Re: [Libreoffice] minutes of tech steering call ...
Petr Mladek wrote: It is well recommended to use daily builds from http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/. They include the very last fixes and can be installed in parallel with the announced builds. That may be true for other OSes but not for Windows. Once LO gets to 3.5.x that will (hopefully) be a correct statement. You can in fact install 3.4.x in such a way that it doesn't uninstall or overwrite the stable build. But it is a hack. Not a proper install. Interestingly I have mentioned in another (ignored) topic that the Windows daily builds are based on code previous to the pre-releases (pre release is on 3.4.1rc3, daily builds are based on 3.4.1rc1) After a quick check, it seems that ALL daily builds for all OSes are based on 3.4.1rc1... I must be missing the logic here... -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/minutes-of-tech-steering-call-tp3100951p3113845.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] minutes of tech steering call ...
Cor Nouws wrote: Plus - especially with the unfortunate experience from 3.4.0, and to do something good for users, testers, marketing etc - IMO it is better that in the end we have three weeks extra, than that we lack three days. So I would really love to be on the save side .. Thank you Cor for listening to the users instead of the mighty schedule BTW since only Betas can be installed in parallel with the stable build under Windows and that was not added to the 3.4.x branch (at least from my understanding) I guess Windows Beta testers will have to wait for 3.5.x, right? -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/minutes-of-tech-steering-call-tp3100951p3102309.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Error message when closing LO 3.4 Beta 2
I'm running the master~2011-05-26_21.20.06_LibO-Dev_OOO340m1_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe build and I get the same error message I got in 3.4.0 Beta2 Does this mean that this fix was not committed to the trunk? Or is it another similar error? -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Error-message-when-closing-LO-3-4-Beta-2-tp2866392p2998269.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Word doesn't see symbols
I'm not a dev (and this mailing list is for devs only). But your problem isn't related to doc compatibility (or any format, for that matter). If the person you are sending the file doesn't the font you are using and the font used to replace doesn't have the symbols you are using, the only option would be to embed the font in the document. Unfortunately it seems that ODF doesn't support embedding fonts and the Save option for .doc in LibreOffice doesn't either. I agree this is a serious limitation (especially for presentations) You should add a feature to request to embed fonts in doc files (which is supported by the MS doc format). As for embedding fonts in ODF, I couldn't find anything on Google or Bugzilla so I guess this hasn't been considered? (In this particular case you could email Opensymbol.ttf to your friends because it has a GPL license although it's copyrighted to Oracle http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?t=11463) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Word-doesn-t-see-symbols-tp2992150p2992360.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
[Libreoffice] Windows installer translations
Hi all May I suggest that all the translation files for the Windows setup (after unpacking) are placed in a subfolder (e.g. trans) and the setup.ini modified accordingly? I.e. from [languages] count=104 default=1033 lang1=1078,trans_af.mst ... to [languages] count=104 default=1033 lang1=1078,trans\trans_af.mst ... There is no major advantage... it is simply more organized :) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Windows-installer-translations-tp2969431p2969431.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.3.99.4 tag created (3.4.0-beta4)
Now that 3.4 Beta 4 is out, is there any chance that someone could automate the creation of daily/nightly builds from the master for all platforms? Currently only Linux-FC11 users have regular daily builds from master (although curiously not from the 3.4 branch?) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ANNOUNCE-libreoffice-3-3-99-4-tag-created-3-4-0-beta4-tp2895369p2916865.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.3.99.4 tag created (3.4.0-beta4)
When you do a code freeze for a Beta (or any) release it means that a branch is created and to that branch only fixes are added but not new features, correct? Are the fixes to the Beta branch incorporated to the main code (trunk?)? I.e. the trunk contains all the fixes from the Beta branch plus new features (which probably have other bugs), right? -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ANNOUNCE-libreoffice-3-3-99-4-tag-created-3-4-0-beta4-tp2895369p2902520.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.3.99.4 tag created (3.4.0-beta4)
