[libreoffice-users] Uninstalling LO 4.3.0.4 from Ubuntu 14.04

[Gordon Burgess-Parker]

I installed 4.3.0.4 from the deb packages. I now wish to uninstall and 
revert to the official Ubuntu-supplied version.

Using either

sudo apt-get remove --purge libreoffice

or

sudo dpkg -P libreoffice

I get the dreaded
dpkg: warning: ignoring request to remove libreoffice which isn't installed

How can I uninstall 4.3.0.4?

Cheers

Gordon

//
--

Registered Linux User no 240308
GBP's alternative computing:http://gbplinuxfoss.blogspot.com/  
I only accept odf or pdf documents by email

Say No to OOXMLhttp://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9594#mpart8.3.0.4  



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Parts of document set to read-only by Writer: how to disable (normal methods not working)?

[Brian Barker]

At 21:54 25/08/2014 -0700, Vincent Rubiolo wrote:

On 08/24/2014 04:28 AM, Mark Bourne wrote:
To protect cells in a table, you can select them and either use the 
menu Table > Protect Cells, or right-click > Cell > Protect. You 
may have accidentally clicked one of those option at some point and 
not noticed since there's no immediately obvious effect; it's easily done.


Having done that, Table > Protect Cells is disabled so can't select 
that again to remove protection. However, you can right-click > 
Cell > Unprotect. A bit inconsistent, but hopefully that helps!


I have tried what you advised but unfortunately this does not work: 
when I go to the protected part of the document and click on the 
protected text, the right-click 'Cell' menu contains only a 'No 
selection possible' greyed entry. The cell is the wrongly protected 
one because this is where I get the 'read-only' popup I mentioned if 
I try to backspace at that point. I can confirm the right-click 
contextual menu is otherwise the correct option because I can freely 
use it on the other table in the document to successfully protect (I 
then get the popup when attempting to edit the text) and unprotect a cell.


One possibility here is that structure of your document is more 
complex than simply cells of table. Have you perhaps got a table - 
even if only of a single cell - inside a cell of another table? If 
so, you may have the relevant cell of the outer, containing table 
protected with the cell of the inner table not protected. As the 
outer cell is protected, you cannot change the properties of the 
inner table cell, so the Cell > submenu there will indeed show a 
greyed-out .


The solution is to unprotect the outer table cell. If there is no 
room to get your cursor into the outer table cell without it being 
also in the inner table cell (so you cannot get to the relevant 
context menu), put the cursor at the end of the text in the inner 
cell and press Alt+Enter. You'll then have space to get to the 
context menu you require.


I trust this helps.

Brian Barker


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Parts of document set to read-only by Writer: how to disable (normal methods not working)?

[Vincent Rubiolo]

Good evening Mark,

Thank you very much for your insightful reply!

I have tried what you advised but unfortunately this does not work: when 
I go to the protected part of the document and click on the protected 
text, the right-click 'Cell' menu contains only a 'No selection 
possible' greyed entry.


The cell is the wrongly protected one because this is where I get the 
'read-only' popup I mentioned if I try to backspace at that point.


I can confirm the right-click contextual menu is otherwise the correct 
option because I can freely use it on the other table in the document to 
successfully protect (I then get the popup when attempting to edit the 
text) and unprotect a cell.


Is there something else that I could try? I can take screen captures but 
it seems the list does not accept attachments.


Thanks again,

Vincent

PS: thanks for opening the bug. In my case, I had a hard time realizing 
the cell was in read-only mode because i wanted to use search and 
replace and while the pattern was correctly found, the replacement was 
not working, without a clue as to why this happened. I think this 
warrants a bug report as well (there does not appear to be one on the 
bugzilla).


On 08/24/2014 04:28 AM, Mark Bourne wrote:

To protect cells in a table, you can select them and either use the menu
Table > Protect Cells, or right-click > Cell > Protect. You may have
accidentally clicked one of those option at some point and not noticed
since there's no immediately obvious effect; it's easily done.

Having done that, Table > Protect Cells is disabled so can't select that
again to remove protection. However, you can right-click > Cell >
Unprotect. A bit inconsistent, but hopefully that helps!

I've submitted bug 83011 to report the inconsistency in options to
remove cell protection:
   https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83011

Mark.



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Numbering/Outline levels in Writer

[dave boland]

How is this done?  I have another document that needs this type of
numbering, so I used F11, went to Heading 1, Modify, but could not find
a way to go from "1." to "1.0".  Same deal with Heading 2 - how do I
chage the style so it goes from "1." to (for example) "1.1" or "2.1"
etc. I looked at the help section, but it was obviously not helpful
enough (for me).

Thanks!
Dave

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014, at 11:36 AM, Kevin O'Brien wrote:
> Yes, got caught again by that damn list problem.
> 
> Well, I would say that earlier version of MS Office (i.e. any time up to
> 2003) had very usable styles, but maybe that is a matter of taste. I had
> to
> do the very thing the original questioner asked about in MS Office 2010 a
> couple of weeks ago and it was a lot harder than in LibreOffice. But the
> general answer for any modern office suite is to do it with styles.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Tom Davies  wrote:
> 
> > Hi :)
> > I think Styles often get ignored by beginners because in MS Office they
> > are more of a hindrance than a useful tool.  In LibreOffice they are really
> > useful though so it's good to introduce people to them at the slightest
> > excuse.
> >
> > I was hoping your message would go to the whole mailing list but it only
> > came to me :(  I think it would really help the couple of new people that
> > have joined recently.
> > Regards from
> > Tom :)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 14 August 2014 13:44, Kevin O'Brien  wrote:
> >
> >> Well, I always keep the Styles and Formatting window open and anchored to
> >> the left of the screen, so I would just access the List styles there.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Tom Davies  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi :)
> >>> From the "Format" menu, the icon-toolbar or the F11, Styles, extra menu
> >>> or somewhere else?
> >>> Regards from
> >>> Tom :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 14 August 2014 00:43, Kevin O'Brien  wrote:
> >>>
>  Well, I do it using a List style.
> 
>  Regards
> 
> 
>  On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 4:07 PM, dave boland 
>  wrote:
> 
>  > Writer used to allow this from a slection in Outline
>  > 1.0 Head 1
>  > 1.1 Head 2
>  > 1.2 Head 2
>  > 1.2.1 Head 3
>  > 2.0 Head 1
>  >
>  > Can't find how to do it in  4.1.3.2  Any ideas?
>  >
>  > Dave,
>  > --
>  >   dave boland
>  >   dbola...@fastmail.fm
>  >
>  > --
>  > http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different...
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
>  > Problems?
>  > http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
>  > Posting guidelines + more:
>  http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
>  > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
>  > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
>  > deleted
>  >
>  >
> 
> 
>  --
>  Kevin B. O'Brien
>  zwiln...@gmail.com
>  http://google.me/+kevinobrien
>  Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.
> 
>  --
>  To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
>  Problems?
>  http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
>  Posting guidelines + more:
>  http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
>  List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
>  All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
>  deleted
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kevin B. O'Brien
> >> zwiln...@gmail.com
> >> http://google.me/+kevinobrien
> >> Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Kevin B. O'Brien
> zwiln...@gmail.com
> http://google.me/+kevinobrien
> Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
> Problems?
> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
-- 
  dave boland
  dbola...@fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own


-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Felmon Davis]

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Paul wrote:


Quick question, Felmon, do you have to do this for all mails from this
list, both Tom's and mine, or just for mails like the ones from Tom?


I would have to look more deeply into the configuration of alpine to 
check settings but I'll note that


a) replies to all emails from this list require my manual tender 
loving care, all of them whether from Tom or from you.


b) on another list I get an option to reply to the poster or reply to 
the list.


I'll dig later to see what the difference is in the configuration - I 
have separate configuration files. I do recall that once it used to 
work the same on both lists. (nonetheless in the meantime I may have 
fiddled with the settings also.)


F.





From a *brief* google, it seems that the List-* headers may legally

be other than email addresses, so some mail clients, I gather Alpine is
one, don't use them at all for replies, instead replying to the From
field. Other mail clients, like Thunderbird and apparently Claws Mail,
do use them, at least when they are email addresses or mailto URLs, to
reply to the list.

So, as I understand it:

Alpine is technically correct, in that it cannot *rely* on the List-*
headers for replies. Though arguably it should do this when these
headers do give a valid email address.

The list is technically correct, in that it shouldn't enforce Reply-To
header rewriting to *force* all mails to go back to the list, and
instead provides the List-* headers as per the RFC. Though arguably it
would be fine to overwrite the Reply-To header, because it changes the
default to be a reply to the list, and users can override that if they
want, rather than the current situation with non-smart mail clients,
which is the reverse.

Thunderbird et. al. are practically correct, in that the List-* headers
often do contain a valid email address, and can be used for replying to
the list, which is what people want most of the time.

The best solution, obviously, would be to extend the relevant RFC to
include a List-Reply header that is mandated to be the valid email
address of the list for replies, such that mail clients can use it to
provide smart replies. Of course, this means extending an RFC, and then
waiting for all email clients to update to include the new behaviour.

Maybe someone who knows this stuff could comment further, I'm just
starting to understand it myself. I've heard the debate on the list
before about what the list should and shouldn't do, but I never really
understood it, because some mails worked correctly and some didn't. I'm
only now getting the hang of this, and I can't remember what all has
been said before (and I can't really be bothered to go look it up and
raise it all again).

Basically, for me things work, unless someone sends mails that are
addressed to me personally and only CCd to the list, which I feel is
the wrong behaviour from a mail client, although the issue of why
some mail clients do that seems to be technical.

But technically, neither the list nor the mail client are *wrong*. In
practice it seems either one could be changed, although it is probably
more a mail client fault than a list fault, or at least so it seems to
me.


Paul



On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 12:56:55 -0400 (EDT)
Felmon Davis  wrote:


On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Paul wrote:


Well, it does seem like all your mails do this, but not all mails
from this list exhibit this behaviour. Most mails from the list,
even replies, are addressed to the list. Yours are different in
that they're not addressed to the list, only CCd to the list. Some
other people's replies are the same, but I'd say not most.


I have to manually remove the OP's address and put the list address
in the To: field.

it is tiresome. no other list I know (or manage) works this way.

I use 'alpine' when posting to the list.

I would be happy to write the postmaster; I forget who that is.

F.



When the mail is addressed to the list, or addressed to someone
else and CCd to the list, I can just click reply, but when the mail
is addressed to me personally and only CCd to the list clicking
Reply replies to the sender only.

I can only think that it's a difference in email clients and how
they handle list messages. The messages contain list headers, so
most clients, like mine, must pick that up and automatically reply
to the list, but some, like yours, must be ignoring those and
replying to the sender instead. I think.

So if I'm understanding the process right, it's not so much a
problem with how the list is set up (other than that it doesn't
rewrite the sender header), but rather with some clients not
honouring the list headers.



Paul



On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:08:01 +0100
Tom Davies  wrote:


Hi :)
Nope, it;s the standard way these mailing lists have behaved for a
long time now.

It used to be that people could just click on "Reply to" and their
message would go straight to the mailing list.  Now most
email-clients require people to click on "Reply to all ..." a

Re: [libreoffice-users] Send Document as Microsoft Word doesn't

[Dave Barton]

Steve Edmonds wrote:
> Must be a bug because it works in my LO 3.6 and 4.1.
> 
> Steve
> On 2014-08-26 01:27, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
>> LO 4.3.0.4 on Ubuntu 14.04 - Thunderbird as default email client.
>> In LO Writer, if I click on File>Send>Email as Microsoft Word then it
>> opens a new message window in TBird, but with no attachment, which
>> rather negates the function!
>> I use this facility to be able to keep one format of document on my
>> machine, rather than having to do a "Save As" into MS Word format.
>> Is this a bug in 4.3?

If it is a bug it might be Linux specific, because it works on Win7 x64
with LO 4.3.0.4 and TB.
I don't have access to my Linux machines right now, but I will take a
look later.

Dave



-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Send Document as Microsoft Word doesn't

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)

https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugReport
or
https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/bug/

(both should work.  One is prettier and easier, the other gives more
control and has more flexibility but is less pretty and simple)
Regards from
Tom :)


On 25 August 2014 20:50, Steve Edmonds  wrote:

> Must be a bug because it works in my LO 3.6 and 4.1.
>
> Steve
>
> On 2014-08-26 01:27, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
>
>> LO 4.3.0.4 on Ubuntu 14.04 - Thunderbird as default email client.
>> In LO Writer, if I click on File>Send>Email as Microsoft Word then it
>> opens a new message window in TBird, but with no attachment, which rather
>> negates the function!
>> I use this facility to be able to keep one format of document on my
>> machine, rather than having to do a "Save As" into MS Word format.
>> Is this a bug in 4.3?
>>
>>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-
> unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
I think it's easier to just edit the bash script isn't it?

Surely to get it's output into a file all that is needed is something like

   > filename.txt

to be added to the end of the relevant lines?  or better would be if it
could keep adding to the end of a file after first creating the file with
the first bit of output.  I think Python is a bit of an over-kill for this
although it might be really nice to have as a permanent Extension written
in a decent language like Python.
Regards from
Tom :)




On 25 August 2014 17:53, Paul D. Mirowsky  wrote:

> If the Python code were modified to also add filename with path and inject
> it at end of paragraph as URL.
>
> It might be possible to re-direct python command output to a .txt file
> that could be opened by Writer.
>
> I am not sure whether or not Writer could be set to recognize and "Open
> File URL" automatically to modify original document.
>
> Hm
>
>
>
> On 8/25/2014 10:03 AM, P. . wrote:
>
>> Try this, even if it isn't exactly an 'out of the box' solution, it
>> can be useful:
>> in few words, the script parses the xml file inside the .odt - in fact
>> an archive file, and search for a keyword after having extracted the
>> text part.
>>
>> A short excerpt, from the page 3 of "Extract and Parse ODF Files with
>> Python":
>> "In this particular program, I collect all the text as a list of
>> paragraphs, and then I search for the keywords passed in from the
>> command line. If the searched word matches, the paragraph is printed
>> out.
>>
>> The text found in each  is Unicode text. You have to convert
>> this to normal text in order to print correctly and/or use in a
>> widget. The encode() command translates the Unicode to a printable
>> string. "
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>> On 25 August 2014 15:31, Paul  wrote:
>>
>>> Well, it does seem like all your mails do this,


> 

>
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 13:41:14 +0100
> Tom Davies  wrote:
>
>  Hi :)
>> I suspect that Paul's post below has not yet arrived in Maurice's
>> time-line.
>>
>> 

>
>> On the other hand it might be good if someone could test Paul's
>> script. Perhaps it's possible to combine the 2 ideas so that both
>> the file-name AND the few lines of surrounding text could be
>> output? Would that help?  Also it might be good to have the
>> output directed into a file rather than just onto the
>> command-line?
>>
>> 

> Regards from
>> Tom :)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24 August 2014 19:29, Paul  wrote:
>>
>>  Try changing the line:
>>>
>>>   unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -ql "$1"
>>>
>>> to:
>>>
>>>   unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -qC 10 "$1"
>>>
>>> the "-l" to grep makes it show only the names of files that
>>> match, not the content. The "-C #" gives # lines of context
>>> around the match. Or you could use "-B #" and "-A #" to print #
>>> lines of leading and trailing conext, respectively.
>>>
>>> You could also make a script to pull the contents of all the
>>> files and concatenate them in such a way that you can use
>>> Writer to do find inside one big document, but that would be
>>> considerably harder. Try this first.
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Disclaimer: I haven't actually tested this, just done a "man
>>> grep", but I think the syntax is right...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 18:16:35 + (UTC)
>>> Maurice  wrote:
>>>
>>>  On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:44:31 -0500, Don Pobanz wrote:

 

>
>>>

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] How to disable undesired error indicator

[CVAlkan]

When adding a footnote reference to the end of a sentence, the typical style
requirement is that the period comes first and then the footnote number,
which is usually superscripted.

When I do this, however, I've always been slightly annoyed that the fact
that there is no space after the period is given the old blue squiggly
underline, as is the fact that footnote number itself gets one (apparently
Writer thinks the next sentence begins with a number, which it doesn't
like).

I finally decided to dive into the scattered configuration menus and disable
these actions, but after looking everywhere I could think of or locate,
could not find a place to do this.

Does anyone know where this sort of thing is located? Or, might this be an
actual bug in the routines that determine the conditions (e.g. it doesn't
notice that the number is actually a footnote reference).

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks ...




--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/How-to-disable-undesired-error-indicator-tp4120218.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Mark Bourne]

Paul wrote:

Well, it does seem like all your mails do this, but not all mails from
this list exhibit this behaviour. Most mails from the list, even
replies, are addressed to the list. Yours are different in that they're
not addressed to the list, only CCd to the list. Some other people's
replies are the same, but I'd say not most.

When the mail is addressed to the list, or addressed to someone else and CCd
to the list, I can just click reply, but when the mail is addressed to
me personally and only CCd to the list clicking Reply replies to the
sender only.

I can only think that it's a difference in email clients and how they
handle list messages. The messages contain list headers, so most
clients, like mine, must pick that up and automatically reply to the
list, but some, like yours, must be ignoring those and replying to the
sender instead. I think.


Indeed. I think Tom tends to Reply All, so you get two copies - one 
direct and one through the list. If you reply to the direct one, that 
doesn't have the List-* headers, so will go only to Tom by default. If 
you reply to the one received through the list, that does have the 
List-* headers and if your mail client uses them it will reply to the list.


In my client, I have to select Reply to List to use the List-Reply 
header, but it sounds like yours uses it by default if available.



So if I'm understanding the process right, it's not so much a problem
with how the list is set up (other than that it doesn't rewrite the
sender header), but rather with some clients not honouring the list
headers.


Yep. This list is set up differently from many others, but it is more 
correct. It shouldn't rewrite the From or Reply-To headers as that 
causes other problems, particularly as this list accepts emails from 
non-subscribed users who sometimes request a direct copy of replies. If 
the From or Reply-To address has been overwritten, it is difficult or 
even impossible to email or copy someone individually. The Sender header 
I think would be safe to overwrite, but doing so wouldn't be 
particularly useful as mail clients don't use it for replies.


Mark.

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Mark Bourne]

Paul wrote:

The list is technically correct, in that it shouldn't enforce Reply-To
header rewriting to *force* all mails to go back to the list, and
instead provides the List-* headers as per the RFC. Though arguably it
would be fine to overwrite the Reply-To header,


That would still cause problems, as it makes it difficult to reply to an 
individual if the need arises. Especially as this list accepts posts 
from non-subscribed users, who sometimes request a direct copy of the mail.


