leginee opened a new pull request #86:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/86
I translated some german comments to english in some files.
My Idea what would be a benefit to review:
- there are only changes in comments
- spelling
- if the translations make sense
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #83:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/83#issuecomment-619377299
Just FYI, these are the changes between 2.7.17 and 2.7.18:
https://github.com/python/cpython/compare/v2.7.17...v2.7.18
cbmarcum commented on pull request #15:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/15#issuecomment-620075270
I have built the office with this patch and it adds the Insert > Object >
Fontwork Gallery to Writer as described.
leginee opened a new pull request #85:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/85
I cleaned the module of all compiler warnings
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message,
leginee opened a new pull request #83:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/83
As announced the commit for review and further testing.
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #83:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/83#issuecomment-619529365
My Windows Test Build was successful.
Python scripts could be executed without problems.
This is an
DiGro commented on pull request #76:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/76#issuecomment-623125835
Carl,
most of these changes are not visible in the office suite itself.
At least I couldn't find them where I expected them
They are part of the index for the
leginee commented on pull request #76:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/76#issuecomment-623024429
Is there a reason why multiple lines have now been addid into a single line?
This is an automated message from
leginee opened a new pull request #84:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/84
changed: ../solenv/bin/deliver.pl
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message,
leginee commented on pull request #84:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/84#issuecomment-619343437
I found a small issue in the build logs with undifened variables. Thge fix
fixed it for me.
Please test and merge
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #83:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/83#issuecomment-631965250
Anyone else wanting to review this?
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to
Pilot-Pirx merged pull request #28:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/28
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go
leginee commented on pull request #76:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/76#issuecomment-623105866
I see. Thanks for the update.
So far I am not negative to this proposal, but I have not checked the change
within OpenOffice.
Hope I can give feedback soon.
DiGro commented on pull request #76:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/76#issuecomment-623092077
Yes, but it is not that relevant.
When I first started to remove the whitespace, I noticed that the whitespace
was
caused by extra tabs/spaces before the text. Text
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #86:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/86#issuecomment-623107939
I did some proofreading and I think this could be merged now...
This is an automated message from the Apache
cbmarcum commented on pull request #76:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/76#issuecomment-623117983
Where would I look in the office to see the effect of this change?
This is an automated message from the Apache
oooforum edited a comment on pull request #12:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/12#issuecomment-685721846
> Is there a bugzilla issue this is to?
I don't think.
Steps to reproduce with Draw app:
1) Open a document and insert a shape
2) Right click and select
oooforum commented on pull request #12:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/12#issuecomment-685721846
> Is there a bugzilla issue this is to?
I don't think.
Steps to reproduce with Draw app:
1) Open a document and insert a shape
2) Right click and select Description
oooforum edited a comment on pull request #12:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/12#issuecomment-685721846
> Is there a bugzilla issue this is to?
I don't think.
Steps to reproduce with Draw app:
1) Open a document and insert a shape
2) Right click and select
DonLewisFreeBSD opened a new pull request #94:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/94
Cherry pick bundled software upgrades from AOO42X:
Upgrade ext_libraries:
apr
apr-util
hunspell-1.3.3
ratscan
Upgrade main modules:
ardovm commented on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-705172239
I apologize for taking so long to reply.
[This file](https://github.com/apache/openoffice/files/5343566/pr89.zip)
contains an ODT and a PDF that was generated with the
DonLewisFreeBSD commented on pull request #100:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/100#issuecomment-703948340
I did my testing with a self-signed certificate that I created about a year
ago. The details are hazy now, but I found this set of instructions:
cbmarcum commented on pull request #100:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/100#issuecomment-703942008
I built this PR with trunk on CentOS 7. BVT tests and some manually file
creation and testing went fine.
I don't think I have a certificate I can test signing a document
oooforum opened a new pull request #104:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/104
Modify GetProductInfo function
Actually returns Product Name and Build version in one string
Example: OpenOffice4.1.7
Adding a space between these to split in two strings
Now: OpenOffice
DonLewisFreeBSD opened a new pull request #105:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/105
Packaging breaks when the --without-fonts option is passed to
configure because the fc_local.conf.
This seems to have been caused by a mismerge when cherry picking
commits from
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-709916345
Hi,
Can you please test AOO 4.1.8-RC2?
This *should* already be fixed.
This is an automated message
ardovm commented on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-709984442
Hello,
I am chiming is as the proposer of PR #89.
Unfortunately, we are still affected by the bug. I am investigating.
androidports opened a new pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106
I got a bug report of crashing in exporting PDF with a Noto Serif CJK JP
font from my Android user.
This is same bug in PC version:
I confirm this crash with:
OpenOffice 4.1.7
Pilot-Pirx edited a comment on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-709916345
Hi,
Can you please test with AOO 4.1.8-RC2?
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/openoffice/4.1.8-RC2/binaries/
androidports commented on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-709966382
OK, I confirm crashing is fixed.
