docs-qa June 2012

docs-qa@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
18 discussions

[Bug 832179] New: Power management guide is wrong for frequency scaling in Fedora 17
by Red Hat Bugzilla 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=832179 Bug ID: 832179 QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Severity: medium Version: devel Priority: unspecified CC: ddomingo(a)redhat.com, oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com Assignee: r.landmann(a)redhat.com Summary: Power management guide is wrong for frequency scaling in Fedora 17 Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: jnm11(a)cam.ac.uk Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: power-management-guide Product: Fedora Documentation Description of problem: Power management guide is wrong https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/17/html/Power_Management_Guide/… Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Fedora 17 the location of the cpufreq directory is misspecified it is /lib/modules/3.4.0-1.fc17.x86_64/kernel/drivers/cpufreq There are no modules acpi-cpufreq or p4-clockmod available is acpi-cpufreq directly compiled in. the cpuspeed package is mentioned for the userspace governor but no package exists in fedora 17. I have been completely unable to figure out the following use case. My laptop overheats and powers off if the cpu load is high for too long. There should be a cpu governor or userspace daemon that reduces frequency when the temperature gets too high. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

2 8

[Bug 769438] New: [PATCH] Fix syntax of code examples within rpm-guide-programming-python.xml
by Red Hat Bugzilla 14 Dec '17

14 Dec '17

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: [PATCH] Fix syntax of code examples within rpm-guide-programming-python.xml https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769438 Summary: [PATCH] Fix syntax of code examples within rpm-guide-programming-python.xml Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: rpm-guide AssignedTo: bcotton+fedora(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: dmalcolm(a)redhat.com QAContact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com, pkovar(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Created attachment 548940 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=548940 Patch to Rpm Guide to fix rpm-guide-programming-python.xml Unfortunately the examples of Python code within the RPM guide have been thoroughly broken since the initial conversion to DocBook, due to the way Python treats leading whitespace as significant. I'm attaching a patch which overhauls this page, so that the code examples are syntactically valid. See the notes in the patch -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

2 5

[Bug 829952] New: Outdated information about cgconfig service in Resource Management Guide for Fedora 17
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 May '15

28 May '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829952 Bug ID: 829952 QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: devel Priority: unspecified CC: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com Assignee: mprpic(a)redhat.com Summary: Outdated information about cgconfig service in Resource Management Guide for Fedora 17 Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: brezhnev(a)redhat.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: resource-management-guide Product: Fedora Documentation Description of problem: The Resource Management Guide for Fedora 17 contains outdated information about cgconfig service in section 2.1 "The cgconfig Service" The guide states that the cgconfig service is not started by default in Fedora 17. It is not true. In addition, the guide contains phrase "When you start the service with chkconfig" that is wrong for any release. For Fedora 17 is should be "When you start the service with the <command>systemctl start</command> command". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 6

[Bug 782916] New: value of security measures; no metric, no scope description
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jun '14

27 Jun '14

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: value of security measures; no metric, no scope description https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782916 Summary: value of security measures; no metric, no scope description Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: security-guide AssignedTo: eric(a)christensenplace.us ReportedBy: budden(a)nps.navy.mil QAContact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: pkennedy(a)redhat.com, eric(a)christensenplace.us, security-guide-list(a)redhat.com, oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Description of problem: The juncture between computer security and network security is inadequate -- too many seams which leaves too many man-in-middle attack opportunities. The most egregious omission in this (otherwise pretty good) document is treatment of SCOPE. This probably belongs in the vicinity of 1.3. Analysis first. Map each of the security solutions you have in the guide onto the ISO Reference Model: Layer 1/2 security measures (like WiFi security) protect frames. The scope of the security is limited to a single segment. No security beyond the router and no security within end systems. Layer 3 security protected datagrams (VPNs do this, IPSec ....). The scope is an enclave tunneled through an internetwork. The protection cannot extend beyond the VPN boxes, so data is wholly unprotected within end systems (and LAN if the VPN box is associated with the last router). Layer 4/5 security includes SSL (aka TLS). You have a how-to for securing an http server (good) but no admonitions regarding scope -- the security extends from the TCP socket in one end system to the TCP socket at the other end of the connection -- again no security inside the OS comes from SSL. All of the above security measures protect infrastructure. But they do not protect the data. Layer 6/7 security measures protect the data. Here the scope _can be_ truly end to end. S/MIME is a good example (so is ssh and XML sign/crypt) where the data passes over the internet and through the OS in protected form. Only in a fairly small space is the data unprotected. In Evolution, for example, only the parts of the UA that deal with composing, reading, ... mail are places where the authenticity and confidentiality of the data is possible. Most of the rest of the UA (including all the filing system deals with data that has been protected exactly the way it's been sent over the network. In the case of Evolution (UAs differ in implementation) secured data is stored in the file system exactly the way it was transmitted. Recommendations: 1) include a mapping similar to above so users have an idea what the scope of this or that security measure is. 2) emphasize those security measures that apply to applications (layer 6/7) as Fedora distribution evolves and matures. (What got me here this morning is the continuing frustration getting Evolution to properly play ball with DoD CAC cards ... works, but doesn't 'just work'). Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Security Guide 16.3 (doesn't have a date) How reproducible: The above analysis doesn't invent anything; it only organizes and sorts. Anyone can reproduce it. Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 831619] New: Inaccuracy in Fedora 17 “Power Management Guide”
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Nov '13