For a start, overwriting the Reply-To header would make Reply and Reply 
All both go to only the list, and not the original sender (Reply-To 
overrides From). It's difficult to persuade many clients to reply (or 
even copy) the From address when a Reply-To address is set.


Additionally, if a user had set their own Reply-To address, expecting 
replies to go to that address instead of their From address, that would 
be completely lost.



because it changes the
default to be a reply to the list, and users can override that if they
want,


No, they can't; that's the problem. If I send an email with my own 
Reply-To header, to a list which overwrites Reply-To, that list removes 
my Reply-To header and sets its own.


In this list's setup, I can set the Reply-To address to the list 
address, indicating that I don't want a direct copy and replies should 
go to the list. (I don't usually bother to do that, but I have the choice).



rather than the current situation with non-smart mail clients,
which is the reverse.


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents

[Joel Madero]

Nope. No templates used.


Best,
Joel
On 08/25/2014 12:54 PM, Kevin O'Brien wrote:
My first question would be whether you used a Template for either or 
both of these documents.


Regards,


On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Joel Madero > wrote:


Makes sense - next question is, how the hell did this happen? ;) I
haven't tinkered at all with settings, haven't reset my profile,
etc . . . all other documents work fine, just this one hit a snag.


Best,
Joel


On 08/25/2014 12:09 PM, Brian Barker wrote:

At 07:16 25/08/2014 -0700, Joel Madero wrote:

I have the following two documents: ...
I'm wondering why the TOC on my evidence briefs is so
screwed up (no indentation at all) while the copyright one
is just fine.


The indentation and so on of entries in the table of contents
are controlled by paragraph styles called Contents 1, Contents
2, etc. In your Copyright document, these styles have
indentations progressively 0.5 cm larger than the previous
level. In your Evidence document, Contents 2, 3, and 4 all
have indentations of zero. This creates exactly the
arrangement you see.

You could choose to tinker with those styles manually or you
can copy them from one document to another:
o In Evidence, open the Styles and Formatting window. (Go to
Format | Styles and Formatting, or press F11, or click the
Styles and Formatting button in the Formatting toolbar.)
o Click New Style from Selection | Load Styles... .
o In the Load Styles dialogue, tick Overwrite.
o Click From File... and browse to and Open the Copyright
document.

Voilà!

I trust this helps.

Brian Barker




-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org


Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and
cannot be deleted




--
Kevin B. O'Brien
zwiln...@gmail.com 
http://google.me/+kevinobrien
Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents

[Kevin O'Brien]

My first question would be whether you used a Template for either or both
of these documents.

Regards,


On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Joel Madero  wrote:

> Makes sense - next question is, how the hell did this happen? ;) I haven't
> tinkered at all with settings, haven't reset my profile, etc . . . all
> other documents work fine, just this one hit a snag.
>
>
> Best,
> Joel
>
>
> On 08/25/2014 12:09 PM, Brian Barker wrote:
>
>> At 07:16 25/08/2014 -0700, Joel Madero wrote:
>>
>>> I have the following two documents: ...
>>> I'm wondering why the TOC on my evidence briefs is so screwed up (no
>>> indentation at all) while the copyright one is just fine.
>>>
>>
>> The indentation and so on of entries in the table of contents are
>> controlled by paragraph styles called Contents 1, Contents 2, etc. In your
>> Copyright document, these styles have indentations progressively 0.5 cm
>> larger than the previous level. In your Evidence document, Contents 2, 3,
>> and 4 all have indentations of zero. This creates exactly the arrangement
>> you see.
>>
>> You could choose to tinker with those styles manually or you can copy
>> them from one document to another:
>> o In Evidence, open the Styles and Formatting window. (Go to Format |
>> Styles and Formatting, or press F11, or click the Styles and Formatting
>> button in the Formatting toolbar.)
>> o Click New Style from Selection | Load Styles... .
>> o In the Load Styles dialogue, tick Overwrite.
>> o Click From File... and browse to and Open the Copyright document.
>>
>> Voilà!
>>
>> I trust this helps.
>>
>> Brian Barker
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-
> unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>
>


-- 
Kevin B. O'Brien
zwiln...@gmail.com
http://google.me/+kevinobrien
Facebook is Evil. Cancel your account.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Send Document as Microsoft Word doesn't

[Steve Edmonds]

Must be a bug because it works in my LO 3.6 and 4.1.

Steve
On 2014-08-26 01:27, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:

LO 4.3.0.4 on Ubuntu 14.04 - Thunderbird as default email client.
In LO Writer, if I click on File>Send>Email as Microsoft Word then it 
opens a new message window in TBird, but with no attachment, which 
rather negates the function!
I use this facility to be able to keep one format of document on my 
machine, rather than having to do a "Save As" into MS Word format.

Is this a bug in 4.3?




--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
The mailing list used to do a certain thing regardless of which mailing
client was being used, and that was to make it easy for messages and
replies to go straight to the mailing list.  it was possible to p.m. people
but it took a bit of faffing around.  Answers were often built-up as
happened in this thread.  People were not shy about posting answers or bits
of answers or suggestions.  The community here was quite strong and grew
fast back then.

Nowadays new people to the list struggle to keep messages on-list and
replies from us apparently go off-list quite often too.


Of course the technical reasons are quite complicated.  Should new users
have to deal with that and change email clients in order to use this
mailing list?  Should this mailing list be restricted to only users who
perform technical shennanigans with their email client before being allowed
to seek answers from us?
Regards from
Tom :)



On 25 August 2014 20:20, Paul  wrote:

> Quick question, Felmon, do you have to do this for all mails from this
> list, both Tom's and mine, or just for mails like the ones from Tom?
>
>
> >From a *brief* google, it seems that the List-* headers may legally
> be other than email addresses, so some mail clients, I gather Alpine is
> one, don't use them at all for replies, instead replying to the From
> field. Other mail clients, like Thunderbird and apparently Claws Mail,
> do use them, at least when they are email addresses or mailto URLs, to
> reply to the list.
>
> So, as I understand it:
>
> Alpine is technically correct, in that it cannot *rely* on the List-*
> headers for replies. Though arguably it should do this when these
> headers do give a valid email address.
>
> The list is technically correct, in that it shouldn't enforce Reply-To
> header rewriting to *force* all mails to go back to the list, and
> instead provides the List-* headers as per the RFC. Though arguably it
> would be fine to overwrite the Reply-To header, because it changes the
> default to be a reply to the list, and users can override that if they
> want, rather than the current situation with non-smart mail clients,
> which is the reverse.
>
> Thunderbird et. al. are practically correct, in that the List-* headers
> often do contain a valid email address, and can be used for replying to
> the list, which is what people want most of the time.
>
> The best solution, obviously, would be to extend the relevant RFC to
> include a List-Reply header that is mandated to be the valid email
> address of the list for replies, such that mail clients can use it to
> provide smart replies. Of course, this means extending an RFC, and then
> waiting for all email clients to update to include the new behaviour.
>
> Maybe someone who knows this stuff could comment further, I'm just
> starting to understand it myself. I've heard the debate on the list
> before about what the list should and shouldn't do, but I never really
> understood it, because some mails worked correctly and some didn't. I'm
> only now getting the hang of this, and I can't remember what all has
> been said before (and I can't really be bothered to go look it up and
> raise it all again).
>
> Basically, for me things work, unless someone sends mails that are
> addressed to me personally and only CCd to the list, which I feel is
> the wrong behaviour from a mail client, although the issue of why
> some mail clients do that seems to be technical.
>
> But technically, neither the list nor the mail client are *wrong*. In
> practice it seems either one could be changed, although it is probably
> more a mail client fault than a list fault, or at least so it seems to
> me.
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 12:56:55 -0400 (EDT)
> Felmon Davis  wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Paul wrote:
> >
> > > Well, it does seem like all your mails do this, but not all mails
> > > from this list exhibit this behaviour. Most mails from the list,
> > > even replies, are addressed to the list. Yours are different in
> > > that they're not addressed to the list, only CCd to the list. Some
> > > other people's replies are the same, but I'd say not most.
> >
> > I have to manually remove the OP's address and put the list address
> > in the To: field.
> >
> > it is tiresome. no other list I know (or manage) works this way.
> >
> > I use 'alpine' when posting to the list.
> >
> > I would be happy to write the postmaster; I forget who that is.
> >
> > F.
> >
> > >
> > > When the mail is addressed to the list, or addressed to someone
> > > else and CCd to the list, I can just click reply, but when the mail
> > > is addressed to me personally and only CCd to the list clicking
> > > Reply replies to the sender only.
> > >
> > > I can only think that it's a difference in email clients and how
> > > they handle list messages. The messages contain list headers, so
> > > most clients, like mine, must pick that up and automatically reply
> > > to the list, but some, like yours, must be ignoring those a

Re: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents

[Joel Madero]

Makes sense - next question is, how the hell did this happen? ;) I 
haven't tinkered at all with settings, haven't reset my profile, etc . . 
. all other documents work fine, just this one hit a snag.



Best,
Joel


On 08/25/2014 12:09 PM, Brian Barker wrote:

At 07:16 25/08/2014 -0700, Joel Madero wrote:

I have the following two documents: ...
I'm wondering why the TOC on my evidence briefs is so screwed up (no 
indentation at all) while the copyright one is just fine.


The indentation and so on of entries in the table of contents are 
controlled by paragraph styles called Contents 1, Contents 2, etc. In 
your Copyright document, these styles have indentations progressively 
0.5 cm larger than the previous level. In your Evidence document, 
Contents 2, 3, and 4 all have indentations of zero. This creates 
exactly the arrangement you see.


You could choose to tinker with those styles manually or you can copy 
them from one document to another:
o In Evidence, open the Styles and Formatting window. (Go to Format | 
Styles and Formatting, or press F11, or click the Styles and 
Formatting button in the Formatting toolbar.)

o Click New Style from Selection | Load Styles... .
o In the Load Styles dialogue, tick Overwrite.
o Click From File... and browse to and Open the Copyright document.

Voilà!

I trust this helps.

Brian Barker





--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] disable "cntrl click to follow link"

[anne-ology]

   very interesting;
   in each computer I've had, this has been the case in whatever
program I used;
  so I assumed there was no option(s) available.

   Thank you; I really enjoy days where I learn something new.



From: Dave Barton 
Date: Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] disable "cntrl click to follow link"
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Cc: 4130 <4...@charter.net>



From: 4130 <4...@charter.net>
To: Dave Barton 
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 10:37:34 -0700 (PDT)

> Hi,
>
> New to Libre office, been using MS office, mostly Word.
>
> How can I enable Libre Writer to show a hand icon while hovering over link
> like in Word.
>
> "cntrl click to follow link" wastes time
>
> cheers,
>
> 4130



>From the main menu select "/Tools -> Options.../".
In the "/Options/" dialog that opens, click to expand the "LibreOffice"
heading.
Click the "/Security/" sub-heading.
Click the "/Options.../" button.
In the "/Security options and warnings/" dialog that opens, click to
untick/uncheck the "/Ctrl-click required to follow hyperlinks/" option.
Click the "/OK/" buttons to save the change and close the dialogs.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Paul]

Quick question, Felmon, do you have to do this for all mails from this
list, both Tom's and mine, or just for mails like the ones from Tom?


>From a *brief* google, it seems that the List-* headers may legally
be other than email addresses, so some mail clients, I gather Alpine is
one, don't use them at all for replies, instead replying to the From
field. Other mail clients, like Thunderbird and apparently Claws Mail,
do use them, at least when they are email addresses or mailto URLs, to
reply to the list.

So, as I understand it:

Alpine is technically correct, in that it cannot *rely* on the List-*
headers for replies. Though arguably it should do this when these
headers do give a valid email address.

The list is technically correct, in that it shouldn't enforce Reply-To
header rewriting to *force* all mails to go back to the list, and
instead provides the List-* headers as per the RFC. Though arguably it
would be fine to overwrite the Reply-To header, because it changes the
default to be a reply to the list, and users can override that if they
want, rather than the current situation with non-smart mail clients,
which is the reverse.

Thunderbird et. al. are practically correct, in that the List-* headers
often do contain a valid email address, and can be used for replying to
the list, which is what people want most of the time.

The best solution, obviously, would be to extend the relevant RFC to
include a List-Reply header that is mandated to be the valid email
address of the list for replies, such that mail clients can use it to
provide smart replies. Of course, this means extending an RFC, and then
waiting for all email clients to update to include the new behaviour.

Maybe someone who knows this stuff could comment further, I'm just
starting to understand it myself. I've heard the debate on the list
before about what the list should and shouldn't do, but I never really
understood it, because some mails worked correctly and some didn't. I'm
only now getting the hang of this, and I can't remember what all has
been said before (and I can't really be bothered to go look it up and
raise it all again).

Basically, for me things work, unless someone sends mails that are
addressed to me personally and only CCd to the list, which I feel is
the wrong behaviour from a mail client, although the issue of why
some mail clients do that seems to be technical.

But technically, neither the list nor the mail client are *wrong*. In
practice it seems either one could be changed, although it is probably
more a mail client fault than a list fault, or at least so it seems to
me.


Paul



On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 12:56:55 -0400 (EDT)
Felmon Davis  wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Paul wrote:
> 
> > Well, it does seem like all your mails do this, but not all mails
> > from this list exhibit this behaviour. Most mails from the list,
> > even replies, are addressed to the list. Yours are different in
> > that they're not addressed to the list, only CCd to the list. Some
> > other people's replies are the same, but I'd say not most.
> 
> I have to manually remove the OP's address and put the list address
> in the To: field.
> 
> it is tiresome. no other list I know (or manage) works this way.
> 
> I use 'alpine' when posting to the list.
> 
> I would be happy to write the postmaster; I forget who that is.
> 
> F.
> 
> >
> > When the mail is addressed to the list, or addressed to someone
> > else and CCd to the list, I can just click reply, but when the mail
> > is addressed to me personally and only CCd to the list clicking
> > Reply replies to the sender only.
> >
> > I can only think that it's a difference in email clients and how
> > they handle list messages. The messages contain list headers, so
> > most clients, like mine, must pick that up and automatically reply
> > to the list, but some, like yours, must be ignoring those and
> > replying to the sender instead. I think.
> >
> > So if I'm understanding the process right, it's not so much a
> > problem with how the list is set up (other than that it doesn't
> > rewrite the sender header), but rather with some clients not
> > honouring the list headers.
> >
> >
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:08:01 +0100
> > Tom Davies  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi :)
> >> Nope, it;s the standard way these mailing lists have behaved for a
> >> long time now.
> >>
> >> It used to be that people could just click on "Reply to" and their
> >> message would go straight to the mailing list.  Now most
> >> email-clients require people to click on "Reply to all ..." and the
> >> mailing list's address is only in the "CC" rather than in the "To"
> >> field.  Numerous people have grumbled about it in here but few
> >> bother to post a complaint to the postmaster address and those
> >> that do just seem to get agro for it.
> >>
> >> One person here did try to show how he re-configured his own
> >> email-client to get around the problem and a few of the other
> >> longer-term people here might

Re: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents

[Brian Barker]

At 07:16 25/08/2014 -0700, Joel Madero wrote:

I have the following two documents: ...
I'm wondering why the TOC on my evidence briefs 
is so screwed up (no indentation at all) while the copyright one is just fine.


The indentation and so on of entries in the table 
of contents are controlled by paragraph styles 
called Contents 1, Contents 2, etc. In your 
Copyright document, these styles have 
indentations progressively 0.5 cm larger than the 
previous level. In your Evidence document, 
Contents 2, 3, and 4 all have indentations of 
zero. This creates exactly the arrangement you see.


You could choose to tinker with those styles 
manually or you can copy them from one document to another:
o In Evidence, open the Styles and Formatting 
window. (Go to Format | Styles and Formatting, or 
press F11, or click the Styles and Formatting 
button in the Formatting toolbar.)

o Click New Style from Selection | Load Styles... .
o In the Load Styles dialogue, tick Overwrite.
o Click From File... and browse to and Open the Copyright document.

Voilà!

I trust this helps.

Brian Barker


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] disable "cntrl click to follow link"

[Dave Barton]

 Original Message 
From: 4130 <4...@charter.net>
To: Dave Barton 
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 10:37:34 -0700 (PDT)

> Hi,
>
> New to Libre office, been using MS office, mostly Word.
>
> How can I enable Libre Writer to show a hand icon while hovering over link
> like in Word.
>
> "cntrl click to follow link" wastes time 
>
> cheers,
>
> 4130

>From the main menu select "/Tools -> Options.../".
In the "/Options/" dialog that opens, click to expand the "LibreOffice"
heading.
Click the "/Security/" sub-heading.
Click the "/Options.../" button.
In the "/Security options and warnings/" dialog that opens, click to
untick/uncheck the "/Ctrl-click required to follow hyperlinks/" option.
Click the "/OK/" buttons to save the change and close the dialogs.




-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
Ahh, wrt the indents it might be taht they are following the styles of the
documents.

The one with no indents has all it's headings flush up against the
left-hand side.  The doc that does have indented ToC also has indented
titles.

This might be something you could sort out by modifying the styles of the
non-indented one and then "Select All" (eg, Ctrl A) and then from the
menus;
Format - "Remove direct formatting"
You might need to reapply appropriate style to the appropriate headings
which could be a bit of a pain.


An alternative route would be to 'just' edit the ToC itself directly and
leave the rest of the document as is.  At the moment the ToCs are both
protect to stop people from editing them but if you right-click on the ToC
then;
Edit Index/Table
then the 1st tab, Index/Table, has a tick-box in the top section of that
1st tab.  You can untick the option there and then edit the ToC as much as
you like.  Of course if you subsequently "Update the index/table" then the
ToC would need re-editing.

So, in some ways it might be better to do the styles route, for example if
this is a document you'll be working on in the future.  However, if you
just want to print the thing as a "one off" and only likely to edit very
rarely then directly editing the ToC might be the quickest hack.

Regards from
Tom :)





On 25 August 2014 18:56, Tom Davies  wrote:

> Hi :)
> Err, in the
> Copyrightbriefs
> one i right-click in the ToC and about halfway down is "Update
> index/table" and that suddenly added 4-6 entries.
>
> I had tried the same thing in the other document but it had no effect
> there.
> Regards from
> Tom :)
>
>
>
>
>
> On 25 August 2014 18:05, Joel Madero  wrote:
>
>> Has nothing to do with tabbing - I use "heading" styles which should be
>> incorporated into the TOC. Also the documents can be downloaded - buttons
>> on top to download when you see the preview image.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Joel
>>
>>
>> On 08/25/2014 10:03 AM, anne-ology wrote:
>>
>>>Without being able to see 'behind the scenes'
>>>  [these merely open as image documents]  ;-)
>>>I'm not sure, yet maybe in the first one, you clicked on the
>>> tab-key and in the second one you didn't  ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: *Joel Madero* mailto:jmadero@gmail.com
>>> >>
>>>
>>> Date: Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:16 AM
>>> Subject: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents
>>> To: "users@global.libreoffice.org "
>>> mailto:users@global.libreoffice.org>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi All -
>>>
>>> I have the following two documents:
>>>
>>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdV2RHM1B0SzE2YTQ/
>>> edit?usp=sharing
>>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdZ3VkSnpnRzdfUTQ/
>>> edit?usp=sharing
>>>
>>> I'm wondering why the TOC on my evidence briefs is so screwed up (no
>>> indentation at all) while the copyright one is just fine. Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Joel
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
>> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-
>> unsubscribe/
>> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
>> deleted
>>
>
>

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
Err, in the
Copyrightbriefs
one i right-click in the ToC and about halfway down is "Update index/table"
and that suddenly added 4-6 entries.

I had tried the same thing in the other document but it had no effect
there.
Regards from
Tom :)





On 25 August 2014 18:05, Joel Madero  wrote:

> Has nothing to do with tabbing - I use "heading" styles which should be
> incorporated into the TOC. Also the documents can be downloaded - buttons
> on top to download when you see the preview image.
>
>
> Best,
> Joel
>
>
> On 08/25/2014 10:03 AM, anne-ology wrote:
>
>>Without being able to see 'behind the scenes'
>>  [these merely open as image documents]  ;-)
>>I'm not sure, yet maybe in the first one, you clicked on the
>> tab-key and in the second one you didn't  ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> From: *Joel Madero* mailto:jmadero@gmail.com>
>> >
>>
>> Date: Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:16 AM
>> Subject: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents
>> To: "users@global.libreoffice.org "
>> mailto:users@global.libreoffice.org>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi All -
>>
>> I have the following two documents:
>>
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdV2RHM1B0SzE2YTQ/
>> edit?usp=sharing
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdZ3VkSnpnRzdfUTQ/
>> edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> I'm wondering why the TOC on my evidence briefs is so screwed up (no
>> indentation at all) while the copyright one is just fine. Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Joel
>>
>>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-
> unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] disable "cntrl click to follow link"

[4130]

Hi,

New to Libre office, been using MS office, mostly Word.

How can I enable Libre Writer to show a hand icon while hovering over link
like in Word.

"cntrl click to follow link" wastes time 

cheers,

4130



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/disable-cntrl-click-to-follow-link-tp4120195.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents

[Joel Madero]

Has nothing to do with tabbing - I use "heading" styles which should be 
incorporated into the TOC. Also the documents can be downloaded - 
buttons on top to download when you see the preview image.



Best,
Joel

On 08/25/2014 10:03 AM, anne-ology wrote:

   Without being able to see 'behind the scenes'
 [these merely open as image documents]  ;-)
   I'm not sure, yet maybe in the first one, you clicked on the 
tab-key and in the second one you didn't  ;-)




From: *Joel Madero* mailto:jmadero@gmail.com>>
Date: Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:16 AM
Subject: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents
To: "users@global.libreoffice.org 
" >



Hi All -

I have the following two documents:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdV2RHM1B0SzE2YTQ/edit?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdZ3VkSnpnRzdfUTQ/edit?usp=sharing

I'm wondering why the TOC on my evidence briefs is so screwed up (no 
indentation at all) while the copyright one is just fine. Thanks in 
advance.



Best,
Joel




--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents

[anne-ology]

   Without being able to see 'behind the scenes'
 [these merely open as image documents]  ;-)
   I'm not sure, yet maybe in the first one, you clicked on the tab-key
and in the second one you didn't  ;-)



From: Joel Madero 
Date: Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:16 AM
Subject: [libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents
To: "users@global.libreoffice.org" 


Hi All -

I have the following two documents:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdV2RHM1B0SzE2YTQ/
edit?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdZ3VkSnpnRzdfUTQ/
edit?usp=sharing

I'm wondering why the TOC on my evidence briefs is so screwed up (no
indentation at all) while the copyright one is just fine. Thanks in advance.


Best,
Joel

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Felmon Davis]

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Paul wrote:


Well, it does seem like all your mails do this, but not all mails from
this list exhibit this behaviour. Most mails from the list, even
replies, are addressed to the list. Yours are different in that they're
not addressed to the list, only CCd to the list. Some other people's
replies are the same, but I'd say not most.


I have to manually remove the OP's address and put the list address in 
the To: field.


it is tiresome. no other list I know (or manage) works this way.

I use 'alpine' when posting to the list.

I would be happy to write the postmaster; I forget who that is.

F.



When the mail is addressed to the list, or addressed to someone else and CCd
to the list, I can just click reply, but when the mail is addressed to
me personally and only CCd to the list clicking Reply replies to the
sender only.

I can only think that it's a difference in email clients and how they
handle list messages. The messages contain list headers, so most
clients, like mine, must pick that up and automatically reply to the
list, but some, like yours, must be ignoring those and replying to the
sender instead. I think.

So if I'm understanding the process right, it's not so much a problem
with how the list is set up (other than that it doesn't rewrite the
sender header), but rather with some clients not honouring the list
headers.



Paul



On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:08:01 +0100
Tom Davies  wrote:


Hi :)
Nope, it;s the standard way these mailing lists have behaved for a
long time now.

It used to be that people could just click on "Reply to" and their
message would go straight to the mailing list.  Now most
email-clients require people to click on "Reply to all ..." and the
mailing list's address is only in the "CC" rather than in the "To"
field.  Numerous people have grumbled about it in here but few bother
to post a complaint to the postmaster address and those that do just
seem to get agro for it.

One person here did try to show how he re-configured his own
email-client to get around the problem and a few of the other
longer-term people here might well have followed his lead but i am
not sure what effect that sort of thing has on non-LO emails.  Also i
kinda believe in the "Eat your own dog food" principle so that i stay
in touch with the problems normal users have when they first approach
this mailing list. Regards from
Tom :)






On 25 August 2014 13:56, Paul  wrote:


Well, Maurice quoted from my mail, so I'm pretty sure he did
receive it.

Btw: Tom, your mail was addressed to me directly, and CCd to the
group, causing my default reply-to to go to just you (luckily I
noticed in time). Not sure why this happens for some messages, did
you do anything differently for your message?


On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 13:41:14 +0100
Tom Davies  wrote:


Hi :)
I suspect that Paul's post below has not yet arrived in Maurice's
time-line.

Email threads sometimes get a bit disjointed, especially if an
over-enthusiastic junk/spam-filter tends to carefully reject
anything with any hint of code in it!  However it could easily be
that someone starts from their older messages and work forwards
to newer and newer ones instead of the more sensible approach
(imo) of working from the newest posts backwards to the oldest.
By starting with the newest ones first i often find that older
posts have already been dealt with and can thus be safely ignored
even if they stir-up side-issues (which also might have already
been largely dealt with).


On the other hand it might be good if someone could test Paul's
script. Perhaps it's possible to combine the 2 ideas so that both
the file-name AND the few lines of surrounding text could be
output? Would that help?  Also it might be good to have the
output directed into a file rather than just onto the
command-line?

I really like Don Pobanz's answer and the way Paul was able to
help tweak it.  It felt like a return to what this mailing list
is largely about = collaborating to build-up a better answer
faster than the individuals had time to do on their own.  Good
work!! :))) Regards from
Tom :)



On 24 August 2014 19:29, Paul  wrote:


Try changing the line:

 unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -ql "$1"

to:

 unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -qC 10 "$1"

the "-l" to grep makes it show only the names of files that
match, not the content. The "-C #" gives # lines of context
around the match. Or you could use "-B #" and "-A #" to print #
lines of leading and trailing conext, respectively.

You could also make a script to pull the contents of all the
files and concatenate them in such a way that you can use
Writer to do find inside one big document, but that would be
considerably harder. Try this first.


Paul



Disclaimer: I haven't actually tested this, just done a "man
grep", but I think the syntax is right...




On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 18:16:35 + (UTC)
Maurice  wrote:


On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:44:31 -0500, Don Pobanz wrote:


I find it very useful for finding

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Paul D. Mirowsky]

If the Python code were modified to also add filename with path and 
inject it at end of paragraph as URL.


It might be possible to re-direct python command output to a .txt file 
that could be opened by Writer.


I am not sure whether or not Writer could be set to recognize and "Open 
File URL" automatically to modify original document.


Hm


On 8/25/2014 10:03 AM, P. . wrote:

Try this, even if it isn't exactly an 'out of the box' solution, it
can be useful:
in few words, the script parses the xml file inside the .odt - in fact
an archive file, and search for a keyword after having extracted the
text part.

A short excerpt, from the page 3 of "Extract and Parse ODF Files with Python":
"In this particular program, I collect all the text as a list of
paragraphs, and then I search for the keywords passed in from the
command line. If the searched word matches, the paragraph is printed
out.

The text found in each  is Unicode text. You have to convert
this to normal text in order to print correctly and/or use in a
widget. The encode() command translates the Unicode to a printable
string. "





On 25 August 2014 15:31, Paul  wrote:

Well, it does seem like all your mails do this, but not all mails from
this list exhibit this behaviour. Most mails from the list, even
replies, are addressed to the list. Yours are different in that they're
not addressed to the list, only CCd to the list. Some other people's
replies are the same, but I'd say not most.

When the mail is addressed to the list, or addressed to someone else and CCd
to the list, I can just click reply, but when the mail is addressed to
me personally and only CCd to the list clicking Reply replies to the
sender only.

I can only think that it's a difference in email clients and how they
handle list messages. The messages contain list headers, so most
clients, like mine, must pick that up and automatically reply to the
list, but some, like yours, must be ignoring those and replying to the
sender instead. I think.

So if I'm understanding the process right, it's not so much a problem
with how the list is set up (other than that it doesn't rewrite the
sender header), but rather with some clients not honouring the list
headers.



Paul



On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:08:01 +0100
Tom Davies  wrote:


Hi :)
Nope, it;s the standard way these mailing lists have behaved for a
long time now.

It used to be that people could just click on "Reply to" and their
message would go straight to the mailing list.  Now most
email-clients require people to click on "Reply to all ..." and the
mailing list's address is only in the "CC" rather than in the "To"
field.  Numerous people have grumbled about it in here but few bother
to post a complaint to the postmaster address and those that do just
seem to get agro for it.

One person here did try to show how he re-configured his own
email-client to get around the problem and a few of the other
longer-term people here might well have followed his lead but i am
not sure what effect that sort of thing has on non-LO emails.  Also i
kinda believe in the "Eat your own dog food" principle so that i stay
in touch with the problems normal users have when they first approach
this mailing list. Regards from
Tom :)






On 25 August 2014 13:56, Paul  wrote:


Well, Maurice quoted from my mail, so I'm pretty sure he did
receive it.

Btw: Tom, your mail was addressed to me directly, and CCd to the
group, causing my default reply-to to go to just you (luckily I
noticed in time). Not sure why this happens for some messages, did
you do anything differently for your message?


On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 13:41:14 +0100
Tom Davies  wrote:


Hi :)
I suspect that Paul's post below has not yet arrived in Maurice's
time-line.

Email threads sometimes get a bit disjointed, especially if an
over-enthusiastic junk/spam-filter tends to carefully reject
anything with any hint of code in it!  However it could easily be
that someone starts from their older messages and work forwards
to newer and newer ones instead of the more sensible approach
(imo) of working from the newest posts backwards to the oldest.
By starting with the newest ones first i often find that older
posts have already been dealt with and can thus be safely ignored
even if they stir-up side-issues (which also might have already
been largely dealt with).


On the other hand it might be good if someone could test Paul's
script. Perhaps it's possible to combine the 2 ideas so that both
the file-name AND the few lines of surrounding text could be
output? Would that help?  Also it might be good to have the
output directed into a file rather than just onto the
command-line?

I really like Don Pobanz's answer and the way Paul was able to
help tweak it.  It felt like a return to what this mailing list
is largely about = collaborating to build-up a better answer
faster than the individuals had time to do on their own.  Good
work!! :))) Regards from
T

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Displaying MathType equations in Writer

[Graham Luffrum]

Alex

My thoughts entirely.  It's one (perhaps the only) reason why I have a
machine with windows (and Office) on it.

Graham


On 25 August 2014 10:37, Alex Thurgood  wrote:

> Le 15/08/2014 18:02, Graham Luffrum a écrit :
>
> Hi Graham,
>
> Use Word, I have the same problem, in fact I've always had this problem
> with equations written in Word. Alternatively, I ask for a PDF, and
> either retype the formulae (not exactly very profitable, when you're
> translating) or else copy/paste the selected formula from the PDF as an
> image and insert with anchoring as character. If you have to re-export
> it to Word, you can forget compatibility or being able to re-edit the
> formulae.
>
> Alex
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
> Problems?
> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] TOC Different Between Two Documents

[Joel Madero]

Hi All -

I have the following two documents:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdV2RHM1B0SzE2YTQ/edit?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2kdRhc960qdZ3VkSnpnRzdfUTQ/edit?usp=sharing

I'm wondering why the TOC on my evidence briefs is so screwed up (no 
indentation at all) while the copyright one is just fine. Thanks in advance.



Best,
Joel

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[P. .]

Try this, even if it isn't exactly an 'out of the box' solution, it
can be useful:
in few words, the script parses the xml file inside the .odt - in fact
an archive file, and search for a keyword after having extracted the
text part.

A short excerpt, from the page 3 of "Extract and Parse ODF Files with Python":
"In this particular program, I collect all the text as a list of
paragraphs, and then I search for the keywords passed in from the
command line. If the searched word matches, the paragraph is printed
out.

The text found in each  is Unicode text. You have to convert
this to normal text in order to print correctly and/or use in a
widget. The encode() command translates the Unicode to a printable
string. "





On 25 August 2014 15:31, Paul  wrote:
> Well, it does seem like all your mails do this, but not all mails from
> this list exhibit this behaviour. Most mails from the list, even
> replies, are addressed to the list. Yours are different in that they're
> not addressed to the list, only CCd to the list. Some other people's
> replies are the same, but I'd say not most.
>
> When the mail is addressed to the list, or addressed to someone else and CCd
> to the list, I can just click reply, but when the mail is addressed to
> me personally and only CCd to the list clicking Reply replies to the
> sender only.
>
> I can only think that it's a difference in email clients and how they
> handle list messages. The messages contain list headers, so most
> clients, like mine, must pick that up and automatically reply to the
> list, but some, like yours, must be ignoring those and replying to the
> sender instead. I think.
>
> So if I'm understanding the process right, it's not so much a problem
> with how the list is set up (other than that it doesn't rewrite the
> sender header), but rather with some clients not honouring the list
> headers.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:08:01 +0100
> Tom Davies  wrote:
>
>> Hi :)
>> Nope, it;s the standard way these mailing lists have behaved for a
>> long time now.
>>
>> It used to be that people could just click on "Reply to" and their
>> message would go straight to the mailing list.  Now most
>> email-clients require people to click on "Reply to all ..." and the
>> mailing list's address is only in the "CC" rather than in the "To"
>> field.  Numerous people have grumbled about it in here but few bother
>> to post a complaint to the postmaster address and those that do just
>> seem to get agro for it.
>>
>> One person here did try to show how he re-configured his own
>> email-client to get around the problem and a few of the other
>> longer-term people here might well have followed his lead but i am
>> not sure what effect that sort of thing has on non-LO emails.  Also i
>> kinda believe in the "Eat your own dog food" principle so that i stay
>> in touch with the problems normal users have when they first approach
>> this mailing list. Regards from
>> Tom :)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 25 August 2014 13:56, Paul  wrote:
>>
>> > Well, Maurice quoted from my mail, so I'm pretty sure he did
>> > receive it.
>> >
>> > Btw: Tom, your mail was addressed to me directly, and CCd to the
>> > group, causing my default reply-to to go to just you (luckily I
>> > noticed in time). Not sure why this happens for some messages, did
>> > you do anything differently for your message?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 13:41:14 +0100
>> > Tom Davies  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi :)
>> > > I suspect that Paul's post below has not yet arrived in Maurice's
>> > > time-line.
>> > >
>> > > Email threads sometimes get a bit disjointed, especially if an
>> > > over-enthusiastic junk/spam-filter tends to carefully reject
>> > > anything with any hint of code in it!  However it could easily be
>> > > that someone starts from their older messages and work forwards
>> > > to newer and newer ones instead of the more sensible approach
>> > > (imo) of working from the newest posts backwards to the oldest.
>> > > By starting with the newest ones first i often find that older
>> > > posts have already been dealt with and can thus be safely ignored
>> > > even if they stir-up side-issues (which also might have already
>> > > been largely dealt with).
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On the other hand it might be good if someone could test Paul's
>> > > script. Perhaps it's possible to combine the 2 ideas so that both
>> > > the file-name AND the few lines of surrounding text could be
>> > > output? Would that help?  Also it might be good to have the
>> > > output directed into a file rather than just onto the
>> > > command-line?
>> > >
>> > > I really like Don Pobanz's answer and the way Paul was able to
>> > > help tweak it.  It felt like a return to what this mailing list
>> > > is largely about = collaborating to build-up a better answer
>> > > faster than the individuals had time to do on their own.  Good
>> > > work!! :))) Regards from
>> > > Tom :)
>> > >
>

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Paul]

Well, it does seem like all your mails do this, but not all mails from
this list exhibit this behaviour. Most mails from the list, even
replies, are addressed to the list. Yours are different in that they're
not addressed to the list, only CCd to the list. Some other people's
replies are the same, but I'd say not most.

When the mail is addressed to the list, or addressed to someone else and CCd
to the list, I can just click reply, but when the mail is addressed to
me personally and only CCd to the list clicking Reply replies to the
sender only.

I can only think that it's a difference in email clients and how they
handle list messages. The messages contain list headers, so most
clients, like mine, must pick that up and automatically reply to the
list, but some, like yours, must be ignoring those and replying to the
sender instead. I think.

So if I'm understanding the process right, it's not so much a problem
with how the list is set up (other than that it doesn't rewrite the
sender header), but rather with some clients not honouring the list
headers.



Paul



On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:08:01 +0100
Tom Davies  wrote:

> Hi :)
> Nope, it;s the standard way these mailing lists have behaved for a
> long time now.
> 
> It used to be that people could just click on "Reply to" and their
> message would go straight to the mailing list.  Now most
> email-clients require people to click on "Reply to all ..." and the
> mailing list's address is only in the "CC" rather than in the "To"
> field.  Numerous people have grumbled about it in here but few bother
> to post a complaint to the postmaster address and those that do just
> seem to get agro for it.
> 
> One person here did try to show how he re-configured his own
> email-client to get around the problem and a few of the other
> longer-term people here might well have followed his lead but i am
> not sure what effect that sort of thing has on non-LO emails.  Also i
> kinda believe in the "Eat your own dog food" principle so that i stay
> in touch with the problems normal users have when they first approach
> this mailing list. Regards from
> Tom :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 25 August 2014 13:56, Paul  wrote:
> 
> > Well, Maurice quoted from my mail, so I'm pretty sure he did
> > receive it.
> >
> > Btw: Tom, your mail was addressed to me directly, and CCd to the
> > group, causing my default reply-to to go to just you (luckily I
> > noticed in time). Not sure why this happens for some messages, did
> > you do anything differently for your message?
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 13:41:14 +0100
> > Tom Davies  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi :)
> > > I suspect that Paul's post below has not yet arrived in Maurice's
> > > time-line.
> > >
> > > Email threads sometimes get a bit disjointed, especially if an
> > > over-enthusiastic junk/spam-filter tends to carefully reject
> > > anything with any hint of code in it!  However it could easily be
> > > that someone starts from their older messages and work forwards
> > > to newer and newer ones instead of the more sensible approach
> > > (imo) of working from the newest posts backwards to the oldest.
> > > By starting with the newest ones first i often find that older
> > > posts have already been dealt with and can thus be safely ignored
> > > even if they stir-up side-issues (which also might have already
> > > been largely dealt with).
> > >
> > >
> > > On the other hand it might be good if someone could test Paul's
> > > script. Perhaps it's possible to combine the 2 ideas so that both
> > > the file-name AND the few lines of surrounding text could be
> > > output? Would that help?  Also it might be good to have the
> > > output directed into a file rather than just onto the
> > > command-line?
> > >
> > > I really like Don Pobanz's answer and the way Paul was able to
> > > help tweak it.  It felt like a return to what this mailing list
> > > is largely about = collaborating to build-up a better answer
> > > faster than the individuals had time to do on their own.  Good
> > > work!! :))) Regards from
> > > Tom :)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 24 August 2014 19:29, Paul  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Try changing the line:
> > > >
> > > >  unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -ql "$1"
> > > >
> > > > to:
> > > >
> > > >  unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -qC 10 "$1"
> > > >
> > > > the "-l" to grep makes it show only the names of files that
> > > > match, not the content. The "-C #" gives # lines of context
> > > > around the match. Or you could use "-B #" and "-A #" to print #
> > > > lines of leading and trailing conext, respectively.
> > > >
> > > > You could also make a script to pull the contents of all the
> > > > files and concatenate them in such a way that you can use
> > > > Writer to do find inside one big document, but that would be
> > > > considerably harder. Try this first.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Disclaimer: I haven't actually tested this, just done a "man
> > > > grep", but I thin

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
I suspect that Paul's post below has not yet arrived in Maurice's
time-line.

Email threads sometimes get a bit disjointed, especially if an
over-enthusiastic junk/spam-filter tends to carefully reject anything with
any hint of code in it!  However it could easily be that someone starts
from their older messages and work forwards to newer and newer ones instead
of the more sensible approach (imo) of working from the newest posts
backwards to the oldest.  By starting with the newest ones first i often
find that older posts have already been dealt with and can thus be safely
ignored even if they stir-up side-issues (which also might have already
been largely dealt with).


On the other hand it might be good if someone could test Paul's script.
Perhaps it's possible to combine the 2 ideas so that both the file-name AND
the few lines of surrounding text could be output?  Would that help?  Also
it might be good to have the output directed into a file rather than just
onto the command-line?

I really like Don Pobanz's answer and the way Paul was able to help tweak
it.  It felt like a return to what this mailing list is largely about =
collaborating to build-up a better answer faster than the individuals had
time to do on their own.  Good work!! :)))
Regards from
Tom :)



On 24 August 2014 19:29, Paul  wrote:

> Try changing the line:
>
>  unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -ql "$1"
>
> to:
>
>  unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -qC 10 "$1"
>
> the "-l" to grep makes it show only the names of files that match, not
> the content. The "-C #" gives # lines of context around the match. Or
> you could use "-B #" and "-A #" to print # lines of leading and
> trailing conext, respectively.
>
> You could also make a script to pull the contents of all the files and
> concatenate them in such a way that you can use Writer to do find
> inside one big document, but that would be considerably harder. Try
> this first.
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> Disclaimer: I haven't actually tested this, just done a "man grep", but
> I think the syntax is right...
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 18:16:35 + (UTC)
> Maurice  wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:44:31 -0500, Don Pobanz wrote:
> >
> > > I find it very useful for finding a word or phrase within my odt
> > > documents.
> >
> > Thank you, Don, but that only shows which files contain the
> > search string. (It's likely that all files in the list will contain
> > at least one occurrence of the string.)
> >
> > That would be a start, but what I am looking for is a means of seeing
> > the string as if Writer was showing the file contents, so that I can
> > see the surrounding text.
> >
> > (Equivalent to joining all the doc's into one big file, then doing a
> > Find.   Perhaps I shall have to do the joining manually...)
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
> Problems?
> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>
>

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Send Document as Microsoft Word doesn't

[Gordon Burgess-Parker]

On 25/08/14 14:27, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:

LO 4.3.0.4 on Ubuntu 14.04 - Thunderbird as default email client.
In LO Writer, if I click on File>Send>Email as Microsoft Word then it 
opens a new message window in TBird, but with no attachment, which 
rather negates the function!
I use this facility to be able to keep one format of document on my 
machine, rather than having to do a "Save As" into MS Word format.

Is this a bug in 4.3?



And it seems that the usual Mail function does exactly the same thing - 
opens a new message window, but with no attachment.

--

Registered Linux User no 240308
GBP's alternative computing:http://gbplinuxfoss.blogspot.com/  
I only accept odf or pdf documents by email

Say No to OOXMLhttp://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9594#mpart8


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Send Document as Microsoft Word doesn't

[Gordon Burgess-Parker]

LO 4.3.0.4 on Ubuntu 14.04 - Thunderbird as default email client.
In LO Writer, if I click on File>Send>Email as Microsoft Word then it 
opens a new message window in TBird, but with no attachment, which 
rather negates the function!
I use this facility to be able to keep one format of document on my 
machine, rather than having to do a "Save As" into MS Word format.

Is this a bug in 4.3?

--

Registered Linux User no 240308
GBP's alternative computing:http://gbplinuxfoss.blogspot.com/  
I only accept odf or pdf documents by email

Say No to OOXMLhttp://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9594#mpart8ocument as  



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
Nope, it;s the standard way these mailing lists have behaved for a long
time now.

It used to be that people could just click on "Reply to" and their message
would go straight to the mailing list.  Now most email-clients require
people to click on "Reply to all ..." and the mailing list's address is
only in the "CC" rather than in the "To" field.  Numerous people have
grumbled about it in here but few bother to post a complaint to the
postmaster address and those that do just seem to get agro for it.

One person here did try to show how he re-configured his own email-client
to get around the problem and a few of the other longer-term people here
might well have followed his lead but i am not sure what effect that sort
of thing has on non-LO emails.  Also i kinda believe in the "Eat your own
dog food" principle so that i stay in touch with the problems normal users
have when they first approach this mailing list.
Regards from
Tom :)






On 25 August 2014 13:56, Paul  wrote:

> Well, Maurice quoted from my mail, so I'm pretty sure he did receive it.
>
> Btw: Tom, your mail was addressed to me directly, and CCd to the group,
> causing my default reply-to to go to just you (luckily I noticed in
> time). Not sure why this happens for some messages, did you do anything
> differently for your message?
>
>
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 13:41:14 +0100
> Tom Davies  wrote:
>
> > Hi :)
> > I suspect that Paul's post below has not yet arrived in Maurice's
> > time-line.
> >
> > Email threads sometimes get a bit disjointed, especially if an
> > over-enthusiastic junk/spam-filter tends to carefully reject anything
> > with any hint of code in it!  However it could easily be that someone
> > starts from their older messages and work forwards to newer and newer
> > ones instead of the more sensible approach (imo) of working from the
> > newest posts backwards to the oldest.  By starting with the newest
> > ones first i often find that older posts have already been dealt with
> > and can thus be safely ignored even if they stir-up side-issues
> > (which also might have already been largely dealt with).
> >
> >
> > On the other hand it might be good if someone could test Paul's
> > script. Perhaps it's possible to combine the 2 ideas so that both the
> > file-name AND the few lines of surrounding text could be output?
> > Would that help?  Also it might be good to have the output directed
> > into a file rather than just onto the command-line?
> >
> > I really like Don Pobanz's answer and the way Paul was able to help
> > tweak it.  It felt like a return to what this mailing list is largely
> > about = collaborating to build-up a better answer faster than the
> > individuals had time to do on their own.  Good work!! :)))
> > Regards from
> > Tom :)
> >
> >
> >
> > On 24 August 2014 19:29, Paul  wrote:
> >
> > > Try changing the line:
> > >
> > >  unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -ql "$1"
> > >
> > > to:
> > >
> > >  unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -qC 10 "$1"
> > >
> > > the "-l" to grep makes it show only the names of files that match,
> > > not the content. The "-C #" gives # lines of context around the
> > > match. Or you could use "-B #" and "-A #" to print # lines of
> > > leading and trailing conext, respectively.
> > >
> > > You could also make a script to pull the contents of all the files
> > > and concatenate them in such a way that you can use Writer to do
> > > find inside one big document, but that would be considerably
> > > harder. Try this first.
> > >
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Disclaimer: I haven't actually tested this, just done a "man grep",
> > > but I think the syntax is right...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 18:16:35 + (UTC)
> > > Maurice  wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:44:31 -0500, Don Pobanz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I find it very useful for finding a word or phrase within my odt
> > > > > documents.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you, Don, but that only shows which files contain the
> > > > search string. (It's likely that all files in the list will
> > > > contain at least one occurrence of the string.)
> > > >
> > > > That would be a start, but what I am looking for is a means of
> > > > seeing the string as if Writer was showing the file contents, so
> > > > that I can see the surrounding text.
> > > >
> > > > (Equivalent to joining all the doc's into one big file, then
> > > > doing a Find.   Perhaps I shall have to do the joining
> > > > manually...)
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
> > > Problems?
> > > http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> > > Posting guidelines + more:
> > > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive:
> > > http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent
> > > to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
> > >
> > >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsub

Re: [libreoffice-users] Strange cursor focus behavior in Xubuntu 14.04 / LO 4.2.6

[Tom Davies]

Hi :)
Personally i would post in both and give each one a url link to the other
to help the 2 teams see what is going on.

It is less likely to happen in OpenSource but it's still possible to fall
into a scenario where each project blames the other so it's possibly best
to let them argue it out between them.  In OpenSource i suspect it's more
likely that both teams would start work on trying to fix it, or to
accommodate for unexpected stuff from the other project leading to one of
the teams trying to fix something that is the other projects fault or that
has already been fixed by the other team.  So it's helpful to let both
teams have a link to see what the other team is doing.

Regards from
Tom :)




On 25 August 2014 08:08, Mark  wrote:

> I recently installed Xubuntu 14.04 on my home desktop since I have been
> using it at work for about 3 weeks and all has gone well there.
>
> However, when I open an encrypted .odt document using the command line or a
> shell script, the focus shifts to the password input box for a fraction on
> a section and immediately reverts to the starting terminal window.
>
> This is annoying in part because when I type in the password, it shows up
> in the terminal window, which is a huge no-no for security, and in part
> because I have to manually shift the focus back to the password input
> window.
>
> This should not happen - the password window should grab the focus and hold
> it until the password is input.
>
> This does not happen if I start LO directly or through a keyboard shortcut
> and then enter the file to open.
>
> Whose bug is it - LO pr Xubuntu?  I don't know how to tell.
>
> Thanks.
> MR
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
> Problems?
> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Paul]

Well, Maurice quoted from my mail, so I'm pretty sure he did receive it.

Btw: Tom, your mail was addressed to me directly, and CCd to the group,
causing my default reply-to to go to just you (luckily I noticed in
time). Not sure why this happens for some messages, did you do anything
differently for your message?


On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 13:41:14 +0100
Tom Davies  wrote:

> Hi :)
> I suspect that Paul's post below has not yet arrived in Maurice's
> time-line.
> 
> Email threads sometimes get a bit disjointed, especially if an
> over-enthusiastic junk/spam-filter tends to carefully reject anything
> with any hint of code in it!  However it could easily be that someone
> starts from their older messages and work forwards to newer and newer
> ones instead of the more sensible approach (imo) of working from the
> newest posts backwards to the oldest.  By starting with the newest
> ones first i often find that older posts have already been dealt with
> and can thus be safely ignored even if they stir-up side-issues
> (which also might have already been largely dealt with).
> 
> 
> On the other hand it might be good if someone could test Paul's
> script. Perhaps it's possible to combine the 2 ideas so that both the
> file-name AND the few lines of surrounding text could be output?
> Would that help?  Also it might be good to have the output directed
> into a file rather than just onto the command-line?
> 
> I really like Don Pobanz's answer and the way Paul was able to help
> tweak it.  It felt like a return to what this mailing list is largely
> about = collaborating to build-up a better answer faster than the
> individuals had time to do on their own.  Good work!! :)))
> Regards from
> Tom :)
> 
> 
> 
> On 24 August 2014 19:29, Paul  wrote:
> 
> > Try changing the line:
> >
> >  unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -ql "$1"
> >
> > to:
> >
> >  unzip -ca "$file" content.xml | grep -qC 10 "$1"
> >
> > the "-l" to grep makes it show only the names of files that match,
> > not the content. The "-C #" gives # lines of context around the
> > match. Or you could use "-B #" and "-A #" to print # lines of
> > leading and trailing conext, respectively.
> >
> > You could also make a script to pull the contents of all the files
> > and concatenate them in such a way that you can use Writer to do
> > find inside one big document, but that would be considerably
> > harder. Try this first.
> >
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
> > Disclaimer: I haven't actually tested this, just done a "man grep",
> > but I think the syntax is right...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 18:16:35 + (UTC)
> > Maurice  wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:44:31 -0500, Don Pobanz wrote:
> > >
> > > > I find it very useful for finding a word or phrase within my odt
> > > > documents.
> > >
> > > Thank you, Don, but that only shows which files contain the
> > > search string. (It's likely that all files in the list will
> > > contain at least one occurrence of the string.)
> > >
> > > That would be a start, but what I am looking for is a means of
> > > seeing the string as if Writer was showing the file contents, so
> > > that I can see the surrounding text.
> > >
> > > (Equivalent to joining all the doc's into one big file, then
> > > doing a Find.   Perhaps I shall have to do the joining
> > > manually...)
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
> > Problems?
> > http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> > Posting guidelines + more:
> > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive:
> > http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent
> > to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
> >
> >


-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Paul]

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:46:53 + (UTC)
Maurice  wrote:

> On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 20:29:22 +0200, Paul wrote:
> 
> > You could also make a script to pull the contents of all the files
> > and concatenate them in such a way that you can use Writer to do
> > find inside one big document, but that would be considerably
> > harder. Try this first.
> 
> That's what I shall perhaps finish up doing...

Any particular reason? Did the arguments to grep not work, or do you
just not find that style of output particularly useful?

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: LO Writer (Linux): Way to do text search in set of documents?

[Maurice]

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 20:29:22 +0200, Paul wrote:

> You could also make a script to pull the contents of all the files and
> concatenate them in such a way that you can use Writer to do find inside
> one big document, but that would be considerably harder. Try this first.

That's what I shall perhaps finish up doing...

-- 
/\/\aurice


-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Strange cursor focus behavior in Xubuntu 14.04 / LO 4.2.6

[Mark]

I recently installed Xubuntu 14.04 on my home desktop since I have been
using it at work for about 3 weeks and all has gone well there.

However, when I open an encrypted .odt document using the command line or a
shell script, the focus shifts to the password input box for a fraction on
a section and immediately reverts to the starting terminal window.

This is annoying in part because when I type in the password, it shows up
in the terminal window, which is a huge no-no for security, and in part
because I have to manually shift the focus back to the password input
window.

This should not happen - the password window should grab the focus and hold
it until the password is input.

This does not happen if I start LO directly or through a keyboard shortcut
and then enter the file to open.

Whose bug is it - LO pr Xubuntu?  I don't know how to tell.

Thanks.
MR

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Re: Displaying MathType equations in Writer

[Alex Thurgood]

Le 15/08/2014 18:02, Graham Luffrum a écrit :

Hi Graham,

Use Word, I have the same problem, in fact I've always had this problem
with equations written in Word. Alternatively, I ask for a PDF, and
either retype the formulae (not exactly very profitable, when you're
translating) or else copy/paste the selected formula from the PDF as an
image and insert with anchoring as character. If you have to re-export
it to Word, you can forget compatibility or being able to re-edit the
formulae.

Alex



-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

[libreoffice-users] Cursor/window focus loss when opening encrypted files from the command line

[MR ZenWiz]

I recently installed Xubuntu 14.04 on my home desktop since I have
been using it at work for about 3 weeks and all has gone well there.

However, when I open an encrypted .odt document using the command line
or a shell script, the focus shifts to the password input box for a
fraction on a section and immediately reverts to the starting terminal
window.

This is annoying in part because when I type in the password, it shows
up in the terminal window, which is a huge no-no for security, and in
part because I have to manually shift the focus back to the password
input window.

This should not happen - the password window should grab the focus and
hold it until the password is input.

This does not happen if I start LO directly or through a keyboard
shortcut and then enter the file to open.

Whose bug is it - LO pr Xubuntu?  I don't know how to tell.

Thanks.
MR

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted