[Bug 1956227] New: DNF System Upgrade page links to non-existent
component=dnf-plugin-system-upgrade
by bugzilla＠redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1956227
Bug ID: 1956227
Summary: DNF System Upgrade page links to non-existent
component=dnf-plugin-system-upgrade
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: install-guide
Severity: high
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: info(a)skierpage.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
(there's no Fedora Documentation component for Upgrading to a new release, or
Quick Docs)
Description of problem:
I followed https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/,
it went smoothly, well done!
But under "Frequently Asked Questions - How do I report issues with the
upgrade?", the step
Search Bugzilla for an existing bug report.
is a link to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?component=dnf-plugin-system-upgra...
The bug list currently has one open bug 1767781 for the component
dnf-plugin-system-upgrade, but this doesn't seem to be a valid component any
more; it's not in the pop-up list when you enter a new bug. I'm not sure what
the correct component is for dnf system-upgrade bugs: some bugs are filed
against dnf, and others against dnf-plugins-extras.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Not applicable.
How reproducible:
Every time.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Read https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/
2. Follow the link in "Search _Bugzilla for an existing bug report_."3
3. Try to file a bug.
Actual results:
Only one open bug for dnf-plugin-system-upgrade, and you can't choose this
Fedora component to enter a new bug.
Expected results:
Link should show a list of bugs with current system-update.
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
5 months
[Bug 1952656] New: F33+ "DNF System Upgrade" needs changes.
by bugzilla＠redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1952656
Bug ID: 1952656
Summary: F33+ "DNF System Upgrade" needs changes.
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: install-guide
Severity: medium
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: mattison.computer(a)yahoo.com
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: pbokoc(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
The F33 (and newer) "DNF System Upgrade" instructions document has a couple of
minor issues, and one more serious problem.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Fedora-33, and probably newer.
How reproducible:
not applicable.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. not applicable.
2. not applicable.
3. not applicable.
Actual results:
not applicable.
Expected results:
not applicable.
Additional info:
I. The "Clean-Up Old Packages" Section (2 minor issues).
In the "Clean-Up Old Packages" section, the instructions first say to do "sudo
dnf repoquery --unsatisfied", and then to do "sudo dnf repoquery --duplicates".
After that, there is a "NOTE" box saying to first do "sudo dnf update". After
the "NOTE" box, the instructions say to do "sudo dnf list extras", and so on.
A. Assuming that the "NOTE" box is saying to do the "sudo dnf update" before
doing the "sudo dnf repoquery --unsatisfied" and the "sudo dnf repoquery
--duplicates", the box should be moved to between
* the "Clean-Up Old Packages" section title, and
* the instruction to do "sudo dnf repoquery --unsatisfied".
So it should be:
1. The section title "Clean_Up Old Packages";
2. The "NOTE" box for sudo dnf update";
3. instruction to run "sudo dnf repoquery --unsatisfied";
4. instruction to run "sudo dnf repoquery --duplicates"; and
5. instructions to run "sudo dnf list extras", and so on.
B. According to the dnf man page, the "update" command is deprecated. It is now
"upgrade". So the dnf command in the "NOTE" box discussed above should be
"sudo dnf upgrade", not "sudo dnf update".
II. The "Clean-Up Old Symlinks" Section (more serious problem).
In the Fedora users list, in the thread "invisible application after upgrade",
one member said that the "sudo symlinks -r -d /usr"
step isn't necessarily a good idea. He provided an example. There was a
little more discussion in the Fedora users list thread "dangling symlinks and
upgrades (was "invisible application after upgrade").". This section needs to
be either redone or deleted. I do not have the expertise to be more specific.
I am a home user with no training as a sys.admin. I have a stand-alone home
work station. I do my own systems administration. So I rely on the Fedora
"DNF System Upgrade" document to guide me through semi-annual upgrades. I ask
that this section be researched and either improved or deleted as appropriate.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
1 year, 9 months
[Bug 2033158] New: Grub documentation out of date in System
Administration Guide
by bugzilla＠redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033158
Bug ID: 2033158
Summary: Grub documentation out of date in System
Administration Guide
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Status: NEW
Component: system-administrator's-guide
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: fedora(a)chrisirwin.ca
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: swadeley(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
Grub2 documentation is out of date in System Administrators Guide.
It explains how grub was configured in previous releases, but doesn't explain
the current configuration and tools sufficiently/
* systemd Boot Loader Specification (/boot/loader/entries)
* grubby description is inaccurate (it says it edits grub.cfg, while it looks
like it now edits /boot/loader/entries/*conf files)
* location of grub config (/boot/grub2/grub.cfg, even on EFI systems now)
* menuentries in grub.cfg (not used now)
* Gives instruction to `grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grub.cfg`
several times, but that is not the proper location now
* Above command is given for "Editing a Menu Entry" to change kernel command
args, but it doesn't do that any more. grubby must be used for that task.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Fedora 35 Documentation:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/f35/system-administrators-gui...
Rawhide documentation appears the same.
How reproducible:
It's documentation, so every time.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Look at Fedora documentation to see where kernel menuentries are defined
2. Documentation says /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grub.cfg
3. That is not correct.
Actual results:
1. /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grub.cfg is only a stub to load /boot/grub2/grub.cfg,
even on EFI systems (documentation says this file is BIOS only)
2. No kernel menu entries are defined there, either
3. Kernel menu entries defined in /boot/loader/entries/*conf files, and
probed by grub via unknown mechanism
Expected results:
Expected documentation to match and explain grub configuration on a current
Fedora system.
Additional info:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2033158
1 year, 9 months
[Bug 1957968] New: WIFI connection with WPS-PBC not working
by bugzilla＠redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1957968
Bug ID: 1957968
Summary: WIFI connection with WPS-PBC not working
Product: Fedora Documentation
Version: devel
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: wireless-guide
Assignee: pbokoc(a)redhat.com
Reporter: hk(a)hsyn.de
QA Contact: docs-qa(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
CC: sradvan(a)redhat.com, zach(a)oglesby.co
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
WiFi Connection can't be established with the Fedora 34 via WPS-PBC.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
OS: Fedora 34 live USB stick.
Rooter: Fritz!Box 7590 v7.27
Notebook: ThinkPad w520
How reproducible:
Start Fedora 34 from USB stick. Try to connect to a WPA&WPA2 Secured WiFi.
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Actual results:
Connection can't established.
Expected results:
Authentication without manual key enter
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
1 year, 10 months