[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #29 from Chris Sherlock  ---
Sorry, I'm literally still learning how to develop on OS X :(

I'm happy to look into it, but not sure how long it will take me to work this
out... I've been a bit ill lately and I have another thing I'm working on in
the VCL module that I need to focus on first once I'm physically able to.

But please keep me on the list, if/when I look at this I'll either add a
comment or submit something to gerrit and note it here.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #29 from Chris Sherlock  ---
Sorry, I'm literally still learning how to develop on OS X :(

I'm happy to look into it, but not sure how long it will take me to work this
out... I've been a bit ill lately and I have another thing I'm working on in
the VCL module that I need to focus on first once I'm physically able to.

But please keep me on the list, if/when I look at this I'll either add a
comment or submit something to gerrit and note it here.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

jan iversen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Whiteboard||ToBeReviewed

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

jan iversen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Whiteboard||ToBeReviewed

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #26 from Sierk Bornemann  ---
(In reply to barefootguru from comment #7)
> 3. Have one download which includes all languages, like every other Mac app

+1 (!)



(In reply to steve -_- from comment #16)
> Raising importance to high | major
[...]
> There must be a better way to deal with this situation. I don't think
> ignoring it, will make it go away.

+1 (!)



(In reply to barefootguru from comment #18)
[...]
> I think the current system is unacceptable and user hostile:
> 
> - you shouldn't have to download 2 things to install LO.  Almost no other
> Mac app has this requirement
[...]
> LO needs a single installer or drag-and-drop install, like almost every
> other Mac app.
[...]
> It should be:
> 
> 1. Download LO
> 2. Install LO
> 3. Run LO (LO remembers your language preference)

+1 (!)



(In reply to Frank Fuchs from comment #20)
[...]
> The problem is even worse than barefootguru described: Because the language
> packs are not signed, you have open the language pack (the one within the
> .dmg) with a "right click" and then acknowledge installing from an unsigned
> installation package - something Apple warns you not to do.
> If you look at all these steps needed, I'm fairly sure a "normal" (i.e.
> non-IT) user will have major difficulties and likely fail w/o IT support.
> 
> My 2 cents:
> I think the LO team needs to accept that support for a specific platform
> like OSX requires a "minimum" of platform specific support - and this starts
> with a user-friendly and secure way to install the application in line with
> the operating system's guidelines.
> And: If I look at the Windows version of LO, it certainly uses a lot of
> Windows-specific installation magic (e.g. the registry) to ensure proper
> installation.
> 
> My recommendation:
> If the LO team is unsure about the best "long-term" solution, a "quick fix"
> needs to be provided, soon. I believe an easy one is to provide exactly one
> single *signed* package (including all the language files). While this
> requires somewhat more space on your permanent storage device, I'm firmly
> convinced that this is the lesser evil (esp. taking into account current
> storage medium prices). That'll give everyone enough time to work on a more
> intelligent installation process (maybe like the one on Windows where you
> select what parts of LO and which languages you want to install).

+1 (!)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #26 from Sierk Bornemann  ---
(In reply to barefootguru from comment #7)
> 3. Have one download which includes all languages, like every other Mac app

+1 (!)



(In reply to steve -_- from comment #16)
> Raising importance to high | major
[...]
> There must be a better way to deal with this situation. I don't think
> ignoring it, will make it go away.

+1 (!)



(In reply to barefootguru from comment #18)
[...]
> I think the current system is unacceptable and user hostile:
> 
> - you shouldn't have to download 2 things to install LO.  Almost no other
> Mac app has this requirement
[...]
> LO needs a single installer or drag-and-drop install, like almost every
> other Mac app.
[...]
> It should be:
> 
> 1. Download LO
> 2. Install LO
> 3. Run LO (LO remembers your language preference)

+1 (!)



