Bug#1042994: libreoffice-draw experimental: LibreOffice Draw (and LO Impress) do not start
tag 1042994 + unreproducible tag 1042994 + moreinfo thanks Hi, Am 04.08.23 um 01:22 schrieb Thomas Florek: Launching LO Draw (and also LO Impress) did not work, either from the plasma desktop or from the console. Works fine here. (Clean sid VM with experimentals LO) Even tried extra in KDE (X11 and wayland). I see you have non-Debian packages installed. try with a clean Debian? Regards, Rene
Bug#1041899: marked as pending in libreoffice
Control: tag -1 pending Hello, Bug #1041899 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 of the fix at: https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/commit/6198096d43410f91ce09b5602ce6bbdfb31e2330 * debian/control.reportbuilder.in: also fix version in Replaces: here (closes: #1041899) (this message was generated automatically) -- Greetings https://bugs.debian.org/1041899
Bug#1041837: marked as pending in libreoffice
Control: tag -1 pending Hello, Bug #1041837 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 of the fix at: https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/commit/3693fc16ba810d9e48a51ac21a3ad84579ad883d add/update Replaces: in -draw/-draw-nogui: libreoffice-impress (<< 4:7.5.4~rc1-1), libreoffice-impress-nogui (<< 4:7.5.4~rc1-1) (closes: #1041837) (this message was generated automatically) -- Greetings https://bugs.debian.org/1041837
Bug#1041837: marked as pending in libreoffice
Control: tag -1 pending Hello, Bug #1041837 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 of the fix at: https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/commit/3693fc16ba810d9e48a51ac21a3ad84579ad883d add/update Replaces: in -draw/-draw-nogui: libreoffice-impress (<< 4:7.5.4~rc1-1), libreoffice-impress-nogui (<< 4:7.5.4~rc1-1) (closes: #1041837) (this message was generated automatically) -- Greetings https://bugs.debian.org/1041837
Bug#1041837: closed by René Engelhard (Re: Bug#1041837: libreoffice-draw: undeclared file conflict with libreoffice-impress-nogui <= trixie: /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/
Control: found -1 4:7.5.4~rc1-1 Control: fixed -1 4:7.6.0~rc1-1 Am 24.07.23 um 19:27 schrieb Helmut Grohne: Control: reopen -1 Control: found -1 4:7.5.5-2 Control: found -1 4:7.5.5~rc1-2 On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 08:09:07AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: 08:26 < helmut> _rene_: re libreoffice (short on time atm): seems like I messed something up, please close my report. (...) Further context here. On IRC you also said that this was fixed in experimental. 20:51 * _rene_ lost hope What? I didn't say anything on IRC about this. And I said experimental (NEW). I even pointed to libreoffice-uiconfig-* of 7.6 (-> NEW) Also note that experimentals version is LOWER than sids. So obviously "fixed in experimental" does not make any sense here otherwise. In contrast *YOU* said it could be closed. I followed. /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/modules/simpress/ui/sidebarslidebackground.ui /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/layoutlist.xml /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/objectlist.xml /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/styles.xml All of those are in -draw *and* draw-nogui (and those two conflict, so OK). That's where they belong (well, probably not needed in -nogui but anyway.) What looks missing indeed is some Replaces, I bumped them to go sure hopefully. And as said in 7.6 it's fixed since the uiconfig-impress package should have the correct Replaces: Regards, Rene
Bug#1041837: closed by René Engelhard (Re: Bug#1041837: libreoffice-draw: undeclared file conflict with libreoffice-impress-nogui <= trixie: /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/
Control: found -1 4:7.5.4~rc1-1 Control: fixed -1 4:7.6.0~rc1-1 Am 24.07.23 um 19:27 schrieb Helmut Grohne: Control: reopen -1 Control: found -1 4:7.5.5-2 Control: found -1 4:7.5.5~rc1-2 On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 08:09:07AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: 08:26 < helmut> _rene_: re libreoffice (short on time atm): seems like I messed something up, please close my report. (...) Further context here. On IRC you also said that this was fixed in experimental. 20:51 * _rene_ lost hope What? I didn't say anything on IRC about this. And I said experimental (NEW). I even pointed to libreoffice-uiconfig-* of 7.6 (-> NEW) Also note that experimentals version is LOWER than sids. So obviously "fixed in experimental" does not make any sense here otherwise. In contrast *YOU* said it could be closed. I followed. /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/modules/simpress/ui/sidebarslidebackground.ui /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/layoutlist.xml /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/objectlist.xml /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/styles.xml All of those are in -draw *and* draw-nogui (and those two conflict, so OK). That's where they belong (well, probably not needed in -nogui but anyway.) What looks missing indeed is some Replaces, I bumped them to go sure hopefully. And as said in 7.6 it's fixed since the uiconfig-impress package should have the correct Replaces: Regards, Rene
Bug#1041837: closed by René Engelhard (Re: Bug#1041837: libreoffice-draw: undeclared file conflict with libreoffice-impress-nogui <= trixie: /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/
Control: found -1 4:7.5.4~rc1-1 Control: fixed -1 4:7.6.0~rc1-1 Am 24.07.23 um 19:27 schrieb Helmut Grohne: Control: reopen -1 Control: found -1 4:7.5.5-2 Control: found -1 4:7.5.5~rc1-2 On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 08:09:07AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: 08:26 < helmut> _rene_: re libreoffice (short on time atm): seems like I messed something up, please close my report. (...) Further context here. On IRC you also said that this was fixed in experimental. 20:51 * _rene_ lost hope What? I didn't say anything on IRC about this. And I said experimental (NEW). I even pointed to libreoffice-uiconfig-* of 7.6 (-> NEW) Also note that experimentals version is LOWER than sids. So obviously "fixed in experimental" does not make any sense here otherwise. In contrast *YOU* said it could be closed. I followed. /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/modules/simpress/ui/sidebarslidebackground.ui /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/layoutlist.xml /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/objectlist.xml /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/styles.xml All of those are in -draw *and* draw-nogui (and those two conflict, so OK). That's where they belong (well, probably not needed in -nogui but anyway.) What looks missing indeed is some Replaces, I bumped them to go sure hopefully. And as said in 7.6 it's fixed since the uiconfig-impress package should have the correct Replaces: Regards, Rene
Bug#1041837: libreoffice-draw: undeclared file conflict with libreoffice-impress-nogui <= trixie: /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/*.xml
Hi, Am 24.07.23 um 06:52 schrieb Helmut Grohne: libreoffice-draw installs /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/layoutlist.xml and /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/objectlist.xml which are also contained in libreoffice-impress-nogui from bullseye to trixie. Mmh, indeed. Already fixed in experimental (well, NEW since ~ 2 months) already though: Package: libreoffice-uiconfig-impress Section: misc Architecture: all Replaces: libreoffice-common (<< 4:7.6.0~beta1), libreoffice-draw (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1), libreoffice-draw-nogui (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1), libreoffice-impress (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1), libreoffice-impress-nogui (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1) Leaves "just" sid. Regards, Rene
Bug#1041837: libreoffice-draw: undeclared file conflict with libreoffice-impress-nogui <= trixie: /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/*.xml
Hi, Am 24.07.23 um 06:52 schrieb Helmut Grohne: libreoffice-draw installs /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/layoutlist.xml and /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/objectlist.xml which are also contained in libreoffice-impress-nogui from bullseye to trixie. Mmh, indeed. Already fixed in experimental (well, NEW since ~ 2 months) already though: Package: libreoffice-uiconfig-impress Section: misc Architecture: all Replaces: libreoffice-common (<< 4:7.6.0~beta1), libreoffice-draw (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1), libreoffice-draw-nogui (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1), libreoffice-impress (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1), libreoffice-impress-nogui (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1) Leaves "just" sid. Regards, Rene
Bug#1041837: libreoffice-draw: undeclared file conflict with libreoffice-impress-nogui <= trixie: /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/*.xml
Hi, Am 24.07.23 um 06:52 schrieb Helmut Grohne: libreoffice-draw installs /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/layoutlist.xml and /usr/lib/libreoffice/share/config/soffice.cfg/simpress/objectlist.xml which are also contained in libreoffice-impress-nogui from bullseye to trixie. Mmh, indeed. Already fixed in experimental (well, NEW since ~ 2 months) already though: Package: libreoffice-uiconfig-impress Section: misc Architecture: all Replaces: libreoffice-common (<< 4:7.6.0~beta1), libreoffice-draw (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1), libreoffice-draw-nogui (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1), libreoffice-impress (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1), libreoffice-impress-nogui (<< 4:7.6.0~rc1) Leaves "just" sid. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:09 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? See Overview: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice Thanks. I don't see anyone obvious there (except not running *any* test) there offhand, though. Even many system-libraries - as I do. Except maybe gcc 12 vs. gcc 13 which might affect the optimization breakage... Will have look some more, though. (And retry with gcc 13 which is default in Debian now, too) Regards, Rene
