docs July 2005

docs@lists.fedoraproject.org

18 participants
29 discussions

CSS for HTML output
by Paul W. Frields 01 Aug '05

01 Aug '05

Pursuant to the following bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=159147 ...I made some changes to the CSS in the Docs Project CVS. Rahul was looking (correctly, Karsten and I think) for a look that would differentiate our docs from Red Hat's. Most of our style sheet comes from the one that Red Hat uses, in particular the coloration of headings and admonitions. I moved the headings to a blue color taken directly from the Fedora web site CSS (the sidebar, to be more specific), and for the admonition boxes, I came up with a yellow that is hopefully attention-getting without being garish. I left the coloration of screen sections alone since there wasn't a clear reason to change it. Refer to a mock-up here to avoid having to build anything yourself: http://docs.frields.org/mirror-tutorial-en/sn-planning-and-setup.html If I can speak for Karsten, pursuant to a conversation we had today, we would like to know what people think about adopting this CSS for DocBook generated pages on the fedora.redhat.com web site. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

4 8

Re: [Fwd: Re: Cannot get mock to work]
by Paul W. Frields 01 Aug '05

01 Aug '05

On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 11:26 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 11:16 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > Seth is making a plea hereunder for some help with mock documentation. > > We have some developer types on this list who are not overworked (yet); > > could anyone spare him some time? If you watch the other lists, you see > > how busy he and the rest of the Fedora Infrastructure have been and will > > continue to be for some time, as they take advantage of the longer > > release cycle for FC5 to build out some much-needed bits of the project. > > I didn't realize I was making a plea. :) Editor, thy name is hyperbole. ;-) > I was just talking about working on a man page and some better examples > in the readme as well as making a webpage, at all. > > The plan for the webpage is simply to put them in the wiki and have a > file-dump point for tarballs and what not somewhere else on > fedoraproject.org. > > That's all. OK, just trying to rustle up some assistance since things have been a little slow on our list of late. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

2 6

[Fwd: Re: Cannot get mock to work]
by Paul W. Frields 30 Jul '05

30 Jul '05

Seth is making a plea hereunder for some help with mock documentation. We have some developer types on this list who are not overworked (yet); could anyone spare him some time? If you watch the other lists, you see how busy he and the rest of the Fedora Infrastructure have been and will continue to be for some time, as they take advantage of the longer release cycle for FC5 to build out some much-needed bits of the project. Seth, if you don't get a response here, please let me know what you need and I'll do my best. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

1 0

Documentation in RTF/PDF request
by Farr, Gregory C 29 Jul '05

29 Jul '05

Dear Docs guys, I'm looking to find a way where I can print out some of the FC4 documentation (Release Notes, Installation Guide, Jargon Buster, Keeping Up to Date, and the Developer's Guide) into either RTF or PDF (preferably) so we can have them for reference around our office. Is there any way I can do this or any way I could be provided with the documents in those formats? Thanks. Gregory Farr Assistant Network Engineer Network Operations Center - Purdue University - SCCA 59 noc(a)purdue.edu 765-49-66200

2 1

Odd Behavior with Fedora Entity
by Thomas Jones 28 Jul '05

28 Jul '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I was reviewing the entities in the current --- fedora-entities-en.ent. And noticed a rather peculiar behavior. One which I assume was expected to behave in a different fashion. It has to do with: LEGALNOTICE-RELNOTES Now I put this entity in my bookinfo/articleinfo element. Anyways, upon building the source, the xml processor is directed to generate a link labeled "Legal Notice". This in effect generates a seperate page entirely with the content of the LEGALNOTICE-RELNOTES entity and it is pointed to from this link. This page is entirely blank minus the content of the entity. No header or footer etc.... No good. http://www.buddhalinux.com/images/snapshot5.png I don't believe that this is the intended behavior. It is my assumption[yeah i know] that (like many other doc projects) that this entity was intended to be called from the abstract element of bookinfo/articleinfo. Personally, i think it provides a better reference to the licensing than a simple link. However, in order to do so. There must be a change to the content of the common file - --- legalnotice-relnotes-en.xml. In essence, this file contains common elements like that of legalnotice-content-en.xml. A simple removal of the legalnotice element parent in legalnotice-relnotes-en.xml corrects the problem and the entities behave as is expected. http://www.buddhalinux.com/images/snapshot4.png I have generated a diff against the current cvs: Index: docs-common/common/legalnotice-relnotes-en.xml =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/docs/docs-common/common/legalnotice-relnotes-en.xml,v retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.2 legalnotice-relnotes-en.xml - --- docs-common/common/legalnotice-relnotes-en.xml 19 Jul 2005 20:41:03 -0000 1.2 +++ docs-common/common/legalnotice-relnotes-en.xml 29 Jul 2005 04:13:57 -0000 @@ -7,9 +7,7 @@ ]> --> - -<legalnotice id="legalnotice"> - - <para> This document is released under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation +<para> This document is released under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. For more details, read the full legalnotice in <xref - - linkend="sn-legalnotice" />. - - </para> - -</legalnotice> + linkend="sn-legalnotice" />. +</para> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFC6QczoR5cE1e/kEIRAstOAJ9yqJ1chxOUqcoe6b5yQUQXiNOAxACgpMmx akmkJvlFB5u+CvltQ0SBT9A= =LdF7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 2

Some thoughts on the yum tutorial
by Timothy Murphy 28 Jul '05

28 Jul '05

=========================================== I thought the yum tutorial was pretty good - I'd give it 8/10 . The following remarks are meant as comments rather than criticism. 0. I found the general approach slightly over-formal even perhaps a tiny bit unfriendly. But that is just a personal view. I would have put the "Revision history" as a link, perhaps just leaving the date of the latest revision, and the author or authors. 1. As far as I can see, there are three standard fedora yum repositories: fedora base (covering the rpms on the distribution CDs), fedora update and fedora extras. If that is correct, I suggest it should be said clearly, as postings suggest some confusion over this. 2. I think a tutorial should concentrate on the ways in which an application is most often used. In the case of yum, I imagine 95% of the usage is covered by "yum update" and "yum install". I would have put these first - perhaps right at the beginning - and put other variants in later sections, eg "Package groups". 3. I would have started by discussing the entries in /etc/yum.repos.d/ , perhaps with model entries for the 3 standard repositories. That would enable people to get started as quickly as possible. 4. I definitely would omit the "su -c '...'" in the examples, and just say you have to run yum as superuser, perhaps once mentioning sudo and "su -c". 5. In case people are using sudo or su, perhaps it should be mentioned that eg * should be given as \* in yum search, etc. 6. When discussing "yum clean" it should be explained what disadvantages if any this may have. You say that cached rpms "may be re-used"; what exactly does this mean? 7. I think a brief description of how yum works - eg what is meant by "metadata" and where it is stored - would be useful. I'd add a few words about rmp headers as well. 8. A few words on what to do about yum errors would be very useful, perhaps as a FAQ. 9. I would have suggested adding non-standard repositories to /etc/yum.repos.d/ with enabled=0 using yum with enablerepo=... when desired. 10. I think yum GPG keys cause more confusion than you realise. I would have mentioned the possibility of turning off key-checking in case one cannot find the key - of course as a second-best solution. =========================================== -- Timothy Murphy e-mail (<80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

7 17

Re: web/html/docs/release-notes index.php,1.5,1.6
by Paul W. Frields 26 Jul '05

26 Jul '05

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 11:52 -0400, Karsten Wade wrote: > Author: kwade > > Update of /cvs/fedora/web/html/docs/release-notes > In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv20326 > > Modified Files: > index.php > Log Message: > New date on updated notice. I wonder what the chances are of having the release-notes errata rolled into a fedora-release update? Note that the fedora-maintainers list is now tossing around the idea[1] of producing an update to allow for a script to do a "rpm --import /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY*". I don't think we should lobby for doing this with every relnotes erratum, but certainly with the addition of the big section on legally encumbered material, it would be worth our while to piggyback there? = = = = = [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2005-July/msg00080.html -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

2 1

yum tutorial
by Paul W. Frields 25 Jul '05

25 Jul '05

Stuart's yum tutorial is nearing publication status. Most of the style edits are done but it could use another once-over. I was hoping to make a publication tonight (does that count as within P2PW?) but would love list members to look it over and point out any errors. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

3 4

Re: Possible Fedora author?
by Paul W. Frields 25 Jul '05

25 Jul '05

On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 09:13 +0100, Gavin Henry wrote: > Seen this: > > http://www.howtoforge.com/perfect_setup_fedora_core_4 Just took a look. I don't know about "perfect," since the writing leaves something to be desired, and one of the first steps is to install apt. ;-) I also notice there's some superfluous use of CPAN when the author could just "yum install perl-HTML-Parser" and so on. Another item of note is that the tutorial in question is marked "All rights reserved," thus legally encumbering the material. Why don't you see if you can (1) convince the author to FDL the contents, and (2) edit it yourself into a more coherent narrative that uses Fedora technical standards? The subject matter itself seems like a good idea for coverage. Followups to fedora-docs-list please, the FDSCo list should be reserved for steering committee matters wherever possible, and has fewer readers in any case. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

3 2

fedora guide
by Colin Charles 20 Jul '05

20 Jul '05

Anyone seen this? http://evolutioncolt.com/fedoraguide/ Regards -- Colin Charles, http://www.bytebot.net/

6 9

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

docs July 2005