(In reply to Frank Fuchs from comment #20)
[...]
> The problem is even worse than barefootguru described: Because the language
> packs are not signed, you have open the language pack (the one within the
> .dmg) with a "right click" and then acknowledge installing from an unsigned
> installation package - something Apple warns you not to do.
> If you look at all these steps needed, I'm fairly sure a "normal" (i.e.
> non-IT) user will have major difficulties and likely fail w/o IT support.
> 
> My 2 cents:
> I think the LO team needs to accept that support for a specific platform
> like OSX requires a "minimum" of platform specific support - and this starts
> with a user-friendly and secure way to install the application in line with
> the operating system's guidelines.
> And: If I look at the Windows version of LO, it certainly uses a lot of
> Windows-specific installation magic (e.g. the registry) to ensure proper
> installation.
> 
> My recommendation:
> If the LO team is unsure about the best "long-term" solution, a "quick fix"
> needs to be provided, soon. I believe an easy one is to provide exactly one
> single *signed* package (including all the language files). While this
> requires somewhat more space on your permanent storage device, I'm firmly
> convinced that this is the lesser evil (esp. taking into account current
> storage medium prices). That'll give everyone enough time to work on a more
> intelligent installation process (maybe like the one on Windows where you
> select what parts of LO and which languages you want to install).

+1 (!)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

Sierk Bornemann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||42082

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

Sierk Bornemann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||42082

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #28 from barefootguru  ---
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #27)
> @Chris, want to be a hero to your fellow OS X users?  ;-)
>   
> See Thorsten's code tip in comment 8

Unless the AppleScript will be run automatically, seamlessly, when someone
downloads LO, it's not going to help your average user.

Even my computer-literate friends/family struggle with LO, while managing their
Mac and other apps fine.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #28 from barefootguru  ---
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #27)
> @Chris, want to be a hero to your fellow OS X users?  ;-)
>   
> See Thorsten's code tip in comment 8

Unless the AppleScript will be run automatically, seamlessly, when someone
downloads LO, it's not going to help your average user.

Even my computer-literate friends/family struggle with LO, while managing their
Mac and other apps fine.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||chris.sherloc...@gmail.com

--- Comment #27 from V Stuart Foote  ---
@Chris, want to be a hero to your fellow OS X users?  ;-)

See Thorsten's code tip in comment 8

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||chris.sherloc...@gmail.com

--- Comment #27 from V Stuart Foote  ---
@Chris, want to be a hero to your fellow OS X users?  ;-)

See Thorsten's code tip in comment 8

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #25 from barefootguru  ---
Thanks Frank, had forgotten you needed to right-click when installing language
pack.

Note you *can* run LO if you immediately install a language pack, but it
requires completely turning off Gatekeeper before launching it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #25 from barefootguru  ---
Thanks Frank, had forgotten you needed to right-click when installing language
pack.

Note you *can* run LO if you immediately install a language pack, but it
requires completely turning off Gatekeeper before launching it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

Christian Lohmaier  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||libreoff...@openmailbox.org

--- Comment #15 from Christian Lohmaier  ---
*** Bug 97680 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

Christian Lohmaier  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||libreoff...@openmailbox.org

--- Comment #15 from Christian Lohmaier  ---
*** Bug 97680 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|high|medium
Summary|lang-pack installation  |The lang-pack installation
   |mechanism on OSX can result |mechanism on OSX
   |in broken LO installation   |unacceptable -- needs
   |which cannot be opened  |refactoring for better
   ||installation UX
   Severity|major   |normal

--- Comment #17 from V Stuart Foote  ---
Back to Medium Normal -- sorry but the "sky is not falling".

Title back to the more appropriate for this issue which is need for refactoring
the handling of Lang Packs on OSX.

bug 93331 is the issue with Lang Packs installation as currently implemented

The Workaround as published to 5.0 release notes, and incrementals, remains
valid.

Install LO package onto OSX -> Run it once -> Install the lang pack.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|high|medium
Summary|lang-pack installation  |The lang-pack installation
   |mechanism on OSX can result |mechanism on OSX
   |in broken LO installation   |unacceptable -- needs
   |which cannot be opened  |refactoring for better
   ||installation UX
   Severity|major   |normal

--- Comment #17 from V Stuart Foote  ---
Back to Medium Normal -- sorry but the "sky is not falling".

