severity 964780 important
tag 964780 + moreinfo
tag 964780 + unreproducible
thanks
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 02:12:26PM +0200, Thorsten de Jong wrote:
> Package: libreoffice-writer
> Version: 1:7.0.0~rc1-5
> Severity: grave
> Justification: renders package unusable
Erm, no, how?
It _obviously_
-
forwarded 964459 https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=133929
tag 964459 + upstream
thanks
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 12:53:14AM +1000, Thom wrote:
> LibreOffice with VCL plugin kf5 have unreadable button labels on welcome
> screen sidebar (white text on light gray background)
tag 964471 - moreinfo
tag 964471 - unreproducible
Hi,
Am 07.07.20 um 23:05 schrieb Evgeny Kapun:
> On 07.07.2020 22:40, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> Even that worked for me in said testing VM "upgraded" to unstable with
>> your apt-get --with-new-pkgs upgrade.
>>
>
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 09:30:23PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Am 07.07.20 um 21:21 schrieb Evgeny Kapun:
> >> but how did you get into this situation?
> >
> > I've run `apt-get --with-new-pkgs upgrade`. This upgraded some
> > libreoffice packages
Hi,
Am 07.07.20 um 21:21 schrieb Evgeny Kapun:
>> but how did you get into this situation?
>
> I've run `apt-get --with-new-pkgs upgrade`. This upgraded some
> libreoffice packages including libreoffice-l10n-ru, but not
> libreoffice-common because this would require it to remove
>
tag 964471 + moreinfo
tag 964471 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 08:59:26PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 08:40:54PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Any upgrade I tried (and yes, also with -l10n-de/-help-de installed)
> > upgtaded lib
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 08:40:54PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Any upgrade I tried (and yes, also with -l10n-de/-help-de installed)
> upgtaded libreoffice-common before the l10ns (and thus
> /etc/libreoffice/registry
> iwas there at .postinst time)
And a clean testing VM d
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 09:13:58PM +0300, Evgeny Kapun wrote:
> When upgrading Libreoffice, the following errors occur:
>
>
> Setting up libreoffice-l10n-ru (1:7.0.0~rc1-3) ...
>
> Creating config file /etc/libreoffice/registry/Langpack-ru.xcd with new
> version
> cp: cannot create
Hi,
Am 04.07.20 um 18:53 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
>> openclipart-libreoffice will probably need updates as well to no longer
>> ship these files (or rename them), it's probably easiest if you fix and
>> upload that QA maintained package, too.
>
> No. I don't care, actually
clone 964251 -1
reassign -1 openclipart-libreoffice
retitle -1 contains /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/gallery/shapes.* also in
libreoffice-common from LO 7.0.x onwards
thanks
Hi,
Am 04.07.20 um 15:51 schrieb Andreas Beckmann:
> because it tries to overwrite other packages files without declaring
Hi,
Am 28.06.20 um 19:40 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
> One can argue about the "ure" here.
>
>
> This comes from the .symbols and is - if I remember right - just there
> to have C++ stuff using those libs have the appropriate runtime
> dependencies. (We don't have som
found 963895 1:7.0.0~beta2-2
severity 963895 minor
reassign 963895
libuno-cppu3,libuno-sal3,libuno-cppuhelpergcc3-3,libuno-salhelpergcc3-3,uno-libs3,ure
retitle 963895 circular dependencies between
libuno-cppu3,libuno-sal3,libuno-cppuhelpergcc3-3,libuno-salhelpergcc3-3,uno-libs3,ure
thanks
[
tag 962903 - wontfix
tag 962903 + patch
thanks
Hi,
Am 20.06.20 um 14:19 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
> Am 20.06.20 um 14:11 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
>> 2575 19:27:45.464196 openat(AT_FDCWD, "/tmp/test-tmp-ametzler/Qqf3SE",
>> O_RDONLY) = -1 EACCES (Permission denied)
>>
tag 962903 - moreinfo
tag 962903 - unreproducible
retitle 962903 Fails to open any PDF ("This PDF file is encrypted and
can't be opened.") if TMPDIR is not /tmp (apparmor DENIED)
severity 962903 minor
tag 962903 + wontfix
thanks
Am 20.06.20 um 14:11 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
>
tag 962903 + moreinfo
tag 962903 + unreproducible
thanks
Am 15.06.20 um 19:49 schrieb Andreas Metzler:
> trying to open any PDF file in libreoffices yields the generic
> PDF error page "This PDF file is encrypted and can't be opened.")
Fresh testing VM.
Plain Text doc just containing "Test".
Hi,
Am 19.06.20 um 19:19 schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz:
> On 6/19/20 7:12 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> Sorry, I don't believe I don't need to fix stuff here myself. ia64 and
>> m68k even didn't yet do a ICU rebuild or at least make stuff being
>> rebuildable.
>>
>
Am 19.06.20 um 17:46 schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz:
> On 6/19/20 1:08 PM, r...@rene-engelhard.de wrote:
>> Am 19. Juni 2020 12:52:40 MESZ schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>> :
>>> So nothing that keeps us from using GCC in cases where clang is not
>>> available.
>>
>> Correct. Except
Hi,
Am 10.06.20 um 17:20 schrieb Teemu Likonen:
> Rene Engelhard [2020-06-10T17:01:28+02] wrote:
>
>> Am 10.06.20 um 16:50 schrieb Teemu Likonen:
>>> there too and with the same strace output. Both computers have Debian
Impossible. The strace iutout clearly says _nvidia
Hi,
Am 10.06.20 um 16:50 schrieb Teemu Likonen:
> Rene Engelhard [2020-06-10T14:31:54+02] wrote:
>
>> What does strace'ing soffice.bin say? (You'll want to use -ff or
>> something like that)
> I ran this:
>
> strace -o dump -ff /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/soffice.
tag 962582 + moreinfo
tag 962582 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
Am 10.06.20 um 10:42 schrieb Teemu Likonen:
> Libreoffice freezes when opening menu "Tools / Options...". To
> reproduce:
>
> 1. Open a terminal program and a shell.
> 2. Start Libreoffice from the shell:
>
> loffice
Hi,
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 04:36:43PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> These files are contained *in the package* (libreoffice-common, even
> language-independent, and you can*t just have multiple versions there.)
> and just installs from upstream:
Sorry, libreoffice-kde5/libreoffi
reassign 961473 libreoffice-kde5,libreoffice-plasma
severity 961473 minor
tag 961473 + upstream
thanks
Hi,
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:43:31PM +0200, Steve Russell wrote:
> Package: libreoffice-kde5
> Version: 1:6.1.5-3+deb10u6
Even if it was a bug, we for sure won't change the default in a
On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 05:16:04PM -0500, Evan Harris wrote:
> > No, $HOME isn't. $HOME in your case is "/raid/home/user/.
>
> Actually it's not. In the particular example I gave logs for, $HOME is
> /home/user. It just happens that /home is a symlink to /raid/home.
Aha...
> > > How should
Hi,
On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 03:32:48PM -0500, Evan Harris wrote:
> I guess I don't understand what needs to be changed. $HOME is /home, which
> is where the local users homes are. There are additional mount points
No, $HOME isn't. $HOME in your case is "/raid/home/user/.
> (/raid, and one
Hi,
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 07:43:06PM +0200, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote:
> please can someone test the build of libreoffice with sane-
> backends from experimental? My build system runs always out of disk
> space.
Hrmpf. (Iit doesn't really need much disc space
given nowadays' disk sizes.)
Hi again.
On Sat, May 02, 2020 at 03:56:26AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > A small sampling of messages (obfuscated):
> >
> > May 1 17:19:49 host kernel: [ 9201.656675] audit: type=1400
> > audit(1588371589.713:822): apparmor="ALLOWED" operation="m
retitle 959399 libreoffice-common: many AppArmor "ALLOWED" log messages
if using "non-standard" $HOME
severity 959399 minor
tag 959399 + wontfix
thanks
On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 06:00:46PM -0500, E Harris wrote:
> Using LibreOffice results in many AppArmor audit log messages marked as
> "ALLOWED".
# not sure. close if appropriate.
clone 957475 -1
reassign -1 src:boost1.71
notforwarded -1
block 957475 by -1
retitle 957475 boost1.71 needs fixes for gcc 10
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 04:32:33PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> This complains about stuff inside a boost header i(wh
clone 957475 -1
reassign -1 src:boost1.67
notforwarded -1
block 957475 by -1
retitle 957475 boost1.67 needs fixes for gcc 10
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 11:04:54AM +, Matthias Klose wrote:
> [build CXX] vcl/source/window/menuitemlist.cxx
> In file included from
forwarded 957475 Stephan Bergmann
thanks
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 11:04:54AM +, Matthias Klose wrote:
> In file included from /<>/include/rtl/ustring.hxx:37,
>
>
> from
reassign 956586 src:libreoffice
retitle 956586 buster -> bullseye upgrade deinstalls -gtk2 without installing
-gtk3
severity 956586 minor
tag 956586 + wonftix
found 956586 1:6.4.0~alpha1-0reprotest1
thanks
[ If you send a bug, please use a non-generic subject ]
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 06:55:18PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Would you please can make a compilation of this nigtly build somewere
> > (experimental?) so I can confirm upstream that the problem is fixed#
Looks like it is, there is now an expander. The dialog itself will be
Hi,
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 06:55:18PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> But will do and upload to
> https://people.debian.org/~rene/libreoffice/6.4/snapshots/.
> (en-US only and amd64 only of course)
Done.
Regards,
Rene
[ Mail ended up somewhere in nirvana, not here, not in Spam but in the
mailing list archives... ]
Hi,
> Would you please can make a compilation of this nigtly build somewere
> (experimental?) so I can confirm upstream that the problem is fixed#
No, I am not uploading random snapshots to
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 03:11:46PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Rene Engelhard]
> > I think if it was a generic problem this would have been reported
> > LOOONG go:
>
> No idea if it is a generic problem, but we ran into it on two different
> machines, one
bian/rules, debian/libreoffice-base.p*.in:
simplify and revert diversion of AccessBase basic stuff.
* debian/libreoffice-common.docs, debian/libreoffice-common.doc-base,
debian/patches/add-access2base-doc.diff: install
www.access2base.com/access2base.html into libreoffice-common as doc
-- Re
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 06:06:42PM +0200, Yngve Spjeld-Landro wrote:
> There are two official and equal variants of Norwegian, Nynorsk and Bokmål.
> Claiming that the Bokmål variant is Norwegian is wrong. Please update the
> description of the package to
>
> libreoffice-l10n-nb
# mark as found in a ancestor (as in the bz bug)
# otherwise 1:6.4.3~rc3-* from experimental are not marked
# as affected (since 1:6.4.2-3 is branch, see the version tracking...)
found 955981 1:6.3.0-1
tag 955981 + upstream
forwarded 955981
; ++
Yeah, known bug. Already fixed in 6.4.2-3 which I cannot backport yet
due to it not being in testing yet.
libreoffice (1:6.4.2-3) unstable; urgency=medium
[...]
- libreoffice-math: Add Breaks/Replaces libreoffice-common
(<&l
tag 955272 + upstream
forwarded 955272 https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=130354
thanks
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 10:29:01PM -0400, John Scott wrote:
> 1. Open LibreOffice and navigate to File -> Digital Signatures -> Sign
> Existing PDF
> 2. Choose a PDF, and in the Writer
user pkg-apparmor-t...@lists.alioth.debian.org
usertag - buggy-profile
thanks
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 10:06:43PM -0400, John Scott wrote:
> User: pkg-apparmor-t...@lists.alioth.debian.org
> Usertags: buggy-profile
Sorry, no.
Just because we didn't have the TOFU trust model in mind the
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 10:08:03PM +0100, Marcin Krawczyk wrote:
> : CommandLine Error: Option 'limited-coverage-experimental' registered more
> than once!
> LLVM ERROR: inconsistency in registered CommandLine options
Thq question still is what involves some CommandLine thingy of LLVM
here.
tag 954849 + moreinfo
tag 954849 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 02:06:52PM +0100, Marcin Krawczyk wrote:
> * What led up to the situation?
> After night upgrade libreoffice crash when is opened
Which packages did get upgraded?
> * What exactly did you do (or not do) that
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 02:29:00PM +0100, Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
> # strace -ff loffice --headless --convert-to pdf foo.doc
>
> [..]
> [pid 14336] openat(AT_FDCWD, "/usr/lib/libreoffice/program/libuuilo.so",
> O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE|O_CLOEXEC) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
> [pid
severity 954323 serious
retitle 954323 libreoffice-common 6.4.2 breaks older versions
found 954323 1:6.4.2~rc1-1
thanks
Am 20. März 2020 09:17:51 MEZ schrieb Ara Keary :
>Package: libreoffice-common
>Version: 1:6.4.2-1
>Severity: grave
>Justification: renders package unusable
Sigh.
>. or the
reopen 952748
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 06:37:03PM +, Brian Potkin wrote:
> > This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
> > which was filed against the libreoffice package:
> >
> > #952748: libreoffice: Printer and queue attributes not available
[...]
> > Date:
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 12:36:34PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 12:20:00PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> > Since you already have a gengal wrapper script, you could check for
> > libreoffice-core being installed and error out with "please ins
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 12:36:34PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Thinking about this now actually, maybe it suffices to use a
> --disable-gui version of gengal.bin for -dev here... Will try..
Hmm, no, won't work. We don't build the nogui variant everywhere
(double build), so we
On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 12:20:00PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> On 14/03/2020 09.51, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Maybe split it out to a new libreoffice-dev-gui package or somesuch? (That
> > would need NEW though,
> > and thus will only be done with the 7.0 packages)? Bu
retitle 952347 /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/gengal.bin: symbol lookup error:
/usr/lib/libreoffice/program/gengal.bin: undefined symbol: _Z10getGlxPipev with
libreoffice-core-nogui installed
clone 952347 -1
reassign -1 src:openclipart
retitle -1 openclipart: please add a explicit build-dependency
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 06:17:21PM +, Brian Potkin wrote:
> On Fri 28 Feb 2020 at 16:29:58 +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
> > Keeping the bug explicitely out of the loop.
>
> I do not understand why.
Because of my first point.
> The subject matter is of legitima
On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 06:15:34PM -0800, Peter Eckersley wrote:
> I saw this on a sid system with dpkg 1.19.0.4 installed (piecemeal upgrades).
dpkg (1.19.1) unstable; urgency=medium
[...]
* Add a new --no-rename option to dpkg-divert. This is the current default
behavior, but it will make
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 06:15:34PM -0800, Peter Eckersley wrote:
> I saw this on a sid system with dpkg 1.19.0.4 installed (piecemeal upgrades).
But stable has 1.19.7 already.
> But people might hit it while upgrading from oldstable to the next release?
They normally should upgrade to a
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 09:35:20AM +0100, fulvio ciriaco wrote:
> I understood from the text shown by reportbug about libreoffice that
> comparing to the
> native version was required or preferred, maybe I was not able to understand
> it, or maybe
> it is written wrong or maybe more hints
notfound 951149 1:6.3.4-2
foun 951149 1:6.4.0~beta1-2
tag 951149 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 11:03:57AM -0800, Peter Eckersley wrote:
> (Reading database ... 405556 files and directories currently installed.)
> Preparing to unpack .../libreoffice-base_1%3a6.4.1~rc1-2_amd64.deb
tag 95 + moreinfo
tag 95 + unreproducible
thanks
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 10:38:31AM +0100, fulvio ciriaco wrote:
> The saveas dialog always select the first subdirectory of the current one,
> if I press the dialogue simple brings me to the next subdirectory.
Can't reproduce this. Tried
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 05:45:30PM +0100, Jan Jona Javoršek wrote:
>I can confirm the same bug with the now current 6.1.5-3+rpi1+deb10u5
And this is not raspbian. And in Debian there's no +rpi1+
>I can attach strace and package info if necessary, but it looks related to
>gtk3 theme
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 03:29:21PM +0100, Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
> So far, I checked the box "Save and Open dialogs" in Tools - Custimize-
> general
> tab. Lo decided not maintaining this dialog and using GTK ones only.
Wrong.
> They removed the checkbox, but the setting stays
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 10:10:24AM +0100, rene.engelh...@mailbox.org wrote:
> >Looks like there is a missing Breaks/Replaces between
> >libreoffice-help-common and libreoffice-help-fr?
>
> Looks like those localized pngs moved packages unexpectedly...
>
> Will look...
Caused by
Ji,
Am 7. Februar 2020 09:47:30 MEZ schrieb Laurent Bigonville :
>While updating a system (partially up-to-date), I got the following
>error:
>
>Dépaquetage de libreoffice-help-fr (1:6.4.1~rc1-1) sur (1:6.4.0-1) ...
>dpkg: erreur de traitement de l'archive
tag 950792 + moreinfo
tag 950792 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
wrt Subject: You mean LibreOffice, not OpenOffice.
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 04:04:36PM +0100, Nicola wrote:
> Package: libreoffice-core
> Version: 1:6.3.4-2
> Severity: important
> File: /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/soffice
Erm, No.
found 949754 1:6.4.0~rc1-1
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 03, 2020 at 05:39:41PM +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
> it turns out the problem was caused by adding new strings for ODF 1.3 to the
> dialog without adapting the code of the dialog; the commit
> ef39938dea14666a5835b6ae85091c1010f8ae8d was reverted
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 08:16:41PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Please read the upstream bug report carefully. It's said there that the
> > fault
>
> I read it. LO upstream is quite fast on blaming upstream bugs to
> distributions if it doesn't work on their sh
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 07:56:57PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> [...] internal libraries - and that includes libepoxy.
and glm.
Just saw
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=fb27784fcbd3383a7b2648714de19ae5f3818fa5
And yes, there is glm 0.9.9.x in unstable since
tag 950225 - pending
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 04:38:40PM +, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Bug #950225 in libreoffice reported by you has been fixed in the
> Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
> message below and you can check the diff o
block 950319 by 928037
thanks
On Sat, Feb 01, 2020 at 08:21:20AM +0100, Frank Loeffler wrote:
> in the mailcap is able to prevent shell escapes. This is why the replacing
> program must be the one doing this. Thus, if any tool using mailcap does not
> quote filenames properly and only relies on
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 01, 2020 at 08:21:20AM +0100, Frank Loeffler wrote:
> For thunderbird I find, e.g.:
>
> message/rfc822; /usr/bin/thunderbird %s; test=test -n "$DISPLAY"
> text/calendar; /usr/bin/thunderbird %s; test=test -n "$DISPLAY"
> text/x-vcard; /usr/bin/thunderbird %s; test=test -n
On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:49:09PM +0100, Antonio wrote:
> I don't remember changing anything, I only used basic functions like
> open, edit, save etc ... and updated the package when available in the
> debian / sid repository.
Hmm, ok.
You missed to answer
> > As said above, did you change
forwarded 949754 Michael Stahl
tag 949754 - unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 07:08:53PM +0100, Antonio wrote:
> the problem is in this line:
>
> oor:name="DefaultVersion" oor:op="fuse">0
aha. ok, as I guessed, ODF format...
Do you remember changing the ODF default save
tag 949754 + moreinfo
tag 949754 + unreproducible
thanks
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 07:39:16PM +0100, Antonio wrote:
> After several tests I found that the problem depended on the
> libreoffice user profile of the previous installed version.
Hrm.
> To solve this problem I manually removed the
found 950319 1:5.2.3~rc1-3
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 11:47:29AM +0100, Frank Loeffler wrote:
> Using mutt, I created a new email, added an attachment with a file name
> containing spaces (a pptx file, thus libreoffice), and without sending
no, MS Office. Which LibreOffice happens to be
retitle 950225 libreoffice-writer: Immediate crash lunching mail merge wizard
if libreoffice-base not installed
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 06:57:14PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > ii libreoffice-base-core1:6.4.0-1
Looked into the past.
libreoffice-base-core
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:38:31AM +0100, Cesare Leonardi wrote:
> As soon as I click to start the wizard, LibreOffice closes and the Document
> Recovery window open up saying: "Due to an error, LibreOffice crashed..."
> Then the recovery process starts.
Mmh.
Indeed.
A 6.3.4-1 from bpo
retitle 949278 endless loop if ~/.config/libreoffice is a symlink
severity 949278 minor
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 09:22:55PM +0100, Pierre Bernhardt wrote:
> Am 20.01.20 um 11:14 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
> > You mean keep the .config/libreoffice and remove the old .li
On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 10:50:57PM +0100, Pierre Bernhardt wrote:
> > That would mean that it always hanged on a new
> > install where .libreoffice (actually that one doesn't exist, you mean
> > .config/libreoffice) doesn't exist.
>
> No, it is really my /home/user/.libreoffice folder which
tag 949278 + moreinfo
tag 949278 + unreproducible
thanks
On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 10:00:37AM +0100, Pierre Bernhardt wrote:
> after removing my .libreoffice directory it will not startup fully any more.
> The splash screen is shown ever and than it hangs as long I press Ctrl-C to
> abort.
>
> I
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 06:49:23PM +0100, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
> is there a way to get the KDE file dialog in libreoffice (buster-backports) ?
>
> Installing libreoffice-kde does not seem to be sufficient for me...
(1:6.2.3~rc2-1) experimental; urgency=medium
* New upstream release candidate
* debian/rules:
- replace various $(findstring for arch checks by $(filter
-- Rene Engelhard Tue, 16 Apr 2019 22:25:38 +0200
This one sneaked in when doing -nogui in 6.4.x, and
$ grep findstring * | grep A
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 04, 2020 at 02:33:51PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 1/4/20 2:28 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > That just means that BUILD_NOGUI_PACKAGES=n is set and the nogui part is
> > not even tried.
> > ppc64 is fast and has server uses, so should
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 04, 2020 at 02:07:36PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 1/4/20 10:19 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > I haven't verified it, but my suspicion is that the following conditional
> > test is
> > incorrect as the function findstring will match "ppc64" in
On Sat, Jan 04, 2020 at 10:19:13AM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> The build on ppc64 currently fails because debian/rules tries to execute some
> script code on ppc64 which is relevant for the OOO_NOGUI_ARCHS in
> debian/rules.
Yes.
> # remove lib*uilo.so in --nogui
> find
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 06:00:49PM +, Christopher Obbard wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 at 17:52, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 06:36:56PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > > The following additional packages wi
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 06:36:56PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > The following additional packages will be installed:
> >libjuh-java libjurt-java libridl-java libunoloader-java
> > The following NEW packages will be installed:
> >libjuh-java libjurt-java l
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 05:00:37PM +, Christopher Obbard wrote:
> $ sudo apt --fix-broken install
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> Correcting dependencies... Done
> The following packages were automatically installed and are
On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 04:49:23PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Package: ure
> Version: 6.4.0~rc1-5
> Followup-For: Bug #947907
>
> It’s more than just libjuh-java:
Yes.
As was already said in
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=947907#34 (this bug!)
and the bugs merged with it
notfound 947446 1:6.4.0~rc1-5
close 947446 1:6.4.0~rc1-3
thanks
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 10:58:11PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Control: reopen -1
> Control: found -1 1:6.4.0~rc1-5
Erm, no. Breaks:/Replaces: are present.
> it looks like ure is still shipping (some of) the files that were
Am 2. Januar 2020 04:46:11 MEZ schrieb William Panlener :
>ure=6.4.0~rc1-5 ships files provided by other packages in addition to
>the reported conflict. I have discovered the following conflicting
>files and packages:
>
>'/usr/share/java/juh.jar', which is also in package libjuh-java
reassign 947907 ure
severity 947907 serious
retitle 947907 trying to overwrite '/usr/share/java/juh.jar', which is also in
package libjuh-java
forcemerge 947909 947907
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 12:32:24AM +0100, Domenico Cufalo wrote:
> Upgrading to v. 1:6.4.0~rc1-5, I had this output:
Package: libjuh-java,libjurt-java,libridl-java,libunoloader-java
Version: 1:6.4.0~rc1-3
Severity: serious
Tags: pending
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 12:54:16PM -0500, David Witbrodt wrote:
> It looks like you introduced some "Breaks" in 1:6.4.0~rc1-3 that were not
> present before, and now things like
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 12:54:16PM -0500, David Witbrodt wrote:
> It looks like you introduced some "Breaks" in 1:6.4.0~rc1-3 that were not
> present before, and now things like libjuh-java have a Breaks on
Jup. See #947446.
> ure (< 1:6.4.0~beta1-1). The epoch "1" on ure is problematic:
>
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 04:56:00PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> found 947488 1:6.4.0~rc1-2
> >If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a
> >better one in a separate message then please contact r...@rene-engelhard.de
> >by
> >replying to
reopen 947469
close 947469 1:6.4.0~rc1-3
thanks
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 05:03:04PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2019 16:58:22 + (UTC)
> From: Thorsten Glaser
> To: 947488-d...@bugs.debian.org
> cc: r...@rene-engelhard.de
> Subject: Bug#947488: marked as
On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 11:01:19AM +0100, nicolas.patr...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have this bug since a long time.
Since when? That should be recorded in Version:. Right now the BTS
thinks it's new in 6.4.0~rc1-3 since you specified that...
> Here are what I see in lo-w (no colour) and what I get
tag 947612 + unreproducible
tag 947612 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi,
On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 04:13:35PM +0100, Nicolas Patrois wrote:
> When I apply a colour, I don’t see it in the edit view (I only see black).
> I must open the preview to see them.
Works here. (gtk3/GNOME here, but I also tried in
tag 947489 + wontfix
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 11:57:24PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Package: libreoffice-common
> Version: 1:6.4.0~rc1-2
> Severity: minor
>
> Why does it depend on *two* themes? This should probably be something like
Because it does need it.
Colibre is default
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 08:05:12PM -0500, David Witbrodt wrote:
> I know nothing about these files. I'm guessing that when "Format" is "HTML"
> it is supposed to be accompanied by a valid "Files" entry.
Maybe, yes, This is only one file, so...
But I added a Files: now
> Would you like me
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 12:11:29PM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> system. I am using KDE and not Gnome. My installation includes
> libreoffice-kde5 and libreoffice-qt5.
>
> Uninstall libreoffice-qt5 leads to an impressive response (see below).
... and it removed libreoffice-kde5 then,
reasign 946708 libreoffice-gtk2
found 946708 1:6.3.3-3
retitle 946708 libreoffice-impress: bullet dialogue: ok does not accept click
with gtk2
thanks
On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 09:56:32AM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> in libreoffice impress the "Bullets and Numbering" dialogue allows to
>
On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 08:39:52PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> On 09/12/2019 18.37, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Either asap or next week when rc1 will be there (but either way will be NEW
> > given the previous versions
> > are still waiting in NEW since mid-November...)
reassign 946459 libreoffice-qt5
affects 946459 libreoffice-kde5
retitle 946459 tip popup does not wrap lines with Qt5/KDE5
thanks
On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 12:39:18PM +0100, Francesco Potortì wrote:
> Package: libreoffice-writer
I believe this is not writer-only, is it? I think libreoffice-core
301 - 400 of 12405 matches
Mail list logo
