Closed Bug 239852 Opened 19 years ago Closed 19 years ago

Documentation changes for Windows support

Categories

(Bugzilla :: Documentation, defect)

x86
Windows XP
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Bugzilla 2.18

People

(Reporter: bruce.armstrong, Assigned: shane.h.w.travis)

References

Details

Attachments

(4 files, 13 obsolete files)

9.54 KB, patch
glob
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
15.40 KB, patch
glob
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
15.40 KB, patch
glob
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
4.08 KB, patch
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
User-Agent:       Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
Build Identifier: 

A number of changes to the documentation because of increased support for 
Windows in the upcoming 2.18 release

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Attached patch Changes to checksetup.pl (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Not quite part of the documentation, but the change is only to a message that
is printed out at the end.
Attached patch Changes to modules.xml (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attached patch Changes to installation.xml (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attached patch Changes to faq.xml (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Assignee: documentation → bruce.armstrong
Comment on attachment 145588 [details] [diff] [review]
Changes to checksetup.pl

This bug is for documentation only. I've moved the patch for the code in bug
239885.
Attachment #145588 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #145589 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #145590 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #145591 - Attachment is obsolete: true
ewww, tabs :)  (dunno if we care in the docs, but it sure makes the diffs look
funny ;)
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Is this something we should try to fold into the 2.18 release?
Comment on attachment 145616 [details] [diff] [review]
Changes to modules.xml (using the diff format)

No review request on these, so they look like they're in danger of being
forgotten. Setting one myself so that doesn't happen, since they look like
useful changes.
Attachment #145616 - Flags: review?(documentation)
Comment on attachment 145617 [details] [diff] [review]
Changes to installation.xml (using the diff format)

See previous comment.
Attachment #145617 - Flags: review?(documentation)
Comment on attachment 145618 [details] [diff] [review]
Changes to faq.xml (using the diff format)

I will incorporate these changes as part of the general FAQ updating (bug
267873)
Comment on attachment 145616 [details] [diff] [review]
Changes to modules.xml (using the diff format)

Several reasons for the r-:
* WAY over 80 characters on many of the new lines
* tabs used instead of spaces in many places
* 4-space indentation used throughout rather than the mandated two-space
indents
* several typos and spelling errors

I'd like to get these in, though, and I don't know if the original poster is
still active or not. As such, I've fixed them up myself and will be posting
another patch immediately.
Attachment #145616 - Flags: review?(documentation) → review-
Comment on attachment 145617 [details] [diff] [review]
Changes to installation.xml (using the diff format)

Reasons for the r- include all the formatting reasons as above, but also:
* section on MySQL no longer needed, as someone has already updated the tip
with this info
* section on win32-code-checksetup would not apply, as that part had been
removed from the docs as part of bug 143490 when the parts of checksetup that
broke windows were taken out. This patch provides useful information to some
people, though, so I re-created that section.

As above, I've fixed these nits up myself and will be posting another patch
immediately.
Attachment #145617 - Flags: review?(documentation) → review-
This patch is
Attachment #145617 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment on attachment 167725 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for 218+tip for modules.xml

This patch will apply cleanly to both tip and 2.18. Formatting is now correct,
and I caught some typos, but please review.
Attachment #167725 - Attachment description: modules.xml → Doc changes for 218+tip for modules.xml
Attachment #167725 - Flags: review?(documentation)
Comment on attachment 167725 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for 218+tip for modules.xml

all of the required ppms are in http://landfill.bugzilla.org/ppm/

the documentation should refer to that instead of apache's repository.
also, the ppm for Chart::Base is on landfill/ppm, so that can be added.
Attachment #167725 - Flags: review-
>I'd like to get these in, though, and I don't know if the original poster
>is still active or not. As such, I've fixed them up myself and will be
>posting another patch immediately.

Yep, still here.  But thanks for cleaning it up.  
Works against tip only... for some reason, one section won't apply to 2.18,
dunno why.

Again, most all the changes are formatting and word-flow based; I can't judge
whether or not this is correct as I know nothing about windows bugzilla.
Assignee: bruce.armstrong → travis
Attachment #145616 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Same text as above; any nits in that one will apply here, an r+ for that will
apply here too.
(In reply to comment #19)
> Yep, still here.  But thanks for cleaning it up.  

Bloody hell, could have just had you do it then. :)

Well, I'm re-assigning it back to you. I've asked for documentation reviews, 
and it'll be up to you to make the changes and upload new patches.

Byron has already made some suggestions, but as I said I'm windows-BZ 
illiterate so I'll let you two fight it out.

Assignee: travis → bruce.armstrong
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Comment on attachment 167726 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for installation.xml - TIP ONLY

Can anyone tell me why my diffs are so freaking ugly and all squashed together?
 :(
Attachment #167726 - Flags: review?(documentation)
installation.xml:

"Windows does not have a native cron capability"
task scheduler is windows' native cron.

"$mysql_binaries = 'c:\mysql\bin';"
checksetup.pl doesn't have this anymore

should also include a reference to http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/win32install.html
The patches look fine to me, no squishing evident, Shane.
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
I'd really like to see http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/win32install.html integrated
into the guide rather than simple refered to from the guide. We should have all
this information in one place.

If that's not likely to happen in the near future, the patches here are
certainly better than what's there now.
Actually, I'm not sure I'm competent enough on the process to get this bug
closed out in a timely manner.  If you don't mind working it, please do.

(In reply to comment #22)
> (In reply to comment #19)
> > Yep, still here.  But thanks for cleaning it up.  
> 
> Bloody hell, could have just had you do it then. :)
> 
> Well, I'm re-assigning it back to you. I've asked for documentation reviews, 
> and it'll be up to you to make the changes and upload new patches.
> 
> Byron has already made some suggestions, but as I said I'm windows-BZ 
> illiterate so I'll let you two fight it out.
> 
> 

Jake: as I understand it, it's not likely to happen in the near future. I 
already made the offer to Byron to help get the guide into a format that could 
be included in the docs, and he declined in favour of having them in place 
without changes from how he wrote them where they are right now. I assume that 
this has not changed in the intervening time.

If Bruce doesn't have time/patience to get these done, I'll take responsibility 
for them. I will be including Byron's suggestions from comment #18 and comment 
#24 in a second revision, and would like to get this landed in the next few 
days... so if there's anything else wrong in the existing patches, please speak 
up ASAP so I can incorporate those too. Thanks!
Assignee: bruce.armstrong → travis
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
I just put the patches on my thumb drive and will try to look at them tonight 
(assuming IE didn't mangle it too much... I really need to look into that 
portable Firefox thing).
Comment on attachment 167725 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for 218+tip for modules.xml

> +      Data-Format (part of TimeDate):
Isn't this Date-Format? But the package we're actually installing is still
TimeDate even though the module is Date::Format. Interesting delima, I guess
:).

> +      MIME::Parser (part of MIME-tools):
In this other instance of a module being part of a larger package, :: was used
as the seperator. Tihs is probably the better way to do it.

I didn't verify that the links are valid, but most of them are gonna change
anyway :).
Attachment #167725 - Flags: review?(documentation)
Comment on attachment 167726 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for installation.xml - TIP ONLY

Just for future refrence, I see no problem with changing whitespace around the
area you're working in or in a general clean-up patch, but for a specific issue
patch, you can probably just leave whitespace as-is 200 lines above where
you're working.


> +          has no such limit or if you are using RAID.  To set a higher

General comment: What the heck does running RAID have to do with anything?

> +          You may also want to refer to the following Microsoft Knowledge
> +          Base articles: 
> +          <ulink url="http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;245225">245225</ulink> 
> +          <quote>HOW TO: Configure and Test a PERL Script with IIS 4.0,
> +          5.0, and 5.1</quote> (for <productname>Internet Information
> +          Services</productname>) and 
> +          <ulink url="http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;231998">231998</ulink>  > +          <quote>HOW TO: FP2000: How to Use Perl with Microsoft Personal Web
> +          Server on Windows 95/98</quote> (for <productname>Personal Web
> +          Server</productname>).

I'm reviewing this in patch form and not near a docbook compiler, but I'm
wondinering if this might look a little strange and be a tough read in prose
form. It may be better to provide the articles on seperate lines, eg:

> [...] Knowledge Base articles:
>   245225 "HOW TO: Configure and Test a PERL Script with IIS 4.0, 5.0, and 5.1"
>   231998 "HOW TO: FP2000: How to Use Perl with Microsoft Personal Web Server on Windows 95/98"

> +          The ActiveState install may have already created an entry for .pl

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't need the web server to run .pl files, do
we?

> +&lt;full path to perl.exe&gt;\perl.exe -T "%s" %s

Doesn't this cause admin pages not to work? Or do those run in taint mode now?

> +        Bugzilla running on Windows you will need to make the following

I probably miss most grammer issues, but I caught this one :). There should be
a comma after "Windows"

> +          The best source for the Windows PPM modules is probably the
> +          ActiveState PPM2 Repository in combination with the Apache

Obviously this will change if we use the landfill repository (though I can't
help but wonder if that should be moved to www.bugzilla.org instead of staying
on a test server).

> +                Data-Dumper                ##

I could be wrong, but I don't think that docbook will preserve all that
whitespace. Or is it only there for visualization when editing and doesn't
really need to stand out as much when reading?

> +            If you are behind a corporate firewall, you will need to let the

General comment: I know this is the normal way of saying it, but this isn't
technically correct. It's entirely possible to be behind a corporate firewall
that either does straight up NAT or has a transparent proxy. I can't really
think of a better way to word it that remains concise, though, so I guess this
will have to do :).

> +$mysql_binaries = 'c:\mysql\bin';

General comment: Wow, we default to the windows path now? Or is there a Win32
check in checksetup.pl that does this? Sure, I could check for myself, but I
was just a little supprised :).
Attachment #167726 - Flags: review?(documentation) → review-
(In reply to comment #23)
> (From update of attachment 167726 [details] [diff] [review])
> Can anyone tell me why my diffs are so freaking ugly and all squashed 
together?
>  :(

It's an IE thing. Internet Explorer thinks it knows better than the doctype so 
when it sees html-like syntax it renders it as HTML.
* Incorporated Jake's suggestion from comment #30
* Replaced all links with Landfill ones WHERE A LANDFILL LINK EXISTED. This
    was not always the case; Byron, any suggestions on what to do?

Requesting review from Byron, as he can say if there are more/different links,
or if these are enough.
Attachment #167725 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #168444 - Flags: review?(bugzilla)
> already made the offer to Byron to help get the guide into a format
> that could be included in the docs, and he declined in favour of 
> having them in place without changes from how he wrote them where 
> they are right now.

as i was losing my hosting, i needed a quick fix solution.

i'm not against the idea anymore, create another bug and we'll work on it there.
Comment on attachment 168444 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for 2.18 and tip (modules.xml), try #2

>+ Also, these PPM links assume the use of ActiveState 5.8.x (8xx build).

bugzilla on windows requires activestate 5.8.1 (bug 257534), which is why the
following modules are not on landfill (as they are part of the core 5.8
modules):

  File::Spec
  File::Temp

>-        PPM Download Link: <ulink url="http://ppm.activestate.com/PPMPackages/zips/6xx-builds-only/GD.zip"/>
>+        PPM Download Link: <ulink url="http://landfill.bugzilla.org/ppm/DBI.ppd"/>

should be http://landfill.bugzilla.org/ppm/GD.ppd

>+        PPM Download Link: <ulink url="http://ppm.activestate.com/PPMPackages/zips/8xx-builds-only/Windows/MIME-tools-5.411a.zip"/>

nit: MIME::Parser is only used by contrib/bug_email.pl, which (a) doesn't work
on windows - hence not on landfill; and (b) is contrib, and imho contrib
dependancies don't belong in the bugzilla core documentation.
Attachment #168444 - Flags: review?(bugzilla) → review-
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't need the web server to 
> run .pl files, do we?

correct, in fact we should comment that all .pl mappings should be removed. 
they are added by default as part of the activestate install, and could cause
issues if not removed .. like being able to run checksetup.

> > +&lt;full path to perl.exe&gt;\perl.exe -T "%s" %s
> 
> Doesn't this cause admin pages not to work? 
> Or do those run in taint mode now?

perl cgi on windows is forced to taint mode by apache and iis, and this was one
of the issue that was cleaned up in making 2.18 windows friendly :)

i've also have mixed success using that mapping, however i haven't had any
issues when i throw -x into the mix:

  <full path to perl.exe>\perl.exe -x<full path to bugzilla> -wT "%s"
  eg.  c:\perl\bin\perl.exe -xc:\bugzilla -wT "%s"

> > +$mysql_binaries = 'c:\mysql\bin';
> 
> General comment: Wow, we default to the windows path now? Or is there a Win32
> check in checksetup.pl that does this? Sure, I could check for myself, but I
> was just a little supprised :).

that whole section needs to be removed, $mysql_binaries doesn't exist in 2.18
checksetup, so no changes are required to checksetup.pl.

to clarify, the only reason for my r- is the GD path.  the other two issues are
nits, and don't need to be resolved to make me happy :)
* made it more clear that Windows requires Activestate 5.8.1
* removed links to modules included in 5.8.1
* fixed GD

Should be good to go.
Attachment #168444 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #169310 - Flags: review?(bugzilla)
Comment on attachment 145618 [details] [diff] [review]
Changes to faq.xml (using the diff format)

This patch has been incorporated as part of the FAQ Overhaul (bug 267873), and
as such is no longer needed here. Thanks for writing it!
Attachment #145618 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Note: one patch replaces two. For some reason, this one applies cleanly against
both 2.18 and the tip; not 100% sure why. (I suspect that I may have had an
older copy of 2.18 when I tried this last time.)

On to comments...

> What the heck does running RAID have to do with anything?
damifino. Probably a holdover from when SCSI disks were smaller, and you had to
RAID to get more than 4GB on one. :) Removed.

> It may be better to provide the articles on seperate lines, eg:
I *think* I've done what you asked for. If not, please be more specific when
you give this its next r-. ;)

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't need the web server to run .pl files, 
> do we?
As per comment #36, this should be removed... but I'm not quite sure how far
down to go. Should I change:
	  If so, modify the executable reference to read:
to:
	  If so, remove this executable reference.

and then delete the next few lines (up to "... for .cgi files"), or is there
more/less to it than that?


> I probably miss most grammer issues, 
... spelling issues too, I bet. (gramm[a]r, not gramm[e]r.) ;-D
(nit fixed.)


> Obviously this will change if we use the landfill repository
Changed; I think I got everything that needed getting. Please review
surrounding text also to ensure I didn't miss anything.

> I could be wrong, but I don't think that docbook will preserve all that
> whitespace. Or is it only there for visualization when editing and doesn't
> really need to stand out as much when reading?

No idea. It was there in the original, so I also included it in my
update/upgrade of the patch. Bruce, you want to weigh in and explain this one?


> > +$mysql_binaries = 'c:\mysql\bin';
> 
> General comment: Wow, we default to the windows path now?

Entire section removed, as ber Byron's comment. (I think I had just re-added it
as part of this patch in the mistaken belief that it still needed to be
there... thanks for the catch.)


Also:
* Changed bug 84876 link to bug 49893 link. 84876 is huge, hard to follow (if
you're new) abandoned, and is never going to land; may as well point them at
the relevant bug.
Attachment #167726 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #167727 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #169319 - Flags: review?(bugzilla)
Attachment #169319 - Flags: review?(jake)
(In reply to comment #40)
> > I could be wrong, but I don't think that docbook will preserve all that
> > whitespace. Or is it only there for visualization when editing and doesn't
> > really need to stand out as much when reading?
> 
> No idea. It was there in the original, so I also included it in my
> update/upgrade of the patch. Bruce, you want to weigh in and explain this one?

I used Visual Studio.Net to edit the XML file, and it sticks in the white space
automagically.  Didn't occur to me that it would be an issue.

(In reply to comment #41)
> (In reply to comment #40)
> > > I could be wrong, but I don't think that docbook will preserve all that
> > > whitespace. Or is it only there for visualization when editing and doesn't
> > > really need to stand out as much when reading?
> > 
> > No idea. It was there in the original, so I also included it in my
> > update/upgrade of the patch. Bruce, you want to weigh in and explain this one?
> 
> I used Visual Studio.Net to edit the XML file, and it sticks in the white space
> automagically.  Didn't occur to me that it would be an issue.

Not really an issue so much as a comment that it aint gonna look like that when
it's all said and done. If that's acceptable, then so be it :)
Comment on attachment 169310 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for 2.18 and tip (modules.xml), try #3

>+      CGI:
>       <literallayout>
>         CPAN Download Page: <ulink url="http://search.cpan.org/dist/CGI.pm/"/>
>-        PPM Download Link: <ulink url="http://ppm.activestate.com/PPMPackages/zips/6xx-builds-only/CGI.zip"/>
>+        PPM Download Link: <ulink url="http://ppm.activestate.com/PPMPackages/zips/8xx-builds-only/Windows/CGI.zip"/>

nit: CGI is part of the perl core.

r=glob if you fix that
Attachment #169310 - Flags: review?(bugzilla) → review+
Comment on attachment 169319 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for 2.18 and tip (installation.xml), try #2

>+ <quote>http:\\&lt;yourdomainname&gt;\Bugzilla</quote>, then do

nit: should be forward slashes

>+ You will also need to create script mappings so that IIS knows how
>+ to handle Bugzilla's .pl and .cgi files. Using the IIS Administration
>+ tool again, open up the properties for the new virtual directory
>+ and select the Configuration option to access the Script Mappings.
>+ The ActiveState install may have already created an entry for .pl
>+ files that is limited to "GET,HEAD,POST" and contains the executable
>+ reference:

this isn't right.

you should *remove* the mapping for .pl if it's present, and add the mapping
for .cgi

>+ modules in only non-Windows compilations. For this reason, you
>+ should probably remove the ActiveState Package Repository from
>+ the repository list and add the Landfill repository as a replacement:

i've never experienced any problems leaving the activestate repositories in the
list.
removing it will only make it difficult for the user to install other modules.

>+ as part of the ActiveState 5.8.1 install.  Modules marked ** are
>+ optional modules that are not available in a pre-compiled form.
[snip]
>+ Chart-Base                 **

nit: chart-base is available in a pre-compiled form on landfill.
Attachment #169319 - Flags: review?(bugzilla) → review-
(In reply to comment #44)
> 
> you should *remove* the mapping for .pl if it's present, and add the mapping
> for .cgi

I don't know that leaving .pl in would hurt, and taking it out may hurt if they
are using something else writting in perl served up by IIS.  ActiveState must
install that one by default for some reason.

> i've never experienced any problems leaving the activestate repositories in
> the list. removing it will only make it difficult for the user to install
> other modules.

Perhaps they've corrected it since.  If memory serves, at one point one of the
PPM repositories that ActiveState pointed to by default had some of the modules
but didn't have Windows distributions for them.  It messed up the install
because PPM would attempt to install from the first repository it found the
module in (without regard to whether there was a Windows distribution in that
particular repository). 

Just FYI guys, I know *nothing* about this, so I'm not going to make another 
patch for installation.xml until it gets hashed out. Byron, Bruce (and maybe 
Jake too if you know anything about it) ... please hash this out and determine 
what the 'correct' answer/s is/are so I can resolve things properly in the next 
(and hopefully final) patch.

Thanks!
> I don't know that leaving .pl in would hurt

it means that someone could execute checksetup.pl via iis.  this _shouldn't_
cause any problems, but you never know.

it's also possible for someone to trigger whineatnews.pl, which could spam
someone.  i don't know if running collectstats.pl more than once a day will
produce screwy data.

> and taking it out may hurt if they are using something else writting 
> in perl served up by IIS.

the changes are being made to the bugzilla virtual directory only, so there
won't be any impact to anything else written in perl.

> Perhaps they've corrected it since...

yeah, ppm3 is much better at that sort of thing than ppm2.
*** Bug 211956 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Bruce? Ball is in your court. I'd love to get this wrapped up and into the docs 
ASAP, but I can't until you and Byron agree on a wording. (Don't expect me to 
be an arbitrator; I point to previous pleas of ignorance.)

Any chance you can make some comments on this so I can get a (crosses fingers) 
final patch ready to go?
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
When I wrote up the original suggested mods we were still supporting version
5.6, and my major issues pertained to that version.  So long as we're
recommending 5.8 as the minimum version, all my major issues go away and Byron's
wording is fine.

(In reply to comment #49)
> Bruce? Ball is in your court. I'd love to get this wrapped up and into the docs 
> ASAP, but I can't until you and Byron agree on a wording. (Don't expect me to 
> be an arbitrator; I point to previous pleas of ignorance.)
> 
> Any chance you can make some comments on this so I can get a (crosses fingers) 
> final patch ready to go?

The documentation is mentioning tools and folders that are not installed in a 
previous stage of the document. For example in the section "Edit localconfig" 
the line "$cvsbin = "c:/bugzilla/win32/cvs.exe";" the document does not says 
that CVS must be installed on that path and CVS is not included in the tarball 
file.

"$interdiffbin = "c:/bugzilla/win32/interdiff.exe";" This tool is not installed 
during the installation and is not included in the tarball as well.

"$diffpath = "c:/bugzilla/win32";" The diff tool is not installed in the 
document and is not included in the tarball file as well.
(In reply to comment #51)
> The documentation is mentioning tools and folders that are not installed in a 
> previous stage of the document. 

Diego, can you please make a new bug mentioning these isssues, and cc me on it.
Minor issue fixed, applies to 2.18 and tip
Attachment #169310 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #170592 - Flags: review?(bugzilla)
Changes made as per Byron's comments above and discussion in IRC. Patch applies
to 2.18 branch only.
Attachment #169319 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #170594 - Flags: review?(bugzilla)
As above, but for tip. (Had to get rid of a bz-devel marker, and some code
about Windows not workout out-of-the-box that wasn't in the 2.18 version)
Attachment #170595 - Flags: review?(bugzilla)
Comment on attachment 169319 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for 2.18 and tip (installation.xml), try #2

Removing obsolete review request
Attachment #169319 - Flags: review?(jake)
Attachment #170592 - Flags: review?(bugzilla) → review+
Comment on attachment 170594 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for 2.18 (installation.xml), take3

>+        <programlisting>
>+&lt;full path to perl.exe &gt;\perl.exe -x&lt;full path to Bugzilla&gt; -wT "%s" %s
>+        </programlisting>
>+
>+        <para>
>+          For example:
>+        </para>
>+
>+        <programlisting>
>+c:\perl\bin\perl.exe -xc:\bugzilla -wT "%s"
>+        </programlisting>

nit: the example is slightly different from the template - it's missing a
trailing %s

>+      <para>
>+        <note>
>+          Windows does not have 'cron', but it does have the Task
>+          Scheduler, which performs the same duties. There are also
>+          third-party tools that can be used to implement cron, such as
>+          <ulink url="http://www.nncron.ru/">nncron</ulink>.
>+        </note>
>+      </para>
(snip)
>+      <para>
>+        <note>
>+          Windows does not have a native cron capability, but there are
>+          third-party tools that can be used to implement it, such as
>+          <ulink url="http://www.nncron.ru/">nncron</ulink>.
>+        </note>
>+      </para>

nit: perhaps these paragraphs should match.


r=glob :)
Attachment #170594 - Flags: review?(bugzilla) → review+
Comment on attachment 170595 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for tip (installation.xml), take3

r=glob, same nits as 2.18 apply.
Attachment #170595 - Flags: review?(bugzilla) → review+
Boy, I'm glad to see the back end of this one! Thanks for writing it, Bruce, 
and thanks a LOT for helping clean it up Byron.

2.18:
"/tmp/cvsoL1T8K" 13L, 500C written
Checking in installation.xml;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/installation.xml,v  <--  
installation.xml
new revision: 1.72.2.15; previous revision: 1.72.2.14
done
Checking in modules.xml;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/modules.xml,v  <--  modules.xml
new revision: 1.1.2.1; previous revision: 1.1
done

Tip:
Checking in installation.xml;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/installation.xml,v  <--  
installation.xml
new revision: 1.86; previous revision: 1.85
done
Checking in modules.xml;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/modules.xml,v  <--  modules.xml
new revision: 1.2; previous revision: 1.1
done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Just so it's recorded somewhere... the checkins for this bug caused tinderbox
to start burning for a whole lotta reasons. This patch fixes the issues for
both 2.18 and tip.
*** Bug 221693 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 254359 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 2.18
QA Contact: matty_is_a_geek → default-qa
Blocks: 266004
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.