Title back to the more appropriate for this issue which is need for refactoring
the handling of Lang Packs on OSX.

bug 93331 is the issue with Lang Packs installation as currently implemented

The Workaround as published to 5.0 release notes, and incrementals, remains
valid.

Install LO package onto OSX -> Run it once -> Install the lang pack.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #18 from barefootguru  ---
While I don't have any stats on the number of people affected by this, I think
the current system is unacceptable and user hostile:

- you shouldn't have to download 2 things to install LO.  Almost no other Mac
app has this requirement

- running the 2 apps in the wrong order results in a broken LO installation. 
Obscure web pages are a pathetic user-unfriendly mitigation.

LO needs a single installer or drag-and-drop install, like almost every other
Mac app.

As for the suggested workaround @Foote, you missed a few steps:

1. Download LO
2. Find and download desired language pack
3. Find and read obscure web page, so you don't break your install
4. Install and run LO, immediately quit it
5. Install language pack
6. Run LO and switch to desired language
7. Restart LO so language change takes effect

Repeat every time there's a new release.

It should be:

1. Download LO
2. Install LO
3. Run LO (LO remembers your language preference)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #18 from barefootguru  ---
While I don't have any stats on the number of people affected by this, I think
the current system is unacceptable and user hostile:

- you shouldn't have to download 2 things to install LO.  Almost no other Mac
app has this requirement

- running the 2 apps in the wrong order results in a broken LO installation. 
Obscure web pages are a pathetic user-unfriendly mitigation.

LO needs a single installer or drag-and-drop install, like almost every other
Mac app.

As for the suggested workaround @Foote, you missed a few steps:

1. Download LO
2. Find and download desired language pack
3. Find and read obscure web page, so you don't break your install
4. Install and run LO, immediately quit it
5. Install language pack
6. Run LO and switch to desired language
7. Restart LO so language change takes effect

Repeat every time there's a new release.

It should be:

1. Download LO
2. Install LO
3. Run LO (LO remembers your language preference)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #20 from Frank Fuchs  ---
Stuart:

I beg to differ as a really long time StarOffice/OOo/LO user - and MAC user
since 3 years:
The problem is even worse than barefootguru described: Because the language
packs are not signed, you have open the language pack (the one within the .dmg)
with a "right click" and then acknowledge installing from an unsigned
installation package - something Apple warns you not to do.
If you look at all these steps needed, I'm fairly sure a "normal" (i.e. non-IT)
user will have major difficulties and likely fail w/o IT support.

My 2 cents:
I think the LO team needs to accept that support for a specific platform like
OSX requires a "minimum" of platform specific support - and this starts with a
user-friendly and secure way to install the application in line with the
operating system's guidelines.
And: If I look at the Windows version of LO, it certainly uses a lot of
Windows-specific installation magic (e.g. the registry) to ensure proper
installation.

My recommendation:
If the LO team is unsure about the best "long-term" solution, a "quick fix"
needs to be provided, soon. I believe an easy one is to provide exactly one
single *signed* package (including all the language files). While this requires
somewhat more space on your permanent storage device, I'm firmly convinced that
this is the lesser evil (esp. taking into account current storage medium
prices). That'll give everyone enough time to work on a more intelligent
installation process (maybe like the one on Windows where you select what parts
of LO and which languages you want to install).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #20 from Frank Fuchs  ---
Stuart:

I beg to differ as a really long time StarOffice/OOo/LO user - and MAC user
since 3 years:
The problem is even worse than barefootguru described: Because the language
packs are not signed, you have open the language pack (the one within the .dmg)
with a "right click" and then acknowledge installing from an unsigned
installation package - something Apple warns you not to do.
If you look at all these steps needed, I'm fairly sure a "normal" (i.e. non-IT)
user will have major difficulties and likely fail w/o IT support.

My 2 cents:
I think the LO team needs to accept that support for a specific platform like
OSX requires a "minimum" of platform specific support - and this starts with a
user-friendly and secure way to install the application in line with the
operating system's guidelines.
And: If I look at the Windows version of LO, it certainly uses a lot of
Windows-specific installation magic (e.g. the registry) to ensure proper
installation.

