[Bug 1021605] New: No Default Syslog
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021605
Bug ID: 1021605
Summary: No Default Syslog
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: install-guide
Keywords: Tracking
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: brentrbrian(a)gmail.com, johannbg(a)gmail.com,
jreznik(a)redhat.com, kvolny(a)redhat.com,
mattdm(a)redhat.com, pbokoc(a)redhat.com,
yjcoshc(a)gmail.com, zach(a)oglesby.co, zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl
Depends On: 967521, 998573
Blocks: 1001355, 1001356
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #998573 +++
This is a tracking bug for Change: No Default Syslog
For more details, see: http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/NoDefaultSyslog
No longer install a traditional syslog service by default. (Specifically,
remove rsyslog from the @core or @standard groups in comps.)
--- Additional comment from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek on 2013-10-08 15:22:54
EDT ---
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/commit/?id=2b8f6883a17b
--- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-10-11 04:44:57 EDT ---
This message is a reminder that Fedora 20 Accepted Changes 100%
Completed Deadline is on 2013-10-15 [1].
All Accepted Changes has to be code complete and ready to be
validated in the Beta release (optionally by Fedora QA). Required
bug state at this point is ON_QA.
As for several System Wide Changes, Beta Change Deadline is a
point of contingency plan, all incomplete Changes will be
reported to FESCo for 2013-10-16 meeting. In case of any
questions, don't hesitate to ask Wrangler (jreznik).
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/20/Schedule
--- Additional comment from Matthew Miller on 2013-10-15 14:38:53 EDT ---
The basic change to implement this went in, although quite a few packages still
bring in rsyslogd as a dependency. I think this feature is fine as it is, and
we'll detangle that as part of making separate, targeted Fedora products.
--- Additional comment from Jaroslav Reznik on 2013-10-16 06:56:42 EDT ---
Ok, thanks, moving to ON_QA.
--- Additional comment from Karel Volný on 2013-10-21 08:27:14 EDT ---
just FTR, journal brings bug #967521 - how could we switch to this nonsense if
that one is still unresolved?
well, in fact, how could we even have this activated by default, maybe I'm just
out of luck googling, but I see no approval for journal to be used?
--- Additional comment from Jóhann B. Guðmundsson on 2013-10-21 08:59:21 EDT
---
Just an FYI This feature is not as simple as no default syslog. We need to fix
the entire syslog ( journal/rsyslog/syslog-ng ) implementation in the
distribution, come up with virtual provide ( to sub package or not to sub
package rsyslog/syslog-ng ) as well as fix roughly 600 packages. Now the
proposal on how to do so has been stuck with FPC for 2 years now and until that
has been done and fixed this feature can never be considered 100% complete...
--- Additional comment from Matthew Miller on 2013-10-21 09:10:10 EDT ---
(In reply to Jóhann B. Guðmundsson from comment #6)
> Just an FYI This feature is not as simple as no default syslog. We need to
> fix the entire syslog ( journal/rsyslog/syslog-ng ) implementation in the
> distribution, come up with virtual provide ( to sub package or not to sub
> package rsyslog/syslog-ng ) as well as fix roughly 600 packages. Now the
> proposal on how to do so has been stuck with FPC for 2 years now and until
> that has been done and fixed this feature can never be considered 100%
> complete...
I agree that that's the target, and also that it will continue to be
slow-moving. This feature was intentionally meant to slice off and accomplish a
small portion of that.
--- Additional comment from Brent R Brian on 2013-10-21 09:42:27 EDT ---
My comments are not intended to be a remedy, fix, enoursement of a fix/remedy
or anything other than a "data point".
If you guys need a "lab rat", let me know.
B
--- Additional comment from Jóhann B. Guðmundsson on 2013-10-21 11:10:22 EDT
---
(In reply to Matthew Miller from comment #7)
> (In reply to Jóhann B. Guðmundsson from comment #6)
> > Just an FYI This feature is not as simple as no default syslog. We need to
> > fix the entire syslog ( journal/rsyslog/syslog-ng ) implementation in the
> > distribution, come up with virtual provide ( to sub package or not to sub
> > package rsyslog/syslog-ng ) as well as fix roughly 600 packages. Now the
> > proposal on how to do so has been stuck with FPC for 2 years now and until
> > that has been done and fixed this feature can never be considered 100%
> > complete...
>
> I agree that that's the target, and also that it will continue to be
> slow-moving. This feature was intentionally meant to slice off and
> accomplish a small portion of that.
That is one of the core problem people really as in that feature and related
work are just implemented up to the point it serves the feature requester need
( and is labelled as 100% feature completed ) as opposed to the actual work
required to implement properly into the distribution.
What we need to do is to keep distribute wide changes as these in a separated
branch and switch all the components at the same time when the feature actually
is 100% feature complete
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967521
[Bug 967521] /var/log/journal breaks system startup
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=998573
[Bug 998573] No Default Syslog
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001355
[Bug 1001355] No Default Syslog
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001356
[Bug 1001356] No Default Syslog
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
5 years, 4 months
[Bug 1175759] New: Checksum validation in PowerShell is wrong
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175759
Bug ID: 1175759
Summary: Checksum validation in PowerShell is wrong
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: install-guide
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: gliverma(a)westga.edu
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co
Description of problem:
I tried to use the info at
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/21/html/Installation_Guide/sec...
and found that the commands did not work due to missing quotes and case
sensitivity.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Fedora 21
How reproducible:
Every time for me.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Download ISO
2. Download checksum file
3. Use code on
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/21/html/Installation_Guide/sec...
Actual results:
PS D:\Downloads> $image = "Fedora-Live-Workstation-x86_64-21-5.iso"
PS D:\Downloads> $checksum_file = "Fedora-Workstation-21-x86_64-CHECKSUM.md5"
PS D:\Downloads> $sha256 = New-Object -TypeName
System.Security.Cryptography.sha256CryptoSer
viceProvider
PS D:\Downloads> $exepected_checksum = ((Get-Content $checksum_file |
Select-String -Pattern
$image) -split " ")[0]
PS D:\Downloads> $download_checksum =
[System.BitConverter]::ToString($sha256.ComputeHash([S
ystem.IO.File]::ReadAllBytes($PWD\$image)))
At line:1 char:109
+ ... adAllBytes($PWD\$image)))
+ ~
Missing ')' in method call.
At line:1 char:109
+ ... adAllBytes($PWD\$image)))
+ ~~~~~~~
Unexpected token '\$image' in expression or statement.
At line:1 char:116
+ ... tes($PWD\$image)))
+ ~
Unexpected token ')' in expression or statement.
At line:1 char:117
+ ... es($PWD\$image)))
+ ~
Unexpected token ')' in expression or statement.
At line:1 char:118
+ ... s($PWD\$image)))
+ ~
Unexpected token ')' in expression or statement.
+ CategoryInfo : ParserError: (:) [],
ParentContainsErrorRecordException
+ FullyQualifiedErrorId : MissingEndParenthesisInMethodCall
Expected results:
No errors in console
Additional info:
I fixed the code and made the output more readable. Below is what I think
should be posted on that page of the docs:
$image = "Fedora-Live-Workstation-x86_64-21-5.iso"
$checksum_file = "Fedora-Workstation-21-x86_64-CHECKSUM"
$sha256 = New-Object -TypeName
System.Security.Cryptography.sha256CryptoServiceProvider
$expected_checksum = ((Get-Content $checksum_file | Select-String -Pattern
$image) -split " ")[0].ToLower()
$download_checksum =
[System.BitConverter]::ToString($sha256.ComputeHash([System.IO.File]::ReadAllBytes("$PWD\$image"))).ToLower()
-replace '-', ''
if ( "$download_checksum" -eq "$expected_checksum" ) {
echo "Checksum test passed!"
} else {
echo "Checksum test failed."
}
echo "Download Checksum: $download_checksum"
echo "Expected Checksum: $expected_checksum"
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
5 years, 5 months
[Bug 1622071] New:
Provide the default disk partitioning scheme that would be used
by bugzilla＠redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1622071
Bug ID: 1622071
Summary: Provide the default disk partitioning scheme that
would be used
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: install-guide
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: torbjorn.lindahl(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co
Description of problem:
During install I sometimes have most of the disk layout ready, or I would like
to set it up from the terminal using ie fdisk/gdisk/lvm/mdadm
It would be nice to know the required bits and how fedora would have set up a
default system so that I can mimic it as closely as I feel like and have an
easier time during the GUI installation process
For me in particular I would like to have in front of me a page saying
something like: "The default installation process will set up the following
disk layout:
p1: 200M /boot/efi
p2: 1024M /boot
p3: <remaining> PV for VGs
(I think this is not too far from what the current default is in anaconda)
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
How reproducible:
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Actual results:
Expected results:
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
5 years, 8 months
[Bug 1615744] New:
Kernel module signing instructions for Secure Boot contain errors
by bugzilla＠redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615744
Bug ID: 1615744
Summary: Kernel module signing instructions for Secure Boot
contain errors
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: system-administrator's-guide
Severity: medium
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: adhenry.9(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com
Description of problem:
At the following Documentation address:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/f28/system-administrators-gui...
