docs-qa February 2019

docs-qa@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
15 discussions

[Bug 1652997] Recommended Partitioning Scheme suggests far too small root partition
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 26 Feb '19

26 Feb '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1652997 --- Comment #2 from Petr Bokoc <pbokoc(a)redhat.com> --- Sorry, forgot to say - the issue where we'll track this is here: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/install-guide/issue/29 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1652997] Recommended Partitioning Scheme suggests far too small root partition
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 26 Feb '19

26 Feb '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1652997 Petr Bokoc <pbokoc(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed| |2019-02-26 11:00:24 --- Comment #1 from Petr Bokoc <pbokoc(a)redhat.com> --- Hi, thank you for the report. We try to stay away from Bugzilla for Fedora docs bugs; I copied your report to the Pagure repo issues where we prefer to keep track of these things and I'll close this bug (ignore the closing reason). It should be fixed sometime before F30 comes out; I'll have to investigate a bit first. Cheers, Petr -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1679849] New: Typo in typographic conventions section
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 22 Feb '19

22 Feb '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1679849 Bug ID: 1679849 Summary: Typo in typographic conventions section Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Status: NEW Component: documentation-guide Severity: low Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: conor.kovats(a)gmail.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: jhradile(a)redhat.com, pkovar(a)redhat.com, sparks(a)redhat.com, stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Document URL: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Do… Section Number and Name: 1.1 Typographic Conventions Describe the issue: In the sentence "Key combinations can be distinguished from keycaps by the hyphen connecting each part of a key combination", I think "hyphen" is a typo and should be "plus" Suggestions for improvement: change "hyphen" in the issue sentence to "plus" Additional information: Context below with the given examples Key combinations can be distinguished from keycaps by the hyphen connecting each part of a key combination. For example: Press Enter to execute the command. Press Ctrl+Alt+F2 to switch to the first virtual terminal. Press Ctrl+Alt+F1 to return to your X-Windows session. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1596438] Missing `fedpkg request-branch`
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 10 Feb '19

10 Feb '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1596438 Petr Kovar <pkovar(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed| |2019-02-10 16:04:38 --- Comment #1 from Petr Kovar <pkovar(a)redhat.com> --- This BZ component is intended for the retired Fedora Packager Guide. Wiki issues should be fixed in the wiki directly. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1673005] New: Applying hbac rules according to guide doesn't return expected results
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 06 Feb '19

06 Feb '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1673005 Bug ID: 1673005 Summary: Applying hbac rules according to guide doesn't return expected results Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: freeipa-guide Severity: medium Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com Reporter: mpolovka(a)redhat.com QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: mkosek(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Description of problem: I followed freeipa-guide closely up to unit 4 - hbac rules. After I created "sysadmin_webservers" using provided instructions (copy-pasted to be sure) I wanted to test, whether it works. However, despite Alice being in "sysadmin" group and all rules are set according to the guide, access to client servers for alice is denied (see Additional info) Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1.Follow the freeIPA-guide till Unit 4 2.Disable allow_all hbac rule 3. Follow the steps in Unit 4 Actual results: [server]$ ipa hbactest --host client.ipademo.local --service sshd --user alice --------------------- Access granted: False --------------------- Not matched rules: sysadmin_webservers [server]$ kinit alice Password for alice(a)IPADEMO.LOCAL: [server]$ ssh alice(a)client.ipademo.local Connection closed by UNKNOWN port 65535 Expected results: [server]$ ipa hbactest --host client.ipademo.local --service sshd --user alice --------------------- Access granted: True --------------------- [server]$ kinit alice Password for alice(a)IPADEMO.LOCAL: [server]$ ssh alice(a)client.ipademo.local Creating home directory for alice. [alice@client]$ Additional info: [server]$ ipa user-show alice User login: alice First name: Alice Last name: von der Wunderland Home directory: /home/alice Login shell: /bin/sh Principal name: alice(a)IPADEMO.LOCAL Principal alias: alice(a)IPADEMO.LOCAL Email address: alice(a)ipademo.local UID: 55400001 GID: 55400001 Job Title: Recreationist Class: Superior Account disabled: False Password: True Member of groups: sysadmin, ipausers Indirect Member of HBAC rule: sysadmin_webservers Kerberos keys available: True [server]$ ipa hbacrule-find ------------------- 1 HBAC rule matched ------------------- Rule name: sysadmin_webservers Service category: all Enabled: TRUE ---------------------------- Number of entries returned 1 ---------------------------- [server]$ ipa hbacrule-show sysadmin_webservers Rule name: sysadmin_webservers Service category: all Enabled: TRUE User Groups: sysadmin Host Groups: webservers -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 4

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

docs-qa February 2019