My recommendation:
If the LO team is unsure about the best "long-term" solution, a "quick fix"
needs to be provided, soon. I believe an easy one is to provide exactly one
single *signed* package (including all the language files). While this requires
somewhat more space on your permanent storage device, I'm firmly convinced that
this is the lesser evil (esp. taking into account current storage medium
prices). That'll give everyone enough time to work on a more intelligent
installation process (maybe like the one on Windows where you select what parts
of LO and which languages you want to install).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #22 from Frank Fuchs  ---
Tor:

that can't be bypassed. Mac OSX simply reports this app as "broken". You do not
get a prompt where you could choose to accept running an unsigned app.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #22 from Frank Fuchs  ---
Tor:

that can't be bypassed. Mac OSX simply reports this app as "broken". You do not
get a prompt where you could choose to accept running an unsigned app.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #23 from Tor Lillqvist  ---
Not even right-click and "Open"?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #21 from Tor Lillqvist  ---
But if the user has to know how to bypass Gatekeeper when running a langpack
installer, can't she then also bypass Gatekeeper when running LibreOffice that
has been "broken" by the langpack? Or is that "brokenness" so several that it
can't be bypassed?

Anyway, see comment #14.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #21 from Tor Lillqvist  ---
But if the user has to know how to bypass Gatekeeper when running a langpack
installer, can't she then also bypass Gatekeeper when running LibreOffice that
has been "broken" by the langpack? Or is that "brokenness" so several that it
can't be bypassed?

Anyway, see comment #14.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #24 from Frank Fuchs  ---
Nope.
If you install a language pack before running a freshly installed LO at least
once, all you can do is move the installed LO app to the trash. Afterwards, a
new install is possible.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #24 from Frank Fuchs  ---
Nope.
If you install a language pack before running a freshly installed LO at least
once, all you can do is move the installed LO app to the trash. Afterwards, a
new install is possible.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #23 from Tor Lillqvist  ---
Not even right-click and "Open"?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #19 from V Stuart Foote  ---
(In reply to barefootguru from comment #18)

> LO needs a single installer or drag-and-drop install, like almost every
> other Mac app.
> 

Hence this Installation/UX issue gathering rational designs for what can
reasonably be implemented in our cross platform code base.

Until resolved--the OS X users simply have to be a bit more adult about
managing the software they install on their systems, acknowledging a
LibreOffice limitation in meeting Apples changed Gatekeeper packaging
practices.

Sorry, but the release note comment should be adequate for anyone.  But, if
more detailed steps are needed--feel free to post steps to Wiki--and we'll link
to it.

Stuart

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable -- needs refactoring for better installation UX

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #19 from V Stuart Foote  ---
(In reply to barefootguru from comment #18)

> LO needs a single installer or drag-and-drop install, like almost every
> other Mac app.
> 

Hence this Installation/UX issue gathering rational designs for what can
reasonably be implemented in our cross platform code base.

Until resolved--the OS X users simply have to be a bit more adult about
managing the software they install on their systems, acknowledging a
LibreOffice limitation in meeting Apples changed Gatekeeper packaging
practices.

Sorry, but the release note comment should be adequate for anyone.  But, if
more detailed steps are needed--feel free to post steps to Wiki--and we'll link
to it.

Stuart

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #13 from Piet van Oostrum  ---
Approach 2 is the standard way these things are done on OS X: install additions
in /Library/Application Support/LibreOffice. If they are version dependent, add
a version directory to it. The problem of leftovers in this directory is the
same for other applications, and these don't seem to bother. Or they provide an
uninstaller. Or just tell the user to also delete that one directory.

The same approach could be used for extensions that are installed for all
users. At the moment this is quite messy, as IIRC they are still installed in a
user directory, or maybe also somewhere in the application.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #13 from Piet van Oostrum  ---
Approach 2 is the standard way these things are done on OS X: install additions
in /Library/Application Support/LibreOffice. If they are version dependent, add
a version directory to it. The problem of leftovers in this directory is the
same for other applications, and these don't seem to bother. Or they provide an
uninstaller. Or just tell the user to also delete that one directory.

The same approach could be used for extensions that are installed for all
users. At the moment this is quite messy, as IIRC they are still installed in a
user directory, or maybe also somewhere in the application.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #14 from Tor Lillqvist  ---
LibreOffice as distributed in the Mac App Store comes with a set of user
interface languages already. No separate lang-packs necessary. Just saying.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #14 from Tor Lillqvist  ---
LibreOffice as distributed in the Mac App Store comes with a set of user
interface languages already. No separate lang-packs necessary. Just saying.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #12 from catacom...@gmail.com ---
[OS X developer and long time LibreOffice user, first time LibreOffice Bugzilla
commenter...]

I would prefer approach 3 as suggested by barefootguru, but if that would grow
the size of the download to the point where it's unacceptable I would like to
add one other possibility:

4. Deliver updated code signatures as part of the language pack. However if the
user installs multiple language packs this might be a complicated issue where
the langpack installer must keep track of signatures for all possible
combinations of language packs... a quick calculation gives me more than 13000
possible combinations of language packs. Every langpack installer would need to
include signatures for all of those combinations which include the installed
language. Doable, but complicated.

In my opinion there are some real problems with approach 1 and 2:

Approach 1 relies on the fact that Gatekeeper will not check an app after it
has been checked the first time, so if we add content to the app bundle after
it has been verified the first time Gatekeeper doesn't care, but this sounds
more like a bug in Gatekeeper. If Gatekeeper should provide any level of
security it should detect modifications in a bundle after it has been checked
the first time (what if some malware did the modification?).
Indeed when checking the app with codesign after adding a language pack (in
this case the Swedish language pack) reveals that it's in fact not valid
anymore:
$ codesign -v -v /Applications/LibreOffice.app
/Applications/LibreOffice.app: a sealed resource is missing or invalid
file added:
/Applications/LibreOffice.app/Contents/Resources/autotext/sv/crdbus50.bau
file added:
/Applications/LibreOffice.app/Contents/Resources/autotext/sv/standard.bau
...

Approach 2 puts data in directories that are not apparent to the user. If the
user wants to uninstall LibreOffice the most obvious thing to do is to delete
the app, but that leaves unreferenced data behind in /Library, wasting disk
space. An application should be self-contained and not rely on data outside the
app bundle.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #12 from catacom...@gmail.com ---
[OS X developer and long time LibreOffice user, first time LibreOffice Bugzilla
commenter...]

I would prefer approach 3 as suggested by barefootguru, but if that would grow
the size of the download to the point where it's unacceptable I would like to
add one other possibility:

4. Deliver updated code signatures as part of the language pack. However if the
user installs multiple language packs this might be a complicated issue where
the langpack installer must keep track of signatures for all possible
combinations of language packs... a quick calculation gives me more than 13000
possible combinations of language packs. Every langpack installer would need to
include signatures for all of those combinations which include the installed
language. Doable, but complicated.

In my opinion there are some real problems with approach 1 and 2:

Approach 1 relies on the fact that Gatekeeper will not check an app after it
has been checked the first time, so if we add content to the app bundle after
it has been verified the first time Gatekeeper doesn't care, but this sounds
more like a bug in Gatekeeper. If Gatekeeper should provide any level of
security it should detect modifications in a bundle after it has been checked
the first time (what if some malware did the modification?).
Indeed when checking the app with codesign after adding a language pack (in
this case the Swedish language pack) reveals that it's in fact not valid
anymore:
$ codesign -v -v /Applications/LibreOffice.app
/Applications/LibreOffice.app: a sealed resource is missing or invalid
file added:
/Applications/LibreOffice.app/Contents/Resources/autotext/sv/crdbus50.bau
file added:
/Applications/LibreOffice.app/Contents/Resources/autotext/sv/standard.bau
...

Approach 2 puts data in directories that are not apparent to the user. If the
user wants to uninstall LibreOffice the most obvious thing to do is to delete
the app, but that leaves unreferenced data behind in /Library, wasting disk
space. An application should be self-contained and not rely on data outside the
app bundle.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #9 from Tor Lillqvist  ---
Also see https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62442#c33

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #9 from Tor Lillqvist  ---
Also see https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62442#c33

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

jan iversen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords|difficultyEasy  |difficultyBeginner

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

jan iversen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords|difficultyEasy  |difficultyBeginner

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also|https://bugs.documentfounda |
   |tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89 |
   |561 |

--- Comment #10 from V Stuart Foote  ---
*** Bug 89561 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also|https://bugs.documentfounda |
   |tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89 |
   |561 |

--- Comment #10 from V Stuart Foote  ---
*** Bug 89561 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://bugs.documentfounda
   ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62
   ||442,
   ||https://bugs.documentfounda
   ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93
   ||331

--- Comment #11 from V Stuart Foote  ---
to see also 
bug 62442
bug 93331

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://bugs.documentfounda
   ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62
   ||442,
   ||https://bugs.documentfounda
   ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93
   ||331

--- Comment #11 from V Stuart Foote  ---
to see also 
bug 62442
bug 93331

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

jan iversen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||libreoffice@lists.freedeskt
   ||op.org

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

Thorsten Behrens  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||difficultyEasy, easyHack,
   ||skillScript
 CC||t...@libreoffice.org

--- Comment #8 from Thorsten Behrens  ---
The code for that is here:
https://github.com/LibreOffice/core/blob/master/setup_native/scripts/osx_install_languagepack.applescript

Anyone with a mac, a bit of time, and the willingness to debug that script
should be able to fix this. Adding EasyHack label.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #7 from Tom Robinson  ---
3. Have one download which includes all languages, like every other Mac app :]

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #6 from Uwe Altmann  ---
Besides fixing I see two possible workarounds:
1. when installing a langpack, the installer checks if a first run of LO has
taken place (is that possible?). If LO wasn't started yet, 

1.1. a warning dialog is given in language of the langpack that LO has to run
one time to install a langpack.

1.2. or LO is started by the langpack-install script and killed immediately
after that so gatekeeper has had it's chance. Perhaps this could be done always
so no check is necessary.


2. change the location of the langpack from LO-package to systems library.
Therefor put a symlink into the package which directs to the appropriate
directory in systems Library/Application Support folder. Because the installer
of the langpack already is a program, it should be possible to get the
necessary admin rights to do this.

2.1 Langpack install script checks also for depecated langpacks with no fitting
LO installation (similar to the way it finds it's right install version) and
deletes them.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   See Also||https://bugs.documentfounda
   ||tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89
   ||561

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #4 from Frank Fuchs  ---
Could you please also add this to the installation Release Notes (e.g.
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Releases/5.0.3/RC1)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||cl...@documentfoundation.or
   ||g

--- Comment #5 from V Stuart Foote  ---
@Cloph, regards comment 4, while I've placed it in the 5.0 Release Notes at:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/5.0#OS_X  would you agree to
including an OS X entry in the Installation stanza of your per build Release
notes?  Or is the general note sufficient?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|NEW
 CC||sberg...@redhat.com
 Resolution|DUPLICATE   |---
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Severity|critical|normal

--- Comment #3 from V Stuart Foote  ---
Back to New.

While OS X packages are now showing as signed resolving bug 89561, the 4.4 and
5.0 packaging to append OS X language-pack to an existing valid (e.g. opened
once successfully) installation seems to remain a problem. 

Suspect OS X packaging design needs to be reworked in some fashion given
Stephan B's comment.

Through 5.0 the work around is to simply launch OS X install/upgrade of LO
once. And then apply the language-pack install package.

Adding work around comment similar to 4.4, to release notes for 5.0.

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/5.0

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

--- Comment #1 from mi...@filmsi.net ---
I first reported this under
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=84352
(See comment 22), but only now we seem to know how to reproduce/why it happens.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs

[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 89657] The lang-pack installation mechanism on OSX unacceptable

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89657

V Stuart Foote vstuart.fo...@utsa.edu changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 CC||vstuart.fo...@utsa.edu
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

--- Comment #2 from V Stuart Foote vstuart.fo...@utsa.edu ---
@miles, closing as duplicate of your bug 89561

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 89561 ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs