https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1662306
Bug ID: 1662306
Summary: TigerVNC Configuration Page out of date
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: system-administrator's-guide
Severity: medium
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: colin.henry(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
Documentation does not reflect current file configuration
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Fedora 29
How reproducible:
Try and follow the instructions on the configuration page, it tells you to
change settings that aren't there. For instance, users are told to edit the
and change:
ExecStart=/sbin/runuser -l USER -c "/usr/bin/vncserver %i -geometry 1280x1024"
PIDFile=/home/USER/.vnc/%H%i.pid
Whereas the actual file contains:
ExecStart=/usr/bin/vncserver -autokill %i
PIDFile=/home/<USER>/.vnc/%H%i.pid
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Go to the documentation page:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/f29/system-administrators-guide…
2. Install tigervnc-server
3. Look at the configuration file /lib/systemd/system/vncserver@.service
Actual results:
The files differ significantly, also following the instructions in the
configuration file fails to start vnc successfully, but I'll file a bug for
that separately.
Expected results:
Configuration documentation should match the files on the host
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1790615
Bug ID: 1790615
Summary: AppStream (formerly AppData) packaging guidelines use
outdated terms and example code
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Status: NEW
Component: packager-guide
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: andrew(a)tosk.in
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: pkovar(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
I'm referring to the docs at "Packaging Guidelines for AppData Files"
<https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AppData/>
The AppStream project has made a number of changes since these Fedora
guidelines were written, and the conflicting information confused me at first,
as I looked up how to add AppStream metadata to a new package I'm working on...
* In the Fedora guidelines, the second sentence
("Installed .appdata.xml files MUST follow the AppData specification page.")
links to
<http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/appdata/>
but this URL now redirects to
<https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Quickstart.html#se…>
* As far as I can tell, the AppStream specification no longer
uses the filename to distinguish between applications and
addons, and all AppStream metadata files should now be named
.metainfo.xml. Files for GUI applications are no longer named
.appdata.xml.
See
<https://www.freedesktop.org/software/appstream/docs/chap-Quickstart.html#se…>
* The example .appdata.xml file in the Fedora guidelines is
therefore also out of date. The current AppStream spec,
for example, states that the component type should be
"desktop-application" instead of just "desktop".
Unless I'm misunderstanding something, the Fedora guidelines here will need to
be rewritten somewhat.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1802159
Bug ID: 1802159
Summary: Default login for Fedora core os either undocumented
or missing
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Status: NEW
Component: install-guide
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: hadmut(a)danisch.de
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
I was just giving Fedora Core OS a first try and installed it from the ISO
image to the bare metal following the instructions at
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-coreos/bare-metal/
Since I didn't have an ignition file yet, I just ran
sudo coreos-installer install /dev/sda
with out the ignition file, and this worked.
After rebooting, the system came up, but I could not login on the console. The
Docs do not contain a hint about what username and what password to use. When i
mounted the file system on a different linux machine I saw that there is a core
use with no password set. Since I'm not familiar with ostree, I wasn't sure
whether I was breaking anything if I just changed the password in the
/etc/shadow on that disk, and this is probably not the intended way to use the
system.
You end up with having a system that's of no use since you can't login.
Either the docs should tell how to login after plain install, or
coreos-installer should prevent from installing a system with no use and no
login.
regards
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1706205
Bug ID: 1706205
Summary: fedora 30 kde live image contains the squashfs image
from fedora 27 and its gnome
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Status: NEW
Component: about-fedora
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: rob.verduijn(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: stickster(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
When booting the recovery option you get the squashfs image from the image
found in the LiveOS folder
This is a gnome image (a bit strange on a kde live image)
And it is from fedora27
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
fedora 30 kde live image iso
How reproducible:
boot the recovery option from that iso and you will see
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Actual results:
gnome squashfs image from fedora27
Expected results:
kde squashfs image from fedora30
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been
waiting more than 3 days for a response from you. Please take
action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs
might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.)
We'll remind you again tomorrow if these requests are still outstanding, or if
there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 3
days for your response.
review
------
Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (1977 days old)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit
To see all your outstanding requests, visit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…
The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been
waiting more than 3 days for a response from you. Please take
action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs
might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.)
We'll remind you again tomorrow if these requests are still outstanding, or if
there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 3
days for your response.
review
------
Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (1976 days old)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit
To see all your outstanding requests, visit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…
The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been
waiting more than 3 days for a response from you. Please take
action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs
might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.)
We'll remind you again tomorrow if these requests are still outstanding, or if
there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 3
days for your response.
review
------
Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (1975 days old)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit
To see all your outstanding requests, visit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…
The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been
waiting more than 3 days for a response from you. Please take
action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs
might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.)
We'll remind you again tomorrow if these requests are still outstanding, or if
there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 3
days for your response.
review
------
Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (1974 days old)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit
To see all your outstanding requests, visit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…
The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been
waiting more than 3 days for a response from you. Please take
action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs
might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.)
We'll remind you again tomorrow if these requests are still outstanding, or if
there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 3
days for your response.
review
------
Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (1973 days old)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit
To see all your outstanding requests, visit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…
The following is a list of bugs or attachments to bugs in which a user has been
waiting more than 3 days for a response from you. Please take
action on these requests as quickly as possible. (Note that some of these bugs
might already be closed, but a user is still waiting for your response.)
We'll remind you again tomorrow if these requests are still outstanding, or if
there are any new requests where users have been waiting more than 3
days for your response.
review
------
Bug 1124344: yum --security update doesn't work on non-fedora repos. This limitation is probably undocumented. (1970 days old)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1124344https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=942713&action=edit
To see all your outstanding requests, visit:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/request.cgi?action=queue&requestee=docs-qa%40li…