Bug 466740

Summary:	[man pages] chkconfig(8) has run level 7 which does not exist
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5	Reporter:	Alexander Todorov <atodorov>
Component:	chkconfig	Assignee:	Bill Nottingham <notting>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	BaseOS QE <qe-baseos-auto>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	5.2	CC:	dkovalsk, notting, rvokal
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	Reopened
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2009-12-02 12:15:16 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Alexander Todorov 2008-10-13 11:15:08 UTC

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #466739 +++

Description of problem:
The manual page chkconfig(8) shows:

<quote>
OPTIONS
       --level levels
              Specifies  the  run levels an operation should pertain to. It is given as a string of numbers from 0 to 7. For example, --level 35 specifies
              runlevels 3 and 5.
</quote>

There's no run level 7, and indeed chkconfig doesn't accept 7 as a valid level parameter. The valid values are from 0 to 6 inclusive.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
chkconfig-1.3.30.1-2

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. man chkconfig
2. search for "7"

  
Actual results:
Incorrect run level 7 specified

Expected results:
Run level 0-6 are specified

Additional info:
It's the chkconfig man page from RHEL5.2 but I believe it's present in 5.3 as well because it's not fixed in F9 too.

Comment 1 RHEL Program Management 2008-10-13 12:03:20 UTC

This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for
inclusion, but this component is not scheduled to be updated in
the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. If you would like
this request to be reviewed for the next minor release, ask your
support representative to set the next rhel-x.y flag to "?".

Comment 3 Bill Nottingham 2008-12-04 19:56:12 UTC

I don't see that it's worth a specific fix for this. If we have actual bug fixes that require an update, sure, we can put it in.

Comment 4 RHEL Program Management 2008-12-04 20:04:42 UTC

Development Management has reviewed and declined this request.  You may appeal
this decision by reopening this request.

Comment 8 Bill Nottingham 2009-11-02 19:27:31 UTC

Building as 1.3.30.2-1.el5.

Comment 12 errata-xmlrpc 2009-12-02 12:15:16 UTC

An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2009-1628.html