But exported PDF is invalid. (attached file)
androidports edited a comment on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-709966382
OK, I confirm crashing is fixed in AOO 4.1.8-RC2.
But exported PDF is invalid. (attached file)
ardovm commented on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-709985252
The file provided in PR #106 ([this
one](https://github.com/apache/openoffice/files/5390104/crashing-with-noto-serif-cjk-jp.docx))
is rendered incorrectly as PDF.
I am working
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-709971389
Thanks for testing!
Can you have a look at PR #89?
This is an enhancement to the fix in 418-RC2.
ardovm commented on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-710050455
@androidports
> I think 4.1.8-RC2 avoid crashing by invalid CFF format, but this invalid
format is caused by casting from `float` to `int` in
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-710430813
I can replicate the garbled PDF output on Windows and Ubuntu.
Will now build 418 for Windows with the patch applied.
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-711023823
Actually I build AOO42X, but I can confirm that the exported PDF looks OK
now.
This will also go in AOO418-RC3.
Pilot-Pirx merged pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to
Pilot-Pirx merged pull request #105:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/105
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to
cbmarcum commented on pull request #104:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/104#issuecomment-711049343
Forgot to mention it's actually the GetProductName() function no
GetProductInfo() as the title suggests.
cbmarcum commented on pull request #104:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/104#issuecomment-711047940
I'm not much of a Basic developer but I put this together as a test.
```
Sub Main
PR104()
End Sub
sub PR104
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-711082689
I almost forgot to say thank you for providing this patch! ;-)
This is an automated message from the Apache
androidports commented on pull request #106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/106#issuecomment-711091850
You are welcome!
I’m going to give feed backs from my project.
This is an automated message from the
cbmarcum opened a new pull request #108:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/108
Merge updates from trunk into maven-jars-2 branch.
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the
cbmarcum merged pull request #107:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/107
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go
cbmarcum opened a new pull request #107:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/107
Rebased branch with trunk updates.
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log
cbmarcum closed pull request #108:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/108
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go
DonLewisFreeBSD commented on pull request #100:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/100#issuecomment-704403118
Another test would be to open an existing validly signed document and
verifying that the signature is valid.
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #105:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/105#issuecomment-708522832
Just FTR:
I built AOO for Windows with the patch applied and with release
configuration.
No problems!
ardovm commented on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-711165338
> The file provided in PR #106 ([this
one](https://github.com/apache/openoffice/files/5390104/crashing-with-noto-serif-cjk-jp.docx))
is rendered incorrectly as PDF.
> I am
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #92:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/92#issuecomment-678517434
Shouldn't that be 1.0.2t in /main/openssl/version.mk?
(The same applies to trunks and AOO42X)
This is
Pilot-Pirx edited a comment on pull request #92:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/92#issuecomment-678517434
Shouldn't that be 1.0.2t in /main/openssl/version.mk?
(The same applies to trunk and AOO42X)
DonLewisFreeBSD opened a new pull request #92:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/92
Upgrade to openssl-1.0.2t.
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on
DonLewisFreeBSD merged pull request #92:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/92
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above
DonLewisFreeBSD opened a new pull request #93:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/93
the most compatible with our old code base rather than relying on the
compiler default mode. Compiling in C++11 or newer mode is very noisy
due to deprecation warnings about our use of
DonLewisFreeBSD merged pull request #93:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/93
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above
DonLewisFreeBSD opened a new pull request #100:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/100
Upgrade the bundled version of nss to nss-3.39-with-nspr-4.20. This is not
the latest version, but newer versions use a lot of C90, which the old version
of Visual C++ that we use can't
DonLewisFreeBSD commented on pull request #100:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/100#issuecomment-700906638
This needs to be tested on MacOS. Nss integrates somewhat strangely on that
platform and we had issues with the previous upgrade.
DonLewisFreeBSD opened a new pull request #101:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/101
Set java compilation target to version 1.5 so that old versions of java
can be detected even when building using a newer version of the compiler.
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #100:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/100#issuecomment-701316288
Just for the record:
Build on Windows was successful. This was Windows 10 64-bit with
MozillaBuild 3.3 (64-bit)
DonLewisFreeBSD commented on pull request #95:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/95#issuecomment-696560215
> My Windows test builds (incl. SDK) were successful.
> But when building with Java 8 (Oracle) an installed Java 7 is not detected
by AOO.
> Since we still are
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #94:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/94#issuecomment-695775735
I would really like to get this PR in AOO418.
@jimjag: But for macOS there are still adjustments to be made?
jimjag merged pull request #94:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/94
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to
jimjag merged pull request #94:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/94
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to
Pilot-Pirx merged pull request #99:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/99
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go
DonLewisFreeBSD opened a new pull request #99:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/99
Upgrade bundled python to 2.7.18 on the AOO418 branch
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #95:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/95#issuecomment-696651911
> I believe the problem is present without the patch, but the build with
Java 8 would have to be done w/o the SDK.
>
> I will try to dig into this.
