Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 218340
firstboot - strange new line about Licence Agreement
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:50 EST
First of all, this is my firt bug report and I hope I'll do it correctly. I'm
translator into Croatian language.
Description of problem:
I do not understand this sentence:
"Do you want to reread or reconsider the Licence Agreement? If not, please
shut down the computer and remove this product from your system."
Does that mean that at one point in time I HAVE to reread or reconsider the
Licence Agreement? In other words, if I do not read it or considered it AGAIN
(once more) I must remove this product? Fellow translator agreed that this
sentence sounds strange.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
POT-Creation-Date: 2006-12-01 12:07-0500
Steps to Reproduce:
The question should indeed be rephrased to allow users not wanting to re-read
the LA to continue.
Here's how the UI flows: you get to the License Agreement screen. At this
screen, you have a set of radio buttons where you select "I Agree" or "I don't
agree". There's also the back and next buttons. If you select "I don't agree"
and click next, you get the message in question.
So yes, if you do not agree and want to continue, you are required to reread
while on that screen or remove. firstboot won't let you continue until you do
Does this clarify things?
Very helpfull. I never "did not agree" during isntallation, hence I did now
where to place this sentence into procedure.
I suggest to either put that explanation into PO, or to rephrase a bit,
"Are you sure that you don't agree with LA? Do you want to reread or reconsider
the Licence Agreement?"
And the second part added to my confusion:
"If not, please shut down the computer and remove this product from your
I thought that LA is about software, but how can you remove something from
computer that is shut down? Unless it is about a piece of hardware?
Actually, any changes to these strings need to be coordinated with the
fedora-release package as they also exist there. This in turn needs to go
through additional legal checking to make sure we're using the proper phrasing
for each country's requirements. I'm marking as CANTFIX for now because I don't
want to get into that mess.