Thank you all for the answers. I guess my understanding of the tree analogy wasn't correct. So the trunk is the main code which comes from version 0.0 and will keep growing and from which a new branch (3.5) will soon sprout (or is this a sub-branch from a 3.0 branch?) Within the 3.4 branch a new sub-branch was created (named 3.4Beta). Any fixes to bugs found in Beta are added to the sub-branch and also to the 3.4 branch (and later to the trunk) while new features are only added to the 3.4 branch (and at some point to the trunk). This branch will continue to grow and from which will sprout 3.4RC, 3.4.0, 3.4.1 (please correct my tree analogy if this is not it :) ) Am I wrong to assume that a current nightly build from the 3.4 branch is a better option for Beta testing (since the dev build fix was committed) than the official Beta4? Why not skip Beta4 and release Beta5? It's not unusual in software development to skip releases... On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Michael Meeks [via Document Foundation Mail Archive] ml-node+2902654-2051771822-251...@n3.nabble.com wrote: Hi there, On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 01:13 -0700, plino wrote: When you do a code freeze for a Beta (or any) release it means that a branch is created and to that branch only fixes are added but not new features, correct? Good question - that branch is libreoffice-3-4 and you have it about right; yes. For new features we need some double (or more) code review and we use that very sparingly; so far I've only seen one go in (fixing the document shadows). Are the fixes to the Beta branch incorporated to the main code (trunk?)? I.e. the trunk contains all the fixes from the Beta branch plus new features (which probably have other bugs), right? That process is a bit slower; some fixes are committed to master, and then cherry-picked back; but in general fixes go to libreoffice-3-4 and then are merged back to master (somewhat intermittently). So it is best to test a libreoffice-3-4 build if possible. HTH, Michael. -- [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=2902654i=0by-user=t , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot ___ LibreOffice mailing list [hidden email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=2902654i=1by-user=t http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice -- If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ANNOUNCE-libreoffice-3-3-99-4-tag-created-3-4-0-beta4-tp2895369p2902654.html To unsubscribe from [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.3.99.4 tag created (3.4.0-beta4), click herehttp://nabble.documentfoundation.org/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_codenode=2895369code=cGVkbGlub0BnbWFpbC5jb218Mjg5NTM2OXwtMTcxMDU2NTk1NA==. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ANNOUNCE-libreoffice-3-3-99-4-tag-created-3-4-0-beta4-tp2895369p2902834.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.3.99.4 tag created (3.4.0-beta4)
Am I wrong to assume that a current nightly build from the 3.4 branch is a better option for Beta testing (since the dev build fix was committed) than the official Beta4? Right - that should be so. Why not skip Beta4 and release Beta5? It's not unusual in software development to skip releases... Its not clear what advantage that would give. The advantage is that if you would tag Beta5 for release TODAY it would already include the switch that prevents is from overwriting the stable build since that has already been committed. I believe more people would be willing to install/use such a beta if this change was properly announced. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ANNOUNCE-libreoffice-3-3-99-4-tag-created-3-4-0-beta4-tp2895369p2903744.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.3.99.4 tag created (3.4.0-beta4)
If you mean the --enable-release-build switch, that has been introduced to the master branch only. This means that it won't be available in the Windows nightlies either (unless there are plans to build master nightlies, currently there is only an empty 3.4 folder) Please note that we have never tested in practice full-scale what effect it has on our build. What if it has some unintended unexpected consequence, that didn't show up in OOo's OOo-Dev' builds? For instance due to our multi-lingual installer mechanism. Then we would need to fix that, and probably yet another beta. This will have to be implemented at some point. And the unexpected consequences will have to rise at some point. If not now then for 3.5... Why post-pone it? :) Also, I assume the plan is that beta4 will be ready by weekend. If we would cherry-pick the change that introduced that switch to the 3-4 branch now, the beta4 build would have to be restarted, and as it takes more or less a day especially for Windows, and the working hours are already over today, we would not have time to get a build before the weekend. I see your point. But maybe loosing a weekend would be compensated by getting more Beta testers and more feedback? It's always a trade off :) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ANNOUNCE-libreoffice-3-3-99-4-tag-created-3-4-0-beta4-tp2895369p2903874.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.3.99.4 tag created (3.4.0-beta4)