Yes, I think
DonLewisFreeBSD commented on pull request #95:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/95#issuecomment-696971253
> > I believe the problem is present without the patch, but the build with
Java 8 would have to be done w/o the SDK.
> > I will try to dig into this.
>
> Yes, I
cbmarcum commented on pull request #95:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/95#issuecomment-697016792
I went back and checked my build and I can confirm what Matthias found about
Java 7 was not discovered when I built with Java 8. But I don't think that is
an issue for this PR.
DonLewisFreeBSD merged pull request #95:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/95
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above
DonLewisFreeBSD commented on pull request #95:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/95#issuecomment-696560215
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to
DonLewisFreeBSD merged pull request #95:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/95
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #95:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/95#issuecomment-696651911
> I believe the problem is present without the patch, but the build with
Java 8 would have to be done w/o the SDK.
>
> I will try to dig into this.
Yes, I think
cbmarcum commented on pull request #95:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/95#issuecomment-697016792
I went back and checked my build and I can confirm what Matthias found about
Java 7 was not discovered when I built with Java 8. But I don't think that is
an issue for this PR.
DonLewisFreeBSD opened a new pull request #102:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/102
Bug fixes from upstream for bundled libxml2 and serf modules
* libxml2
- Possible infinite loop in xmlStringLenDecodeEntities
- Make sure that truncated UTF-8 sequences don't
DonLewisFreeBSD merged pull request #101:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/101
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above
cbmarcum opened a new pull request #98:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/98
Ant build can't fetch junit since it requires https now.
501 HTTPS Required.
Use https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/
More information at https://links.sonatype.com/central/501-https-required
DonLewisFreeBSD commented on pull request #83:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/83#issuecomment-695131653
Yes, I think so.
Why was this never merged?
This is an automated message from the Apache Git
cbmarcum commented on pull request #98:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/98#issuecomment-695126042
we may want to pull this into AOO418 also since you can't run BVT tests
without it.
This is an automated
Pilot-Pirx edited a comment on pull request #83:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/83#issuecomment-695127873
With
https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/26aca12f509e5c739c98db9ce5641a2c5feecea7
this PR is now obsolete?
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #83:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/83#issuecomment-695127873
With
https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/26aca12f509e5c739c98db9ce5641a2c5feecea7
this is now obsolete?
Pilot-Pirx closed pull request #83:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/83
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #83:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/83#issuecomment-695134792
I really don't know... ;-)
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the
Pilot-Pirx merged pull request #98:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/98
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go
leginee commented on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-695195811
A good test is after apply that the Font still works as expected. The patch
first was a quick and dirty fix, and this should be the proper one.
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #98:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/98#issuecomment-695204529
I think this should be applied to all branches.
Maybe later we can move to junit-4.13.jar?
This is an
ardovm commented on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-695215925
> A good test is after apply that the Font still works as expected. The
patch first was a quick and dirty fix, and this should be the proper one.
Are there any automated
pedlino opened a new pull request #97:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/97
Intro logo with sentence "free and open-source for 20 years" by Matthias
Seidel, as discussed in dev mailing list
This is an automated
pedlino opened a new pull request #96:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/96
About logo with sentence "free and open-source for 20 years" by Matthias
Seidel, as discussed in dev mailing list
This is an automated
Pilot-Pirx merged pull request #96:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/96
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go
Pilot-Pirx merged pull request #97:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/97
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go
ardovm commented on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-695216559
I forgot to mention that while developing this PR, I made some mistakes that
produced _invalid output_ with no crashes. The PDF was wrong (garbled
characters) but no error
pedlino commented on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-695216940
> > A good test is after apply that the Font still works as expected. The
patch first was a quick and dirty fix, and this should be the proper one.
>
> Are there any
pedlino edited a comment on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-695216940
> I am feeling a bit stupid while typing this, like I am reinventing the
wheel using the wrong tools, but please understand I am only trying to help.
Never feel
cbmarcum commented on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-694603116
I built trunk CentOS 7 without this PR applied and tested a writer document
with Noto Sans CKJ JP and CKJ SC and neither one crashed on PDF Export. Should
it always crash? I'm
Pilot-Pirx opened a new pull request #103:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/103
I think this is only one of those typical typos...
Using OpenGrok could not find any other reference outside this file, but I
am not sure if this would have side effects.
DonLewisFreeBSD merged pull request #102:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/102
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above
DonLewisFreeBSD commented on pull request #102:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/102#issuecomment-703146676
Testing the serf bug fix would require making an SSL connection through a
MITM device that redirected SSL network connections to intended to go to the
server
DonLewisFreeBSD commented on pull request #103:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/103#issuecomment-703144853
Looks fine to me.
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message,
Pilot-Pirx merged pull request #103:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/103
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to
Pilot-Pirx commented on pull request #89:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pull/89#issuecomment-694699613
The crash was already fixed in trunk (AOO42X and now AOO418).
This is just a better fix and some additional comments.
Not sure how to test it...
1 - 100 of 726 matches
Mail list logo
