Re: [libreoffice-users] search does not find (
Hi ThomasI just tried it in the Linux version and it works fine. Had a document with ( and ) in it and it found both just on a straight find.KeithOn 18/06/11 12:07, Thomas Blasejewicz wrote:Good morning (Windox XP desktop, LO 3.3.0) just noticed: the search function DOES NOT find ordinary brackets: (, ), [, ] etc. (not regular expression etc. ...) THESE are not any form of special characters. Every software I know of with a search function can find these ASCII characters. What is so special about them, that LO does NOT find them (they are right there on the screen!). Recently I have started working with LO, but this kind of really stupid problems makes me wonder ... In case there is a solution, I would like to hear it. Thank you. Thomas-- God bless you Keith Bates 4 Mooloobar St Narrabri 2390 Ask Jesus into your life He is The Way, The Truth and The Life -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] search does not find (
Hi Thomas, Thomas Blasejewicz wrote (18-06-11 04:07) Good morning (Windox XP desktop, LO 3.3.0) just noticed: the search function DOES NOT find ordinary brackets: (, ), [, ] etc. (not regular expression etc. ...) No problems here in 3.3.0 on Ubuntu. Maybe you can try this version? Cheers, -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] MSO's 80/20 rule: 80% of the people use about 20% of the functionality.
Il 17/06/2011 19:34, jorge ha scritto: Hi ! I think the most import is that there are several kinds of users, at least in OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice. Some of them use some features as statistical funcions; other use pivot table or macros ... as examples in CALC. Same in Writer, Base, Impress and others. Exceptions users use a lot of features at the same time ... but is so important to have on hand all that features because if you need one of them you only have to click for using... that is great at least for me ... I didn't use all the features but I 've used much of them in some different moments since I use Open Sourse office suites. Regards, Jorge Rodríguez ___ Yes I agree, you dont' know when you need a function so if you find it at glance instead of install is very better than install it, nowdays disk space are very cheap:-)) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] search does not find (
At 11:07 18/06/2011 +0900, Thomas Blasejewicz wrote: (Windows XP desktop, LO 3.3.0) just noticed: the search function DOES NOT find ordinary brackets: (, ), [, ] etc. (not regular expression etc. ...) THESE are not any form of special characters. Every software I know of with a search function can find these ASCII characters. What is so special about them, that LO does NOT find them (they are right there on the screen!). I'm not sure what you mean by (not regular expression etc. ...). If you have Regular expressions ticked in the Find Replace dialogue, then parentheses and (square) brackets are indeed special characters - as are braces. Recently I have started working with LO, but this kind of really stupid problems makes me wonder ... Does this really count as stupid? In case there is a solution, I would like to hear it. o If you are not using regular expressions, remove the tick from Regular expressions. o If you are using regular expressions, you need to escape each special character with a backslash. A search for \( or \) will find your parentheses. I trust this helps. Brian Barker -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] search does not find (
Cor Nouws wrote (18-06-11 09:42) Hi Thomas, Thomas Blasejewicz wrote (18-06-11 04:07) Good morning (Windox XP desktop, LO 3.3.0) just noticed: the search function DOES NOT find ordinary brackets: (, ), [, ] etc. (not regular expression etc. ...) No problems here in 3.3.0 on Ubuntu. Oops, should have been 3.3.3 :-) Maybe you can try this version? Cheers, -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] MSO's 80/20 rule: 80% of the people use about 20% of the functionality.
planas jsloz...@gmail.com writes: Lee, On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 21:42 +0200, lee wrote: planas jsloz...@gmail.com writes: I believe that the 80/20 is somewhat misleading. As noted earlier must use approximately 20% but not the same 20%. I would estimate that somewhere around 50% of all the features are used reasonably often and the rest are rarely used. There are substantial features 100% of the users use, aren´t there? What´s the percentage of such substantial features compared to all features? If substantial features make for 20%, you would have 80% percent of all features of which 50% are rarely used. If I´m not mistaken, that makes already 60% of all features used reasonably often. When you need to make a package that provides 60% of all available features, you might find that there´s another 20% or 30% of all available features that need to be packaged as well because of dependencies. When you need to package 80--90% of all features anyway, how important is it to put effort into packaging only 10--20% of all features seperately? The current problem is we do not have any good information of what features are not very important and do not extend the functionality for all but a few users. The question is what mix of included and extensible features should be available beyond those that are important. Which features are important? One of the problems is you need either a lot different users surveyed at the same time or smaller number surveyed over a longer period of time. For example, most of the time I do not use a table of contents in my documents but when I need the feature I must have it. How many people need this feature irregularly versus those that often use it? I do not know. There you go: When you need a particular feature, you must have it. When you need it, it is totally irrelevant how often you or other users use it. How often a feature is used and/or how many users use it doesn´t say anything about how important the feature is. When someone needs it, it has to be there. One of the marketing tricks is tout all the features you have in your package without regard to how useful many are to all but a handful of users. Look carefully at some the commercial software ads and notice how often they tout features that look nice but you probably will never use. What´s worse? Having features you don´t need often or not at all in the software you use or having to look for other software you don´t use and that has the particular feature (and maybe not others) you happen to need (maybe only once ever) and use that instead? And what about one of the most important features: being able to create a text or a spreadsheet or a presentation or some other kind of document you can still use 20 or 60 years later? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Side by side install of LibO and OOo
Hi .., aqualung wrote (18-06-11 06:12) It would be nice to have the option of keeping OOo, for the odd case when something that works in it is broken in LibreOffice, or when you need OOo installed in order to provide help to another user who has OOo but not LibO. I think that is a fair idea. The way to do this, I guess, would be to add an option in LibO's installation, e.g.: Thanks for your text. Too me, it looks good, though I am not interested myself at all, since I use parallel installation all the time ;-) Could be handy for you too: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Installing_in_parallel But for your idea: the best is to have a look at bugZilla if there already is an issue for this, where you might add your thoughts. And if not, create a new issue. See this page for info: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugReport Kind regards, -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: How can I reset all settings?
Dear Jan I had a similar problem where I needed an as-new clean re-install I spent many hours on this including editing the registry (never a good idea). I wish that I had posted this first, as Roxy's idea of using Revo-Uninstall does the same (if not better) in a matter of minutes. There were other cleaners suggested, but this is the one I chose to try. However, just out of interest, the configuration files are held in docs settings/your user-name?/application data/LibraOffice which is not deleted with the standard windows un-install (bad dog!). If you say (do as I do in Options), change the rulers in Write to inches and the background colour to blue(chart12), you will find that 4 files are changed in this directory. I have absolutely no idea what does what and will probably never need to know. All the best John B On 17/06/2011 21:22, NoOp wrote: On 06/17/2011 12:51 PM, Gérard FARGEOT wrote: Message du 17/06/11 21:23 De : Jan Parttimaa A : users@global.libreoffice.org Copie à : Objet : [libreoffice-users] How can I reset all settings? Hi all! I have a question. How can I reset all settings and toolbars to defaults in LibreOffice? I already tried to unistall and reinstall LibreOffice and yes I restarted PC after unistalling but it didn't work. I still have non-default settings. I use Windows 7 (64-bit). Sincerely Jan Parttimaa Reset your user profile : http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?p=58401#p58401 Gérard And change all 'openoffice.org' to 'libreoffice.org' in those instructions. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] search does not find (
Dear Thomas Whilst I am not suggesting you try LibraOffice 3.4, but it works on my computer using 3.4 It was not an exhaustive test but it found ( ) * # [ % - until I got fed up John B On 18/06/2011 03:07, Thomas Blasejewicz wrote: Good morning (Windox XP desktop, LO 3.3.0) just noticed: the search function DOES NOT find ordinary brackets: (, ), [, ] etc. (not regular expression etc. ...) THESE are not any form of special characters. Every software I know of with a search function can find these ASCII characters. What is so special about them, that LO does NOT find them (they are right there on the screen!). Recently I have started working with LO, but this kind of really stupid problems makes me wonder ... In case there is a solution, I would like to hear it. Thank you. Thomas -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] search does not find (
Hi :) The 3.3.0 was the first release and it might be good to try a more recent version but i would recommend the 3.3.2 or wait a week or so and then try the 3.3.3 as it was released just a couple of days ago. The 3.4.0 seems to have a lot of issues for quite a few people and the 3.4.1 is due out soon which fixes a lot of issues. The 3.3.x series is the stable branch and the 3.4.x seems to be testing newer perhaps more advanced features. Regards from Tom :) From: John B jo...@email2.me To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Sat, 18 June, 2011 12:33:17 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] search does not find ( Dear Thomas Whilst I am not suggesting you try LibraOffice 3.4, but it works on my computer using 3.4 It was not an exhaustive test but it found ( ) * # [ % - until I got fed up John B On 18/06/2011 03:07, Thomas Blasejewicz wrote: Good morning (Windox XP desktop, LO 3.3.0) just noticed: the search function DOES NOT find ordinary brackets: (, ), [, ] etc. (not regular expression etc. ...) THESE are not any form of special characters. Every software I know of with a search function can find these ASCII characters. What is so special about them, that LO does NOT find them (they are right there on the screen!). Recently I have started working with LO, but this kind of really stupid problems makes me wonder ... In case there is a solution, I would like to hear it. Thank you. Thomas -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: How can I reset all settings?
Hi :) There are 2 advantages to NOT un-installing users configurations when the package is un-installed. 1. When you reinstall again later on everything is set-up the way you like it. 2. You might have templates, dictionaries, even images in the gallery that might be painful to lose Both can be a huge advantage when upgrading or reinstalling. Being able to rename the config folder so that you get back to factory defaults for LO saves the hassle of having to reinstall just because something went a bit wonky. It can be an excellent quick-fi and can also be used to trouble-shoot down to exactly where a problem occurred. I wonder if it's possible to copypaste the config to different machines (eg in a corporate network) so that they all have some good settings? I might play around with that on Wednesday (if i remember). It does seem a bit dumb, untidy or geeky at first but allows you a lot of finesse and control. Regards from Tom :) From: John B jo...@email2.me To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Sat, 18 June, 2011 12:23:20 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: How can I reset all settings? Dear Jan I had a similar problem where I needed an as-new clean re-install I spent many hours on this including editing the registry (never a good idea). I wish that I had posted this first, as Roxy's idea of using Revo-Uninstall does the same (if not better) in a matter of minutes. There were other cleaners suggested, but this is the one I chose to try. However, just out of interest, the configuration files are held in docs settings/your user-name?/application data/LibraOfficewhich is not deleted with the standard windows un-install (bad dog!). If you say (do as I do in Options), change the rulers in Write to inches and the background colour to blue(chart12), you will find that 4 files are changed in this directory. I have absolutely no idea what does what and will probably never need to know. All the best John B On 17/06/2011 21:22, NoOp wrote: On 06/17/2011 12:51 PM, Gérard FARGEOT wrote: Message du 17/06/11 21:23 De : Jan Parttimaa A : users@global.libreoffice.org Copie à : Objet : [libreoffice-users] How can I reset all settings? Hi all! I have a question. How can I reset all settings and toolbars to defaults in LibreOffice? I already tried to unistall and reinstall LibreOffice and yes I restarted PC after unistalling but it didn't work. I still have non-default settings. I use Windows 7 (64-bit). Sincerely Jan Parttimaa Reset your user profile : http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?p=58401#p58401 Gérard And change all 'openoffice.org' to 'libreoffice.org' in those instructions. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Side by side install of LibO and OOo
Cor Twayne, Thank you for your replies. Twayne wrote: If you think about the preceding paragraph, it's saying that both OOo and LO use the same file types and thus there could be confusion to the program as to which program should open a given file. Why should there be confusion? If LibO during installation grabs all ODF file types for itself, then doubleclicking on, say, an .odt file will launch LibO Writer but not OOo Wtiter. OOo could then still open the .odt via File Open. And vice versa, if the user is given a choice during LibO installation to leave existing file associations intact. Ditto for Microsoft Office file types. Twayne wrote: Since you're apparently leaving OOo for LO Not so fast . I'd like to have both OOo and LibO coexisting on my system indefinitely. And I would expect to be able to make either program the default for all (or only some) possible file types via Windows Control Panel at any time. I've searched the bugzilla to see if this has been filed as a bug, did not find one. However, I found this: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33844, which suggests that LibO does not play nicely with OOo (but maybe it's only a problem for Portable LibO?) I wouldn't mind not being able to have both LibO and OOo open and running simultaneously, but I find the suggestion to uninstall OOo before installing LibO mystifying. snip -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Side-by-side-install-of-LibO-and-OOo-tp3078835p3080029.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] gmane test
test Larry -- _ Larry I. Gusaas Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada Website: http://larry-gusaas.com An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs. - Edgard Varese -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Disappearing Spell Checker
Well, its a moot point now whether it is related to one of those bugs or not, as I went ahead and installed 3.3.3 final. But now have another problem as I ran back into the installation problem that started with 3.3.2. The installation hangs - it will not complete on its own. It gets near what you think is the end of the installation and it hangs my CPU at 50% usage. The first install try I hit cancel - nothing happens. I hit the X (close window) on the installer dialog window and nothing happens. I open Process Explorer and unopkg.bin has my CPU hung at 50%. So, I just let it sit there like that for close to 15 minutes. Then I killed the unopkg.bin file in Process Explorer. The install window closed and became a window telling me that LO installation had been stopped - that it could be installed again later. I waited about 15 minutes and tried again. This time I got the window with 3 options: Modify, Repair, or Remove. I choose Repair. Again at a point when you would think the install should be complete (the status bar quits moving altogether), it hangs my CPU up again at 50%. So I don't do anything this time but wait for 25 minutes. Status bar on the installation window has still not moved and my CPU is still at 50%, hung there by unopkg.bin. But this time when I kill that process I get the Installation Complete window, and it appears all is well and I have LO 3.3.3 installed. Haven't found anything wrong yet. This started with the first install of LO 3.3.2. It also happened with 3.3.2 both times I repaired spell check by using the Modify function of install. So that was 3 times with 3.3.2 and now the first time with 3.3.3. I run Win7-64. Oh, yes, I had completely uninstalled OO, using RevoUninstaller, a few hours to doing this new install. Thought that maybe somehow the side by side installation might be doing something with the install package. But that didn't have any effect on the installation process. Roxy Hi, On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 05:28, Roxy Robinson wrote: About a week ago I posted a problem I have had with the spell checker disappearing - yes, that's correct - disappearing. This will be the 3rd time since I installed LO 3.3.2, which was installed a couple days after the final release became available. I was typing in some recipes tonight and misspelled a word - actually realized I misspelled it about the time I finished the word. Well, my little red squiggly didn't show up. What the heck - not again! So I went to Writing Aids in Options. Once again, I do not have ANY Available language modules in the window. And of course, if there aren't any available, it can't check the spelling. This is absolutely crazy. Oh, well, I have the 3.3.3 final downloaded so I guess this will be as good as time as any to install it and see what happens. I run Win7 - 64. Maybe related to the following bug reports: (1) Bug 37439 - Dictionary access lost [duplicate of Bug 37195] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37439 - Please have a look at the screenshots (Attachments/Details) - You might try (s. Comment #1): 1. Close LibO. 2. Go to your user profile: rename the folder 'bundled' [path: '...\3\user\extensions\bundled'], e.g.: 'bundled_old'. 3. Restart LibO: A new folder 'bundled' will be created in the user profile. All bundled dictionaries will be available. See also: (2) Bug 37195 - Dictionary access lost after LibO upgrade https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37195 mjk -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: gmane test
