[Bug 832179] New: Power management guide is wrong for frequency scaling in Fedora 17
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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_Guid...
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.
6 years, 2 months
[Bug 769438] New: [PATCH] Fix syntax of code examples within rpm-guide-programming-python.xml
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: [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.
6 years, 4 months
[Bug 829952] New: Outdated information about cgconfig service in Resource Management Guide for Fedora 17
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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.
8 years, 10 months
[Bug 782916] New: value of security measures; no metric, no scope description
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: 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.
9 years, 9 months
[Bug 831619] New: Inaccuracy in Fedora 17 “Power Management Guide”
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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.
10 years, 5 months
[Bug 836383] New:=?UTF-8?Q?=20Merging=20teams=20and=E2=80=A6=20zanata=20or=20TXN?=?!
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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.
10 years, 8 months
[Bug 822857] New: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'
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: 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.
11 years
[Bug 822855] New: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'
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: 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.
11 years
[Bug 822859] New: please merge 'fr_FR' transifex team under 'fr'
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: 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.
11 years