[Bug 450331] New: lack of documentation on restoring from bare-metal (UUID problem)
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450331
Summary: lack of documentation on restoring from bare-metal (UUID
problem)
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: low
Priority: low
Component: docs-requests
AssignedTo: kwade(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: czar(a)acm.org
QAContact: stickster(a)gmail.com
CC: fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
Description of problem:
ref: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449299
There is a lack of documentation on restoring a system from bare metal. I have
found (see reference) that restore the root ("/") is not as simple as as just
executing the restore command when running in rescue mode.
With the current emphasis being place on use of UUIDs in both Fedora and RHEL,
the whole business of UUIDs need to be better documented.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Fedora 9
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
10 years, 1 month
[Bug 504066] New: CMS for docs.fp.org
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: CMS for docs.fp.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504066
Summary: CMS for docs.fp.org
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: project-tracking
AssignedTo: kwade(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: mel(a)redhat.com
QAContact: kwade(a)redhat.com
CC: fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
Zikula chosen, working on test instances and project plan with Zikula team
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
11 years, 11 months
[Bug 513907] New: SRPMs fail to build in Koji
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: SRPMs fail to build in Koji
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=513907
Summary: SRPMs fail to build in Koji
Product: Fedora
Version: 11
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: urgent
Priority: high
Component: publican
AssignedTo: jfearn(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: eric(a)christensenplace.us
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: jfearn(a)redhat.com, fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com,
mmcallis(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem: SRPMs fail to build in Koji due to the following error:
Processing files: fedora-security-guide-en-US-1.0-16.fc12.noarch
error: Two files on one line: /usr/share/applications/Fedora
error: File must begin with "/": Projectfedora-security-guide-en-US.desktop
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 0.44-0.fc11
Possible Fix: Remove the %{?vendoropt} from
desktop-file-install %{?vendoropt}
--dir=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/applications %{name}.desktop
or remove %{vendor} all together.
I'll be testing this soon to see if I can provide a patch.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
12 years, 6 months
[Bug 504063] New: Toolchain next steps
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Toolchain next steps
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504063
Summary: Toolchain next steps
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: project-tracking
AssignedTo: kwade(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: mel(a)redhat.com
QAContact: kwade(a)redhat.com
CC: fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
Sorting out what fedora-doc-utils does, where to use Publican, etc. --
Principals to discuss status, progress, direction on IRC.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
12 years, 7 months
publishing group suggestion
by Karsten Wade
11:12 < quaid> ok, here's a thought ...
11:12 < quaid> long tradition is that 'docs' gave full commit access
to content; I see people still do
that with f'hosted repos
11:12 < quaid> (mostly)
11:13 < quaid> we had publishing separate because it was different,
separate, required training to not
break, etc.
11:13 < quaid> but if we're going to be publishing websites with
publican as the cms (basically)
11:13 < quaid> why not just use 'docs' group as who can publish?
What I was also saying is that we have this:
CMS for docs.fp.o:
* Publican handles publishing and building of content for the web.
* FAS handles authentication.
* Beacon with DocBook extensions could be the wysiwyg editor.
'docs' group membership could be sufficient for publishing. Why add
another group when we have one well populated with all the people we
want able to publish immediately?
This lowers the barriers a lot for using Publican, but it doesn't give
us a CMS that invites the 10x participation that we get through the
wiki-like interfaces. Having an easy web authentication layer with a
nice WYSIWYG editor (and a publish button) is a very important goal.
- Karsten
--
name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
team: Red Hat Community Architecture
uri: http://TheOpenSourceWay.org/wiki
gpg: AD0E0C41
13 years
Southeast Linux Fest
by Eric Christensen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Anyone from the Docs Team going to SELF in June?
- --Eric
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=JNLi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
13 years, 1 month