12 Nov '13

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=831619 Bug ID: 831619 QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Severity: low Version: devel Priority: unspecified CC: ddomingo(a)redhat.com, oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com Assignee: r.landmann(a)redhat.com Summary: Inaccuracy in Fedora 17 “Power Management Guide” Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: vaskodd(a)yahoo.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: x86_64 Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: power-management-guide Product: Fedora Documentation Created attachment 591487 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=591487&action=edit The problem description in .pdf format - easy to follow Hi, First I want to notice I am a Linux newbie and my English is not that good. Now straight to the point! (The same description is available in the attached pdf file and is more easy to follow) I've noticed some inaccuracy in Fedora 17 “Power Management Guide” (Fedora Documentation), particularly in section “2.5. Tuned and ktune” including “2.5.1. The tuned.conf file” and “2.5.2 Tuned-adm”. In section “2.5. Tuned and ktune” right bellow the “yum install tuned” command it's written: “Installing the tuned package also sets up a sample configuration file at /etc/tuned.conf and activates the default profile.” There is no such file in /etc. I found a /etc/tuned/active_profile file containing the following: “/usr/lib/tuned/balanced/tuned.conf”. I'm not sure this file (/etc/tuned.conf) is missing only on my system or it has a new location by default for each profile - /usr/lib/tuned/profileX/tuned.conf. Bellow in this section and in “2.5.1. The tuned.conf file” it is pointed again that the default location for the tuned.conf file is /etc/tuned.conf. In section “2.5.2 Tuned-adm” in the first paragraph it is written “Fedora 17 includes a number of predefined profiles for typical use cases...”. Just to be precise it is good to be mentioned that these profiles are not installed by default with “yum install tuned” command (tuned-2.0.1-1.fc17 package), but can be found in tuned-profile-compat-2.0.1-1.fc17 package (I found it in Gnome Package Manager). Another thing in this section is in the last third of the page where it is written: “All the profiles are stored in separate subdirectories under /etc/tune-profiles. So /etc/tune-profiles/desktop-powersave contains all the necessary files and settings for that profile. Each of these directories contains up to four files:” There /etc/tune-profiles directory does not exist. Instead I found the profiles stored in /run/lib/tuned. Each directory for the corresponding profile typically contains only 2 files - script.sh and tuned.conf. The presence of script.sh is not mentioned in the directories contains description – it is mentioned ktune.sh insetad. That's all. I hope this is helpful. Best regards Vasil Draganov Fedora 17 3.4.0-1.fc17.x86_64 P.S. “Power Management Guide” is great. It's really useful. The moment i run tuned service i noticed how quieter my laptop became (less heat – less fan needed :) ). The first thing I noticed about new Fedora installation was that the laptop was noisier in comparison to Win7 (I dual-boot with Win7). Tuned just fixed that :) Many thanks to the creators of Fedora Documentation!!! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 9

[Bug 836383] New:=?UTF-8?Q?=20Merging=20teams=20and=E2=80=A6=20zanata=20or=20TXN?=?!
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Aug '13

12 Aug '13

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=836383 Bug ID: 836383 QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Severity: high Version: devel Priority: unspecified CC: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com Assignee: rlandman(a)redhat.com Summary: Merging teams and… zanata or TXN?! Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: kev.raymond(a)gmail.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: installation-quick-start-guide Product: Fedora Documentation Hi, I am a maintainer of this guide at TXN, but before doing the full merge, i wanted to be sure… https://fedora.transifex.com/projects/p/fedora-ins-quick-start-guide/ * fb03c3c Adding zanata config file I can see some zanata things. You serious guys, you are moving to zanata? If so… * Please *MERGE* before. * Also, be notified that you won't benefit of any Fedora translators. Only RH folks are there… That's not good, we use a unified platform, already spreading translators between teams… having many platform is going to be a pain. * delete the transifex one. And prevent us, translators… If the project stay at TXN, why it does not have any .tx/config file? (or no lang_map?) Could I help? Thanks, -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 816765] New: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'
by Red Hat Bugzilla 26 Mar '13

26 Mar '13

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr' https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=816765 Summary: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr' Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: urgent Priority: unspecified Component: installation-quick-start-guide AssignedTo: rlandman(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: kev.raymond(a)gmail.com QAContact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: Bug Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Once again, please merge the'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'. And then delete the fr_FR one. Would be appreciated to propagate this on all guides This should have been done for… F15 (at least). Thanks. see https://fedora.transifex.net/projects/p/fedora/language/fr/?project=2180 https://fedora.transifex.net/projects/p/fedora/language/fr_FR/?project=2180 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 822857] New: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'
by Red Hat Bugzilla 25 Mar '13

25 Mar '13

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr' https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822857 Summary: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr' Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: urgent Priority: unspecified Component: readme-burning-isos AssignedTo: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: kev.raymond(a)gmail.com QAContact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: stickster(a)gmail.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: Bug Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Once again, please merge the'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'. And then delete the fr_FR one. fr_FR is not the only duplicated team. See #816765 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 822855] New: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'
by Red Hat Bugzilla 25 Mar '13

25 Mar '13

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr' https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822855 Summary: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr' Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: urgent Priority: unspecified Component: virtualization-guide AssignedTo: docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: kev.raymond(a)gmail.com QAContact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: Bug Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Once again, please merge the'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'. And then delete the fr_FR one. fr_FR is not the only duplicated team. See #816765 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 822859] New: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'
by Red Hat Bugzilla 25 Mar '13

25 Mar '13

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr' https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=822859 Summary: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr' Product: Fedora Documentation Version: devel Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: urgent Priority: unspecified Component: accessibility-guide AssignedTo: mail.gerardryan(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: kev.raymond(a)gmail.com QAContact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org CC: eric(a)christensenplace.us, oglesbyzm(a)gmail.com Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: Bug Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Once again, please merge the'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'. And then delete the fr_FR one. fr_FR is not the only duplicated team. See #816765 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.

1 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

docs-qa June 2012