There are a couple of syntax errors regarding listing keyrings and signing a
kernel module.
How reproducible: every time
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Reference to "keyctl list %:.system_keyring" is deprecated and should
instead be:
keyctl list %:.builtin_trusted_keys
This can be verified by listing the keys:
cat /proc/keys | grep keyring
Note that this error is already discussed in Bug 1509714:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1509714
2. Secondly, the script syntax for signing a kernel module is wrong. In the
documentation it says as follows:
~]# perl /usr/src/kernels/$(uname -r)/scripts/sign-file \
> sha256 \
> my_signing_key.priv \
> my_signing_key_pub.der \
> my_module.ko
Running the above gives this error:
Unrecognized character \ ; marked by <-- HERE after <-- HERE near column 1 at
/usr/src/linux/scripts/sign-file line 1.
But perl is no longer needed since kernel 4.3.3 and sign-file is now an
executable, so it should read like this:
~]# /usr/src/kernels/$(uname -r)/scripts/sign-file \
> sha256 \
> my_signing_key.priv \
> my_signing_key_pub.der \
> my_module.ko
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
5 years, 8 months
[Bug 1220155] New: gnome-system-monitor Network Rates are off by order of magnitude
by Red Hat Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1220155
Bug ID: 1220155
Summary: gnome-system-monitor Network Rates are off by order of
magnitude
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: amateur-radio-guide
Severity: low
Assignee: wb8rcr(a)arrl.net
Reporter: bugzilla_fedora(a)couldbe.securecoffee.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: sparks(a)redhat.com, wb8rcr(a)arrl.net, zach(a)oglesby.co
Description of problem:
gnome-system-monitor Network Rates display as 2 - 3 times higher than reality.
I noticed when torrenting a Linux ISO that maxed out my connection speed that
gnome-system-monitor was claiming a transfer rate that was 2-3 times what the
torrent client said as well as 2-3 times my FIOS bandwidth availability.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
3.19.3-100.fc20.x86_64
How reproducible:
Easily.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Download a large file
2. Compare gnome-system-monitor Network History speeds to another tool
3.
Actual results:
gnome-system-monitor Network History speeds are 2-3 times reality.
Expected results:
Accurate values.
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
5 years, 8 months
[Bug 1615212] New:
Edited all the *.adoc from the git repository and have an attachment of an
updated pagure.io git file
by bugzilla＠redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615212
Bug ID: 1615212
Summary: Edited all the *.adoc from the git repository and have
an attachment of an updated pagure.io git file
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: system-administrator's-guide
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: lsatenstein(a)yahoo.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com
Created attachment 1475446
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1475446&action=edit
updated system-administration-guide (as a .git within a zip file)
Description of problem:
Guide for Fedora 28
In perusing the guides for Fedora 28, I found them with many grammar errors,
from missing commas, misspellings, run-on sentences and poor grammar.
Where sentences were better corrected within an *.adoc, I did that correction
to the *.adoc file. I am not able to produce a diff file.
But I am attaching my updated git file for the system-administrator's guide.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
How reproducible:
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Actual results:
Expected results:
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
5 years, 8 months
[Bug 1615208] New: /var diskspace is under specified
by bugzilla＠redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1615208
Bug ID: 1615208
Summary: /var diskspace is under specified
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Component: install-guide
Severity: low
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: lsatenstein(a)yahoo.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co
Created attachment 1475444
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1475444&action=edit
list of non zero entries for a Fedora 28 Gnome system with /var
Description of problem:
Install guide and I believe release guide too, mention that /var would be
satisfied with about 7-8 gigs of partition diskspace.
I setup /var on my system to be part of root.
I ran into a problem. I received a warning that / was less than 1 gig from
full.
I did a du -h of /var and it's grown to 15gigs. The culprits are freedesktop,
lots of icons, and loads of Gnome crap (from F26 forward). Gnome software
updates are not cleaning up /var
I cleared out 2 gigs of logs.
It is my intention to separate /var to it's own partion away from my SSD drive
to a hard disk. I sized /var to be 10gigs, but now my existing /var does not
fit. Ergo so my warning message about partition full.
What size is recommended. I ran a du -h /var and I am attaching a list of the
Fedora /var contents less the zero byte entries.
Although this is documentation, I will be posting a second bug against F28
gnome not cleaning up and along with freedesktop.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Development documents.
How reproducible:
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Actual results:
Expected results:
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
5 years, 8 months