Hi Tor Thank you for your clear answers! Yes, that is more or less the definition of release candidate, isn't it? Please remember that it in principle isn't known in advance which release candidate is good enough to be declared a release. The last release candidate is *exactly* the same as the stable release, the downloadable file names, and/or directories, are just renamed. If the release candidates still were considered temporary builds (your words) and thus effectively a totally different product, with different setting locations and whatnot, how could then a release candidate magically turn into a release? I see your point. It does make sense that at some point all is moved to the final folders. This means that developers and whoever makes the decision to move from Beta to RC must take this into account and be able to create an extra Beta build if a last minute stopper bug is found. 3.4(.0) beta 4 will, yes. Because it was too late now to start using the ooo-dev (or whatever we should call it) mechanism for 3.4(.0) beta4, the last beta of it. As have been seen on this list, we who build the generic LibreOffice builds had no idea about this mechanism. And nobody bothered to tell us (at least is a way that we would have understood) before some weeks ago. But if the ooo-dev thingie works, then for 3.4.1 and later (and maybe 3.3.3, too) we can use it for their betas, sure. Those are excellent news for the future. But this is a good example of a situation where the project admins should have been able to override the schedule. Having more people testing the Betas can only be a good thing for the project, right? ;) I'm aware that a Release doesn't have to be bug-free (is there any bug-free program? :) ) but since LibreOffice is trying to get momento over OOo it should make damn sure that AT LEAST it doesn't have more bugs than the competition ;) Cheers, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ANNOUNCE-libreoffice-3-3-99-4-tag-created-3-4-0-beta4-tp2895369p2897894.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [libreoffice-l10n] Re: REMINDER: Release 3.4.0-rc1 from ooo-build-3-2-1 branch == string and UI freeze
Hi Jan Could this also be the case for daily Windows builds? There is a single daily build (from April 20th) at http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/Windows_Release_Configuration/ -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/REMINDER-Release-3-4-0-rc1-from-ooo-build-3-2-1-branch-string-and-UI-freeze-tp2889339p2898158.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.3.99.4 tag created (3.4.0-beta4)
I'm not sure I understand this: does this mean that RC releases are not considered temporary builds and will be allowed to replace the previous stable build? Will Beta4 overwrite my stable 3.3.2? -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/ANNOUNCE-libreoffice-3-3-99-4-tag-created-3-4-0-beta4-tp2895369p2896582.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
[Libreoffice] Error message when closing LO 3.4 Beta 2
Am I the only one getting this error message under Windows (XP Pro SP3 Eng_US)? http://img153.imageshack.us/i/lo34beta2.png/ I'm using LO 3.4 Beta 2 (but this also occurred under Beta 1, but not on 3.3.2) BTW congratulations (and thanks) to the Devs for cutting over 50Mb on the Win installer ;) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Error-message-when-closing-LO-3-4-Beta-2-tp2866392p2866392.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Error message when closing LO 3.4 Beta 2
Thank you for the quick answer, Tor. I was finding it odd that nobody had reported it before. Could this be the same bug that you patched with a workaround previously? https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31494 -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Error-message-when-closing-LO-3-4-Beta-2-tp2866392p2866836.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
[Libreoffice] Non-functional Beta?
Hi all This is a warning/question: I just installed LO 3.4 Beta 1 under Windows XP Pro SP3 (from the install_multi.exe file) and there are no buttons on the interface (just text) and opening any ods/odt file (curiously no error for doc or xls!) results in General Error. General Input/Output Error If this is only happening to me, then ignore this message. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Non-functional-Beta-tp2824860p2824860.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] LibreOffice 3.4 Beta 1 available
I think I will keep the release of this beta as a secret. Anyhow there is more than enough interesting news :-) Too late :) http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-3-4-Beta-1-available-tp2825422p2825422.html http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/04/15/libreoffice-3-4-beta-1-available/ http://www.libreoffice.org/ I think the only option now is to fix it and replace it ASAP ;) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LibreOffice-3-4-Beta-1-available-tp2826294p2827164.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] update service
It is quite interesting that this message from one of the members of the Steering Committee is unanswered since 12 February. Maybe I'm wrong about the importance of this feature but it puzzles me that both OOo and LO seem to ignore having an update mechanism. IMO adding this single feature would clearly separate the two suites and give an advantage to whoever adds it first... -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/update-service-tp2479818p2816928.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] update service
I meant what the OP was talking about: an update service. Obviously if there is such a service one would need to have a method to check for such updates. But that is totally secondary comparing to downloading updates instead of whole packages. It's obvious that most (all?) developers have thought about this. What surprises me is that apparently there are no efforts in that sense, not even from the Oracle sponsored OOo. When you pointed me to an external link I thought you were going to show me a dev log... unfortunately it's only a nice to have list :( -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/update-service-tp2479818p2817455.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] over-long extensions manager list ...