Bug#1019862: invisible mouse pointer: still an issue in bookworm 12.1
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:17 schrieb Andreas B. Mundt: Hi Rene, all, first, many thanks for maintaining libreoffice! We are running the KDE plasma desktop environment in our school and observe probably the same issue here: Sure? The description in the original bug doesn't talk about mouse cursors? Theer's that wayland message, indeed, but.. Especially in libreoffice draw, when selecting for example the 'lines and arrows'-tool, the mouse pointer usually becomes a cross and a line on the drawing area. However, it becomes invisible in KDE/Plasma on wayland. I found the following related upstream bug reports with patches already, but unfortunatelly they are not applied to the libreoffice 7.4 series or to qt6-wayland (cc Debian Qt/KDE Maintainers): https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15 https://git.libreoffice.org/core/+/091f56e50748e3fd807b9bae88652b68834aac3a%5E%21 So fixed in 7.5.2 then... I could upload a backport if 7.5 even migrated to testing The related qt6 report is here: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-95434 https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtwayland/+/461361/3/src/client/qwaylandcursor.cpp But that is Qt6, but Qt5. The kf5 plugin uses Qt5 "of course". You say "or to qt6-wayland". If at all - for KDE -, this needs to be fixed in Qt5 (in whatever package is equivalent to said qt6-wayland) additonally tp qt6-wayland. Regards, Rene
Bug#1019862: invisible mouse pointer: still an issue in bookworm 12.1
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:17 schrieb Andreas B. Mundt: Hi Rene, all, first, many thanks for maintaining libreoffice! We are running the KDE plasma desktop environment in our school and observe probably the same issue here: Sure? The description in the original bug doesn't talk about mouse cursors? Theer's that wayland message, indeed, but.. Especially in libreoffice draw, when selecting for example the 'lines and arrows'-tool, the mouse pointer usually becomes a cross and a line on the drawing area. However, it becomes invisible in KDE/Plasma on wayland. I found the following related upstream bug reports with patches already, but unfortunatelly they are not applied to the libreoffice 7.4 series or to qt6-wayland (cc Debian Qt/KDE Maintainers): https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15 https://git.libreoffice.org/core/+/091f56e50748e3fd807b9bae88652b68834aac3a%5E%21 So fixed in 7.5.2 then... I could upload a backport if 7.5 even migrated to testing The related qt6 report is here: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-95434 https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtwayland/+/461361/3/src/client/qwaylandcursor.cpp But that is Qt6, but Qt5. The kf5 plugin uses Qt5 "of course". You say "or to qt6-wayland". If at all - for KDE -, this needs to be fixed in Qt5 (in whatever package is equivalent to said qt6-wayland) additonally tp qt6-wayland. Regards, Rene
Re: Bug#1019862: invisible mouse pointer: still an issue in bookworm 12.1
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 16:17 schrieb Andreas B. Mundt: Hi Rene, all, first, many thanks for maintaining libreoffice! We are running the KDE plasma desktop environment in our school and observe probably the same issue here: Sure? The description in the original bug doesn't talk about mouse cursors? Theer's that wayland message, indeed, but.. Especially in libreoffice draw, when selecting for example the 'lines and arrows'-tool, the mouse pointer usually becomes a cross and a line on the drawing area. However, it becomes invisible in KDE/Plasma on wayland. I found the following related upstream bug reports with patches already, but unfortunatelly they are not applied to the libreoffice 7.4 series or to qt6-wayland (cc Debian Qt/KDE Maintainers): https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15 https://git.libreoffice.org/core/+/091f56e50748e3fd807b9bae88652b68834aac3a%5E%21 So fixed in 7.5.2 then... I could upload a backport if 7.5 even migrated to testing The related qt6 report is here: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-95434 https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtwayland/+/461361/3/src/client/qwaylandcursor.cpp But that is Qt6, but Qt5. The kf5 plugin uses Qt5 "of course". You say "or to qt6-wayland". If at all - for KDE -, this needs to be fixed in Qt5 (in whatever package is equivalent to said qt6-wayland) additonally tp qt6-wayland. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Am 22.07.23 um 15:53 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS? https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:RISCV/libreoffice/standard/riscv64 Thanks... But maybe I am too blind. I don't see the actual spec + related files anywhere? Repositories isn't it either, it just gives me (src)rpms. I could look there, but... (Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy) Perhaps it is a matter of using a good java. Have you tried java 19 or 20? No, 17 only. The test extension in the smoketest indeed is Java, but given this also affects python extensions (lightproof) I'd bet it 's a general, non-Java issue. Even if Java was broken lightproof should have worked. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 15:07 schrieb Andreas Schwab: Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. $ find /usr/lib64/libreoffice/ -name "*smoke*" /usr/lib64/libreoffice/program/classes/smoketest.jar How can I run that? You can't from that, ttbomk. You miss other files needed which are not ending up in the installation. You build it and run make subsequentcheck in smoketest (or a general make check). But you might need to build prereqs first, see https://salsa.debian.org/libreoffice-team/libreoffice/libreoffice/-/blob/master/rules#L2340 ff. Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi,
Am 22.07.23 um 15:02 schrieb Andreas Schwab:
On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual
thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't
appear as bundled extensions.
$ unopkg list --bundled
All deployed bundled extensions:
Identifier: org.openoffice.en.hunspell.dictionaries
Version: 2022.05.01
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.package-bundle
Description:
bundled Packages: {
URL:
vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Lightproof.components
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.uno-components
Description:
URL: vnd.sun.star.expand:$BUNDLED_EXTENSIONS/lightproof-en/Linguistic.xcu
is registered: yes
Media-Type: application/vnd.sun.star.configuration-data
Description:
}
Interesting.
Now the question is what is different between openSUSEs libreoffice
package and Debians...
Does opensuse have some public git/$VCS?
(Though I would more bet of some system evironment thingy)
Regards,
Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:34 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) How can I test that? I have never used libreoffice before, so I don't know what to look for. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00010.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html (some of them says mips64el, but as said in my other replies, the smoketest failure is the same symptom there, just on riscv64 actual unopkg add does nothing effectively.) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:28 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Yes. _basically_. (Only with -O0 or maybe -Os as upstreams makefile says, though) On openSUSE Factory, libreoffice is built with the usual compiler flags, wich includes full optimisation and hardening. Which gives the smoketest test failure here I pointed out (again) in my other mail. Regards. Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:25 schrieb Andreas Schwab: On Jul 22 2023, Rene Engelhard wrote: Just not registering or unregistering *any* extension. What does that mean? I haven't seen any errors about extensions. Do you run the testsuite? Especially the smoketest? And you are replying to exactly a thread which (later) talks about extensions being broken. So I wonder why you didn' t take the previous mails into account? https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg00014.html is for manual thing. And the IRC log shows that even libreoffice-lightproof-en etc don't appear as bundled extensions. https://lists.debian.org/debian-riscv/2023/07/msg1.html is for the smoketest (that one's mips64el, but same symptom on riscv64) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:09 schrieb Rene Engelhard: And that included packaged extensions so if they install but don't work that's a grave bug. And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) (Whether one needs the NLPSolver or Wiki Publisher or so can definitely be discussed, though) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:09 schrieb Rene Engelhard: And that included packaged extensions so if they install but don't work that's a grave bug. And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) (Whether one needs the NLPSolver or Wiki Publisher or so can definitely be discussed, though) Regards, Rene
Re: unbreaking LibreOffices tests on at least release architectures
Hi, Am 22.07.23 um 14:09 schrieb Rene Engelhard: And that included packaged extensions so if they install but don't work that's a grave bug. And that includes LibreOffice-bundled extensions like the english,hungarian,russian grammar checker for example. Ot external finnish spellchecking, hyphenation and grammer checking. Or turkish spellchecing. And those are extensions written in python which neither register when registering manually nor when being installed as bundled extensions (see the discussion in this thread, not going to reiterate) (Whether one needs the NLPSolver or Wiki Publisher or so can definitely be discussed, though) Regards, Rene
