[Libreoffice-qa] Crash in Impress in slideshow mode with linked movie ?

[Jean-Baptiste Faure]

Hi,

it seems that Impress in LO 3.5.0 crashes under *MS-Windows* in
slideshow mode when you try to show a slide with a linked movie (menu
Insert -> Movie and Sound...).

No problem for me under Ubuntu.

Can you confirm ? Sorry, no time today to check bugzilla.

Best regards.
JBF
-- 
Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents.
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Java 7 support in LO 3.4.5 (was: [Libreoffice] minutes of tech. steering call ...)

[Michael Meeks]

On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 19:53 +, Pedro Lino wrote:
> Uninstalled Java 6 rev 29.
> Run LO 3.4.4. Executed File, Wizard, Letter. Reported missing Java
> Run LOdev 3.5.0 Build ID: f923851-7f15fca-1f1fd1a-ca8e46d-5bcbce4.
> Executed File, Wizard, Letter. LOdev crashed.

Gosh; when you say 'crashed' - it took down the whole office suite ?
that is a pretty horrendous existing bug it'd be nice to fix.

> Conclusion
> LO 3.4.4 works like a charm but won't detect Java 7;

Right there is no support there.

> LO 3.5.0 crashes on Wizard execution if Java is not installed or was
> not detected. Works as expected when Java is detected or selected.

So - on this basis, it sounds like supporting Java 7 is something we
should be doing, if only to avoid the crashes when it is not present ;-)
Having said that - the relevant components will be disabled if there was
no Java on the system at install time.

> One question: if both Java versions are installed and I do not specify
> which one to use, which version is used?

You can select it in tools->options IIRC, otherwise the latest version.

Thanks so much for testing,

ATB,

Michael.

-- 
michael.me...@suse.com  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] [ANNOUNCE] libreoffice-3.4.99.1 tag created (3.5.0-beta1)

[Petr Mladek]

Petr Mladek píše v Po 12. 12. 2011 v 18:34 +0100:
> Hi,
> 
> there have been created the libreoffice-3.4.99.1 tag for 3.5.0-beta1 release.
> The corresponding official builds will be available within 4 days or so.

I am sorry. I created the source tarballs from a wrong directory (beta0
was made from master), so they were wrong. Note that the beta1 tag was
correct in git. Just the source tarballs were wrong.

I have updated them at
http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/src/ 3 hours ago.

If you want to be sure that you have the right version. Please compare
it with the attached .asc files. For example you could do:

for file in *.asc ; do echo $file ; gpg2 --verify $file ; done 2>&1 |
less



Also I have uploaded alternative tarballs compressed by xz!

The LZMA compression safes 65GB of 355GB (18%) in compare with bz2.
I think that we could provide both bzip2 and xz tarballs for some time.
I guess that everyone will want only .xz tarballs in the long term.


Thanks a lot Tomas (scarabeus) for finding the problem with wrong
tarballs. Also thank him for the idea of LZMA compression.

Big apologies if you used wrong tarballs. I have updated my release
notes, so it should not happen again.


Best Regards,
Petr


libreoffice-binfilter-3.4.99.1.tar.bz2.asc
Description: PGP signature


libreoffice-core-3.4.99.1.tar.bz2.asc
Description: PGP signature


libreoffice-dictionaries-3.4.99.1.tar.bz2.asc
Description: PGP signature


libreoffice-help-3.4.99.1.tar.bz2.asc
Description: PGP signature


libreoffice-translations-3.4.99.1.tar.bz2.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Java 7 support in LO 3.4.5 (was: [Libreoffice] minutes of tech. steering call ...)

[Pedro Lino]

>> Executed File, Wizard, Letter. LOdev crashed.
>
>        Gosh; when you say 'crashed' - it took down the whole office suite ?
> that is a pretty horrendous existing bug it'd be nice to fix.

Yep. I would say so :)

>> Conclusion
>> LO 3.4.4 works like a charm but won't detect Java 7;
>
>        Right there is no support there.

I know that. Just reported it because I'm happy about 3.4.4 :)

>        So - on this basis, it sounds like supporting Java 7 is something we
> should be doing, if only to avoid the crashes when it is not present ;-)
> Having said that - the relevant components will be disabled if there was
> no Java on the system at install time.

What do you mean disabled? Is it automatically enabled when/if Java is
installed? If not then it would be better to keep it enabled and just
pop the warning (like in 3.4.4)

>        You can select it in tools->options IIRC, otherwise the latest version.

Yes I know how to select it. I just wanted to know the criteria.

--
Pedro
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Which nightly/daily build should be used?

[Petr Mladek]

Hi Pedro,

I think that you can't do a mistake. Any the suggested builds were good
for testing.

Pedro Lino píše v Ne 11. 12. 2011 v 23:28 +:
> The problem arises again:
> 
> For Beta0 testing Petr Mladek suggests getting the latest from
> http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/Win-x86@6-fast/libreoffice-3-5/current/
> (this machine builds and uploads quite frequently)

This was the only place where a Windows build was available on Friday
evening. It does not matter what snapshot you use. Any newer build will
be closer to LO-3.5.0 final but you need not download every build. The
machine is fast, so there are not that many changes between the various
builds.

It is done with the default configure switches, so it might slightly
differ from the configuration used for the final build. Though, it
should be perfectly fine for 99% of testing.


> Thorsten Behrens suggests
>  http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases
> (this folder contains the Win-x86@6 MSVC build from
> 2011-12-09_12.44.50 but machine #6 only uses core, dictionaries and
> help)

This site provides "official" builds before they are available on
mirrors. We use this place to do some pre-testing before we announce
them into wide public. The build appears here usually 1-2 days after we
create the tag. Thorsten announce them on the developers mailing list.

Thorsten put here the last snapshot from the Win-x86@6-fast tinderbox on
Friday, so people would test one particular over the weekend. It was
non-standard action and we do not plan to do such things for other
betas.

You might already find here the "official" beta1 builds created from the
git tag.


> and finally Fridrich Strba suggests
> http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/Windows_Release_Configuration/libreoffice-3-5/
> (this is a build that finished compiling at 11-Dec-2011 06:51, it
> doesn't have a log but it includes all 5 repositories)

It was full language build produced on the machine where we build
release builds. Fridrich did it with exactly the same configure options
that are used for the final build => this one was closest to what we
would release.

Well, it was non-standard action. The build was built and uploaded
manually. We do not plan this for other betas. There will be the
official beta build instead.


> I repeat my previous question: Is it important for testing purposes
> how many/which repositories are used?

I think that it does not mater. Every build has advantages and
disadvantages.

The official beta builds are done on the same machine that will be used
for the final build => you are sure that it is built using the same
compiler, has the same features enabled like the final build.

The build from Win-x86@6-fast has last changes from the git repo. So,
there might already be some bugs fixed, ...


Best Regards,
Petr

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] End of the line for 3.3 family and regressions

[Petr Mladek]

Rainer Bielefeld píše v So 10. 12. 2011 v 12:59 +0100:
> Pedro Lino schrieb:
> 
> > Looking at the Release Plan chart
> 
> Pedro Lino schrieb:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I am just preparing some information concerning such regression problems 
> we will discuss during next TSC call on Thursday before I publish it.
> 
> The current results are completely in accordance with Pedro's arguments 
> and show that currently we have a much worse situation concerning 
> unfixed regression bugs than we had for 3.4.0

What do you compare? The number of regressions on LO-3.3 against OOo-3.2
and LO-3.4 against LO-3.3?

I think that it is not easy to compare. The number of bugs increases
with the number of users. It might just mean that we have more LO-3.4
users than LO-3.3 users. Also LO-3.4 was released relatively soon after
LO-3.3. 

One important thing is the severity of the regressions and how many
people and how much they annoy.

It would be great to know how many people are using LO-3.4 and LO-3.3.


Best Regards,
Petr

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] Which nightly/daily build should be used?

[Pedro Lino]

Hi Petr

>> I repeat my previous question: Is it important for testing purposes
>> how many/which repositories are used?
>
> I think that it does not mater. Every build has advantages and
> disadvantages.

Thank you for the detailed answer.
I will stick to the newly uploaded Beta1 for the moment unless told otherwise ;)

Kind regards,
Pedro
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA ideas for 3.5 WAS Re: [Libreoffice] Improving the QA and Release for 3.5

[Cor Nouws]

Hi Petr,

Cor Nouws wrote (09-12-11 13:44)


On the wiki, I added a section with the draft for the later to create
separate wiki page:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Improving_QA-Release-3.5#DRAFT_for_page_with_info_for_bug-hunting_session


Is it possible for you - without wanting to stress you - to tell smthg 
more about the expected planning?


tjanks a lot


--
 - Cor
 - http://nl.libreoffice.org

___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

[Libreoffice-qa] LibO 3.5.0 beta1 WIN7 64bit

[klaus-jürgen weghorn ol]

Hi all,
after downloading Libo-dev-3.5.0beta1_install_multi.msi today in the 
evening I installed it in WIN7 64bit in parallel to 3.4.4. But looking in

C:\Program Files (x86)\LOdev 3.5\program there were neither exes nor dlls.
Even all other folders were empty. The only full folder was the help 
folder because I installed the German help pack too.

I installed the beta user defined with obsolete filters.

--
Grüße
k-j
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibO 3.5.0 beta1 WIN7 64bit

[Thorsten Behrens]

klaus-jürgen weghorn ol wrote:
> after downloading Libo-dev-3.5.0beta1_install_multi.msi today in the
> evening I installed it in WIN7 64bit in parallel to 3.4.4. But
> looking in
> C:\Program Files (x86)\LOdev 3.5\program there were neither exes nor dlls.
> Even all other folders were empty. The only full folder was the help
> folder because I installed the German help pack too.
> I installed the beta user defined with obsolete filters.
> 
Another datapoint - WinXP, no 3.4.4 install, custom install path,
otherwise kept defaults - startmenu entries there, otherwise working
as well.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten


pgpUdHSBcPMHx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

[Libreoffice-qa] [ANN] LibreOffice 3.5.0 Beta1 test builds available

[Thorsten Behrens]

Hi *,

for 3.5.0 beta1, we're now uploading preliminary builds to a public
(but non-mirrored - so don't spread news too widely!) place, as soon
as they're available. Grab them here:

http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/pre-releases/

If you've a bit of time, please give them a try & report *critical*
bugs not yet in bugzilla here, so we can incorporate them into the
release notes, and/or roll new builds. Please note that it takes
approximately 24 hours to populate the mirrors, so that's about the
time we have to collect feedback.

Except for 

 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43455

all other Windows-specific bugs listed on

 http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Releases/3.5.0/Beta0

should be fixed.

Thanks a lot for your help,

-- Thorsten


pgpQaV1r4ktLc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] QA ideas for 3.5 WAS Re: [Libreoffice] Improving the QA and Release for 3.5

[Yifan Jiang]

Hi Cor,

I hope I didn't interrupt anything :) But here's some of my comments.

1. Thanks for Rimas and Petr's actively participating, what we did in the past
two month to improve the structure of Litmus and now the new stuff is online
and a 3.5.0 beta regression test run is created, in which we are encouraging
people to run the tests.

https://tcm.documentfoundation.org/

There are a few important changes need to notify people, especially for l10n
testers that:

- we now have the localization test cases merged together with English
cases, both in content and structure. Then we add "locale-dependent"
property for each test case.

 https://tcm.documentfoundation.org/show_test.cgi?id=3105

Specifically, a test result submitted for a locale dependent cases will
not influence the progress statistics of the test cases running in another
locale condition. For a locale independent case,the executing result will
be shared among all tests whatever locales were seleted. For locale
selection I meant the bottom field here in test configuration details set:

 http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Litmus_chose-de.png

So it is important to make people informed correct locale selection is
necessary before submitting test results.

Also it is important to let l10n people know the translation version of
test cases are not disappeared, all languages versions of test cases were
just put together to save our effort depend on how much they related with
languages.

- we abandoned the build id selection to avoid duplicating test effort. So
it is important to make people informed to actively use correct build
submitting a result in the corresponding test run. For build id selection
I also meant the field in configuration details set (the screenshot needs
to update for this...):

 http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Litmus_chose-de.png

- we grouped test cases with priorities, and it is preferred the higher
priority test cases are executed before lower ones. This can be seen
when it comes to test group selection after the above configuration set.

2. We also got the wiki page updated and cleaned up. The important start pages
to understand all related stuff can be:

http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Litmus
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Testing/Regression_Tests

3. As for the regression test plan, we got a full regression test related
section in the QA processes page typically to describe what a Litmus admin
should do when there comes a build:


http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Processes#Full_regression_test_management

Briefly speaking, we create a single test run for every beta and rc phases,
during whose time slot the test cases inside test runs are supposed to be
executed.

For example, from the release plan, we will have 3 beta builds from 5/Dec to
9/Jan. In this phase, we do NOT create three test runs, instead the only test
run "3.5.0 beta regression test" will be recommended there for nearly a month,
when continuously submitting test result in the latest 3.5 beta build is
expected.

4. Is it possible to emphasize the regression strategy in the bug hunting
session you are planning? :)

Not sure if some of the points answered your original question :) Please let
me know if anyone needs more regression test and litmus related information!
Thank you!

Best wishes,
Yifan

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:35:44PM +0100, Cor Nouws wrote:
> Hi Petr,
> 
> Cor Nouws wrote (09-12-11 13:44)
> 
> >On the wiki, I added a section with the draft for the later to create
> >separate wiki page:
> >http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/Improving_QA-Release-3.5#DRAFT_for_page_with_info_for_bug-hunting_session
> 
> Is it possible for you - without wanting to stress you - to tell
> smthg more about the expected planning?
> 
> tjanks a lot
> 
> 
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

[Libreoffice-qa] Bug 43808 - (rtl-meta) Meta bug for RTL related issues

[Rainer Bielefeld]

Hi Lior,

We have quite a lot of RTL indicators:


and
most people use RTL in Summary line
and now a new task bug
and
on  I learned 
an additional meaning ;-)


Common sense seems to be to use RTL in the Summary line, we have 30 such 
bugs, but only 2 with RTL in Whiteboard.


My suggestion:
1. We unify use of pseudo key word RTL by creating a new "sub component"
   That, for example, will also appear in the assistant
   
2. We adapt help in the wiki due to 1.
3. We modify Bug 43808 to
   "Bug 43808 - (rtl-meta) Meta bug for MOST ANNOYING  RTL related
issues"

What do you think?

Best regards

Rainer
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/

Re: [Libreoffice-qa] LibO 3.5.0 beta1 WIN7 64bit

[klaus-jürgen weghorn ol]

Am 13.12.2011 23:42, schrieb klaus-jürgen weghorn ol:

Hi all,
after downloading Libo-dev-3.5.0beta1_install_multi.msi today in the
evening I installed it in WIN7 64bit in parallel to 3.4.4. But looking in
C:\Program Files (x86)\LOdev 3.5\program there were neither exes nor dlls.
Even all other folders were empty. The only full folder was the help
folder because I installed the German help pack too.
I installed the beta user defined with obsolete filters.


I made a bug report for this:
https://www.libreoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43813

--
Grüße
k-j
___
List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list
Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org
Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/