If I may contribute with my 2cents why not use the best ideas already on the field? The perfect installer IMHO should start with a simple box to select the language used by the installer itself (where the detected locale is suggested) An example is the first screen for the FLOSS Abiword http://www.abisource.com/ http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n2404563/Select_language.png This variable (user confirmed) can be used from this step forward in the installer dialogs and inclusively to select the language of the GNU agreement and obviously for selecting the GUI and dictionaries to be installed. But better yet on the next step use the best solution already provided also by Abiword The components are selected according to the type of install but the user can see what is selected and add/remove any component on the same screen (please notice that all the text in this installation step is already displayed in the language selected on the first step, I just switched to English for this example) http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n2404563/components.png Finally the cherry on the top of the cake: in addition to the included dictionaries (English is included as default but others can probably be added) you have an option to download other dictionaries during installation (although you can also add them on the fly at any time after installation) http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n2404563/dictionaries.png I think this is the best installer possible. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/MS-Windows-about-dictionaries-installation-tp2382566p2404563.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] over-long extensions manager list ...
Jesús, obviously a CD/DVD installer should include everything. This is a suggestion for a downloadable installer where size matters :) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/MS-Windows-about-dictionaries-installation-tp2382566p2404670.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Remove old Word 6.0/95 save as support
I think jonathon-4's suggestion is brilliant! Keep the currently used formats in the Save As (sorted please!) dialog and old cryptic formats in a Export to option. This way no formats are lost but functionality is increased. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Remove-old-Word-6-0-95-save-as-support-tp2403218p2408005.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Impressive mockups
Absolutely fantastic! Brilliant use of all this wasted space in a wide screen while writing in a portrait page! This just makes me think how the MS innovative big fat ribbon on top was wasting valuable screen space. Congratulations to whoever had this brilliant idea. I hope it is implemented ASAP! -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Impressive-mockups-tp2389105p2389133.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] RC4 / Windows size analysis ...
Can you get rid of those 120 zero byte files or are these needed? -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RC4-Windows-size-analysis-tp2302919p2319901.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] RC4 / Windows size analysis ...
As soon as you remove the extra language packs and dictionaries, as well as the extensions, I'm sure it will go down to the same size as the OOo installer ;) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RC4-Windows-size-analysis-tp2302919p2311479.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Serious bug on LO Windows installer
Hi Michael I did receive the email by Tor at the time. But I checked the Nabble site and my message was listed as pending until 1 AM, i.e 12 hours later... (and I have subscribed to this mailing list) This is the first time I'm using a mailing list that converts to a Forum and honestly I hate it :) I can see that we have different views about forums and mailing lists ;) Answer to both: the only languages I'm familiar with are Portuguese, English, Spanish and French :) I can take a look at the code just out of curiosity ;) Cheers, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Serious-bug-on-LO-Windows-installer-tp2294391p2301104.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Serious bug on LO Windows installer
Thanks for clarifying that, Kevin. I still prefer a good ol' forum any day :) I agree with you that devs should not waste time with forums. But on the other hand, even an ignorant like me ;) who can't write a like of code, could contribute on such site as a Moderator or a Forum Helper... Cheers, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Serious-bug-on-LO-Windows-installer-tp2294391p2302129.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Serious bug on LO Windows installer
This might not be a Dev problem but since it's still related to the Windows installer... The RC4 installer correctly identified my location (once) and modified the installer language accordingly (I would prefer to choose it myself even if the installer provides a suggestion) The text on the first screen says in Portuguese something like Sun Microsystems thanks you for downloading LibreOffice 3.3 :) Curiously I only noticed this now because this was the only time it started in Portuguese (I couldn't repeat the event to take a screenshot...) Can someone confirm the startup screen? Can you modify the installer for the user to be allowed to select the language (even if it defaults to the detected language)? Why did it detect Portuguese just once (since Beta1)? -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Serious-bug-on-LO-Windows-installer-tp2294391p2302973.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
[Libreoffice] Serious bug on LO Windows installer
I had already detected this and confirmed with the latest installer (for RC4): LO installer somehow modifies the attributes of the All Users Desktop folder when it adds the LibreOffice lnk to the desktop. The All Users Desktop folder is a System Folder and usually can not be modified or deleted. After installing the LO lnk these attributes are changed. Even worse: if you Uninstall LO and the only item on the All Users Desktop is the LO lnk, then the uninstaller nicely deletes the folder (which makes sense because it is empty). The problem is that loosing the Desktop folder causes problems with many Windows programs. Please fix this ASAP (I have no idea how to do it, as I mentioned before I'm not a programmer) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Serious-bug-on-LO-Windows-installer-tp2294391p2294391.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Serious bug on LO Windows installer
Oops.. Sorry, I forgot to mention that this was under Windows XP Pro Sp3. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Serious-bug-on-LO-Windows-installer-tp2294391p2294709.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Serious bug on LO Windows installer
Wow. It took 12 hours for my post to show up... I'm really looking forward to a real Forum... I agree Tor, only an advanced user like me (and apparently you :) ) has an empty All Users Desktop folder. And obvioulsy I wouldn't allow a desktop shortcut if I wasn't testing ;) But what worries me is that the installer modifies the attributes in a way that the folder CAN be moved or deleted... This is a system folder, Windows should never allow this to happen. What is the installer doing? I never said it was a LO specific bug. But I gave up on reporting bugs to OOo a long time ago :) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Serious-bug-on-LO-Windows-installer-tp2294391p2299032.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Leftovers
Sure, no problem ;) Leftover files/folders C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\uno_packages C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.bundle.PackageRegistryBackend C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.component.PackageRegistryBackend C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.configuration.PackageRegistryBackend C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.executable.PackageRegistryBackend C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.help.PackageRegistryBackend C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.script.PackageRegistryBackend C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.sfwk.PackageRegistryBackend C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.bundle.PackageRegistryBackend\backenddb.xml C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.configuration.PackageRegistryBackend\187.tmp C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.configuration.PackageRegistryBackend\187.tmp_ C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.configuration.PackageRegistryBackend\backenddb.xml C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.configuration.PackageRegistryBackend\configmgr.ini C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.configuration.PackageRegistryBackend\registered_packages.db C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.configuration.PackageRegistryBackend\187.tmp_\dictionaries.xcu C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\prereg\bundled\registry\com.sun.star.comp.deployment.help.PackageRegistryBackend\backenddb.xml C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\uno_packages\cache C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3\share\uno_packages\cache\uno_packages Leftover keys (when installed for Current user only) [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\LibreOffice] [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\LibreOffice\Layers_] [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\LibreOffice\Layers_\Basis] [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\LibreOffice\Layers_\Basis\3.3] BASISINSTALLLOCATION=C:\\Program Files\\LibreOffice 3\\Basis\\ [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\LibreOffice\Layers_\URE] [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\LibreOffice\Layers_\URE\1] UREINSTALLLOCATION=C:\\Program Files\\LibreOffice 3\\URE\\ Leftover keys (when installed for All Users) [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\LibreOffice] [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\LibreOffice\Layers_] [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\LibreOffice\Layers_\Basis] [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\LibreOffice\Layers_\Basis\3.3] BASISINSTALLLOCATION=C:\\Program Files\\LibreOffice 3\\Basis\\ [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\LibreOffice\Layers_\URE] [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\LibreOffice\Layers_\URE\1] UREINSTALLLOCATION=C:\\Program Files\\LibreOffice 3\\URE\\ -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Leftovers-tp2269442p2272603.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Change executable/sh names
Jesús, thank you for the new build. Unfortunately it doesn't fix the problem. Even if it did, the next time a user installs an OOo update wouldn't the problem appear again? If you add your fix to LO only, OOo updates won't unfix it? I can't see any other permanent solution than renaming the exes... BTW I have NEVER said it's a minor change. I'm just saying that it's better to do this change sooner than later. And my only argument for changing this now is that I think the first impression is really important. If the first release is successful most people will stick with LO from the beginning. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Change-executable-sh-names-tp2108193p2261836.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Change executable/sh names
I'm afraid it's not fixed yet. I think the problem is that e.g. ODS is associated with OOo's scalc as the default application and to LibO's scalc as an alternate program. These are not stored in the SAME registry Key. For xls which is associated with MS Excel (on my system), both OOo and LibO are alternate programs. Since there can be only one entry for scalc.exe in Open With there seems to be no way around this (at least for people who are still holding to MS Office, that is) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Change-executable-sh-names-tp2108193p2264164.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Change executable/sh names
Michael, please don't regard this as a personal complaint. I think many users who are currently using OOo will have this problem when they try LO (and update any of them). I think it's a bad idea to cause grievance to users who are giving it a go. IMO it will make them stick to OOo... Changing this now would be a wiser option. As I mentioned in a previous post, I can manually change the exe names to l*.exe (as long as I don't rename soffice.exe which must be fixed internally) without any loss in functionality. I think this proves that it's a minor change for the program but a major change for usability. Just my 2 cents. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Change-executable-sh-names-tp2108193p2255023.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [Windows] Executable name and file association
Yes, I'm doing this for testing purposes This is not odd at all. Most LibreOffice users will be OpenOffice users. And I imagine that many will install LibreOffice without uninstalling OpenOffice at least for some time... -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Windows-Executable-name-and-file-association-tp2079216p2121286.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [Windows] Executable name and file association
Hi Jesús I uninstalled both and I got the two options in Open with as you mentioned. I guess this problem is more common than expected. And probably will happen to many previous OpenOffice users? -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Windows-Executable-name-and-file-association-tp2079216p2121293.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Support info links still point to openoffice.org
Thank YOU for the feedback. Looking forward to RC2 ;) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Support-info-links-still-point-to-openoffice-org-tp2101694p2105001.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
[Libreoffice] Support info links still point to openoffice.org
In the Windows Add/Remove list each program has a link Click here for support information. Clicking on this link for LibreOffice RC1 displays the following window http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n2101694/Support.png (I know the image is too wide but that seems to be a problem with the Comments line detailing all languages...) The links are incorrect and even the Publisher line, although it says LibreOffice, links to http://www.openoffice.org/ -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Support-info-links-still-point-to-openoffice-org-tp2101694p2101694.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
[Libreoffice] [Windows] Executable name and file association
Renaming the executables from s*.exe to l*.exe has been discussed and apart from the differentiation of office suites it has a practical implication for Windows users: An extension (e.g. ods) is associated with an exe file (e.g. scalc.exe). If the user has installed OpenOffice AND LibreOffice, the extension can only be associated to one of the executables. Furthermore if a user is testing OpenOffice AND LibreOffice but his current default application is MS Office, that means that both OOo and LO could be used through the Open with option IF the executable name was not same since. (Actually I just renamed scalc.exe to lcalc.exe and it seems to work perfectly :) ) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Windows-Executable-name-and-file-association-tp2079216p2079216.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] Comments on RC1
Wait - you also complained about RC1's size ? and then again here with a link ? :-) and Charles told you're we're working on fixing it, which is what we are doing ... No. LO is NOT working on it. This has been discussed on other topics since late Nov (Beta1 or 2) http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-td1954148i60.html#a1969084 But now Sophie Gautier says exactly the same thing and everybody listens, but the reasoning is that now is not a good time because we are already at RC1 Just so you know - developer motivation is nearly exactly -inversely- proportional to griping :-) Now, it would be great if you could jump in and help out fix up the packaging - do you have a Windows machine you can get a build going on ? I have collaborated (and still do) on several open source projects. I know that. But sometimes provocation is the only way to get noticed and answered to... I do have a Windows machine and I have been testing the builds. I don't know how to code. My contribution is helping others on the Users forum. And I'm willing to report the bugs I find when a proper bug tracker is set up. I'm not a leecher or a troll. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Comments-on-RC1-tp2028874p2040567.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
