Dave Pawson sent me a tutorial on using yum to download Fedora updates a
while back, and I finally had time to edit it and get it into CVS.
It is in the updates/ directory in CVS. Dave, look over my edits and let
me know what you think. I changed a few tags to comply to our standards
and made some minor edits like moving the recap list to the end of the
Updating Sources section. If they are OK with you, let me know and I'll
get it up on the website. I've opened bug #131131 to track this
At Colin's behest I added a few more bugs for docs on which I am working
(and would love some help). I also changed some of my existing bugs to
reflect "enhancement" rather than "normal" severity.
Colin also helpfully entered a bug regarding ESR's Fedora Multimedia
HOWTO. However, I think that this particular request may not be one that
the Fedora Documentation Project should handle. You can read the bug and
my comments here, after which my reasons might be clearer:
As an aside, remember that documentation that is published under the GNU
FDL is suitable fodder for inclusion in the FDP. The FDL is an obvious
signal of the author's intent to share this content with others. It's
always courteous, though, and probably a good SOP, to let the author
know your intentions; if nothing else, it gives them a "warm fuzzy" that
their work might go on to help a broader audience. The particular case
in point may not be the best example of material the FDP should include,
but it's definitely a good example of how to put the FDL to good use.
Paul W. Frields, RHCE
As I write docs, e.g. my mirror-tutorial, I'm making stylistic decisions
(i.e. self-editing). As I edit myself, I'm trying to make notes in my
TODO for the eos-guide, which I hope will be incorporated in the
eventual Style Guide. I'm hoping to do some major contribution to that
guide, especially after having XML coded Strunk's book recently.
If you notice a stylistic decision that you are making consciously as
you write, whether you think it is glaringly obvious or not, please feel
free to send me a note about it -- off-list please, since I'll have the
TODO available at my repo if you would like to look at or add to it. See
<http://svn.frields.org>* for more information; the TODO is in the
I intend to use not just EOS, but also the GNOME Style Guidelines (which
are licensed via the FDL), as source material for any work I can do on
the Style Guide. If, perchance, anyone else has already started, I hope
you'll consider this an offer of help. :-)
- - - -
*Umm, I have mentioned that repo a few times, and I hope (Karsten, this
means you especially) that *someone* will say something if my doing so
is a faux pas. I am fully aware that it's not part of the FDP, nor is it
intended to be. It's only a nice way for me to work on this stuff at
remote locations, until the One True CVS appears, but I also wanted
editors and collaborators to be able to reach it too.
Paul W. Frields, RHCE
(Top posting because I'm basically forwarding.)
There's another docs idea toward the bottom of this post. Unfortunately,
recent changes in the kernel building schema for FC2 and FC3test* have
started some flamewars, mostly (methinks) because of misunderstanding.
(C'est la vie.) But it does argue for some quick docs work. There is a
link below to a write-up that Arjan van de Ven did for FedoraNews.org
not too long ago. I'm sticking it in the archives for reference.
Again, if no one has a quibble, I'll Bugzilla this.
On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 14:45, Bob Arendt wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>If fedora.us accepts the fact that multiple-repos (co)exist, and would
> >>be willing to work on interoperability/compatibility I would very much
> >>welcome a new kernel module framework outside of Arjan's reach ;)
> > You know, YOU and 2 or 3 other people are the reason I entirely stopped
> > caring about this. No matter what I do you or those others will just
> > flame me and personally attack me. So I rather do just nothing and
> > ignore the entire thing.
> As a kernel source user, module builder, I'd like to speak in *favor*
> of the new kernel src.rpm scheme.
> Using mod-versioned kernels, I used to have to rebuild kernel-source
> up through the "make dep" stage to get valid kernel headers to compile
> against. It was error-prone; If I didn't change the Makefile
> EXTRAVERSION, or copy the correct architecture config file to start
> with, I got incompatible headers. Building a module for multiple
> archs, this was repetitious. OR - I could burn a *lot* of disk space
> replicating the kernel source just to build the headers to build
> modules against. Yech.
> Now the kernel headers are included with each kernel install!
> Fantastic! No more special builds. ASCII headers compress really
> well, so there's little inflation in binary-kernel rpm size. And it's
> much easier to build & install the 3rd party hardware drivers we use.
> Now 3rd party delivered build scripts "just work" since the correct
> headers can always be found with the kernel. Vendors have gotten
> fewer callbacks regarding installation. It no longer depends on the
> last state of the /usr/src/linux* since someone last used the
> kernel-source. In fact, it removes the kernel-source requirement
> Better yet, the kernel src.rpm now gives me direct visibility into the
> patches that RedHat's applied. kernel-source always used to bug me,
> since all I got was the post-patched kernel-source without much info
> on how it differed from kernel.org's version. If I just "rpm -i", I
> get the virgin kernel source tarball in the ./SOURCES directory. With
> "rpmbuild -bp " I get the RedHat patched kernel, equivalent to
> kernel-source. Better yet, I can look in kernel.spec and see the
> patches applied (with comments) one-by-one. Though the src.rpm had
> been available, I'd never really looked at it since most of the
> literature (well .. web-searches) steered me towards kernel-source.
> Arjan's write-up here: http://fedoranews.org/colin/fnu/issue14.shtml
> seemed to cover the history and issues pretty well. It would be good
> to get this written up in a HOWTO or some more easily findable docs.
> Especially prior to RHEL4, where I'd expect to see some quality docs
> on these procedures, delivered as part of RHEL4 documentation.
> Good work Arjan.
Paul W. Frields, RHCE
Just wanted to make everyone aware of a few website changes:
1. A link have been added to this page to allow people looking for docs
an easier way to submit an idea (bug #130836)
2. The x86_64 Release Notes have been added
3. An updated version of the FC2 SELinux FAQ has been posted
>> If someone hosted a static page with a URL of fedoracommunity.org
FYI as of this AM, fedoracommunity.org is dark. But, it does reslove to an
active DNS entry. It may just be offline.
>> gateway-style that provided a list of non-RH community-based resources,
>> including Google search hints and un-commented links to Fedora-related
>> that should easily pass muster for mention in the README.
> No, you are mistaken
>> Consider it done; that someone will be me. I just registered the domain
>> and will be hosting the site by next week on a Fedora server, no less.
> Why, when the actual plan is to have http://www.fedoraproject.org/
> actually be the nice new shiny website?
What Plan? fedoraproject.org bounces to http://fedora.linux.duke.edu/
So, why is that site more entitled to be a release point for documentation
then any other?
OK, I am done with website issues. I apologize if I have antagonized the
group with some of my posts. I am only trying to help push for a release
Attached is a tutorial that I have been working on for the group. It has
basic markup, but I am falling down with the correct syntax for the group
and am asking for someone, editor?, to review, revise and critique my
first offering. I have compile problems with chp4, my compiler isn't able
to handle the -> and ~ char. What do I need to load to get special char.
(btw-I have been unable to dl the examples from the CVS)
Also, since this is my first project I am trying to keep up ~ Do I open a
bugzilla rpt? or What? While I have tried to review and follow the current
directions for submissions, I am a little confused. I'll probably be
confused until I get one or two submissions under my belt.
>> (btw-I have been unable to dl the examples from the CVS)
> With respect to the last part, how exactly have you been unable to d/l?
> Please provide details and we can try to help. I just updated this
> morning from CVS and it worked fine.
Thank you, I will re-trace my steps into CVS and post what errors I'm
> Have you read Karsten's process documents? Those are the most up-to-date
> guidance on the way it should work.
Thank you again, I have read the digest of the mailing-list, but this was
what I was looking for.
Full Name: Stuart Ellis
Country, City: UK, Newtown (Powys)
Profession: Network Administrator
Company: Coleg Powys
Goals In Fedora Project: Author documents to help fill the gaps in
available resources. Particularly interested in networking and systems
Historical Qualifications: Professional admin for about 6 yrs. Started
experimenting with Linux at about the same time, since OS/2 didn't look
like it had much life left in it. Have been maintaining Linux servers
for my current employer for about 3 yrs (usual suspects - Apache, BIND,
MySQL etc.). Now provide support on LinuxQuestions forums, mostly on
Samba and Red Hat issues. Recently, revised a couple of chapters of the
GNOME User Guide for 2.8 - my first go with DocBook. Broad base of
understanding, but not an expert in any area.
After hanging around LinuxQuestions for a bit, I found that there are a
number of problem areas that keep coming up. This may be because there
aren't documents which are up to date and specific enough to guide
someone through particular tasks. Other issues are that new users
aren't aware of the various resources that are available, and that many
docs assume a fairly high level of subject knowledge on the part of the
reader, more than the average Windows-using enthusiast or technician
actually has. So I'm interested in contributing to sets of docs which
can be specific, kept up to date and well-advertised so that they can
help users who don't yet have the Linux experience to hunt out and
interpret the diverse sources around the 'net.
I received the below message today. Does anyone have any docs on how to
Since Core1 is EOL, I would like to upgrade to Core2. I have thousands
of core1 devices all over the world. All of which I do not have
physical access to. I only have SSH access to these machines, and it
seems that there is a severe lack of documentation on the subject of
upgrading core1 to core2 remotely over ssh without the use of serial or
net booting. Unfortunately, this puts me in quite a predicament, and I
would be eternally grateful if you could point me in the right
Today had to tell someone on #fedora-docs that we don't have an
Installation Guide, and just like many others, had to refer to RHL 9 IG
and other resources.
Are a couple of people interested in taking on this task? It has some
tedium to it, but it's not that bad. Once completed, it will need
regular updating, so it's a good, valuable, and stable long-term
Anaconda has support for taking screenshots, iirc. A format can be
borrowed from existing guides, as a starting place.
However ... this is a full guide, which requires more effort than a
shorter tutorial. Is it even worth it to throw this idea into the
bucket at this stage? If so, I'll file the bug and etc. This should be
an early one to be tackled, when we are ready.
And, yes, I know it's been discussed before. So, I bring it up again.
Karsten Wade, RHCE, Tech Writer
a lemon is just a melon in disguise
gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41