On 06/18/2011 10:07 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote: test Larry Working. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: gmane test
On 06/18/2011 10:07 AM, Larry Gusaas wrote: test Larry I'd asked on the gmane.discuss group Adam Sjøgren was kind enough to fix the issue: On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:51:16 -0700, NoOp wrote: From us...@libreoffice.org http://gmane.org/list-address.php?group=gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.user To users@global.libreoffice.org Ok; updated. Best regards, Adam -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Error saving LibreOffice Documents under MacOSX 10.7 Lion Preview
hi world, i am now testing the new Lion Version ( is a Preview from the Mac-Developer ) which comes next month to the Apple Store. But if i use LibreOffice (also a new installed actual version ). LibreOffice can't save/export any document. The dialog says file can not created and after the error message i find a directory with the new name i want to give to the filename. Is there a problem with the extension exports with LibreOffice ??? I have repared the user right also, but the same effect. Any ideas ? Thanks fwm -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Error-saving-LibreOffice-Documents-under-MacOSX-10-7-Lion-Preview-tp3080390p3080390.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] mail merge
Pamela, On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 12:23 -0400, parks wrote: I have 3.3 version on windows7 home premium 64 bit. I used word and excel to produce invoices. I could specify what groups to merge and print based on a specific field and then if the date in the cells were blank or nonblank. I was able to get the merge fields for the addresses and such set up but I don’t see where I can run separate groups is this possible in Libre or will I have to have each group in it’s own spreadsheet? I searched for mail merge in writer in the forum but did find anything addressing this. I am a beginner so forgive me if I missed the answer. Thanks pamela The Mail Merge Wizard is located under TOOLS, I have not used it so I can not give you tips. It looks similar to the one in MS Word. I would expect it work similarly to Word's wizard. -- Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Error saving LibreOffice Documents under MacOSX 10.7 Lion Preview
Hi, On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 11:51 -0700, fwm wrote: hi world, i am now testing the new Lion Version ( is a Preview from the Mac-Developer ) which comes next month to the Apple Store. But if i use LibreOffice (also a new installed actual version ). LibreOffice can't save/export any document. The dialog says file can not created and after the error message i find a directory with the new name i want to give to the filename. Is there a problem with the extension exports with LibreOffice ??? I have repared the user right also, but the same effect. Any ideas ? Thanks fwm -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Error-saving-LibreOffice-Documents-under-MacOSX-10-7-Lion-Preview-tp3080390p3080390.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. Which version of LO are you using? Can you replicate this problem with same version of LO on another Mac OS version? -- Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] *dbf files open in Calc not Base
Hi The standard for many years for Database files was *.dbf (dBase) and I have many. It is very strange that in LibreOffice this opens up in Calc and not Base, no matter how I try to force it. Calc is simply not good enough to handle Database files. This is also confirmed in the File Open lists:- dBase(.dbf) is listed in Calc and it is absent from Base Is this a bug - have I missed something ? regards John B Windows XP Pro Sp3 LibreOffice 3.4 -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] *dbf files open in Calc not Base
While it may be counter intiutive, it is not a bug. There is only one Java class library which does something close to an adequate job when it comes to DBF files, and that is the xBaseJ class library which I wrote a book about. Despite calling dbf a standard there IS ABSOLUTELY NO XBASE STANDARD. While there are some overlapping similarities due to the fact they all stole code from the Jet Propulsion Lab to start with, each flavor has different limitations, defaults, and characteristics. This is especially true with indexes and memo fields. http://www.free-ebooks.net/ebook/The-Minimum-You-Need-to-Know-About-Java-and-xBaseJ The book is completely free. Pull it down and read up. This class library was also the only active project on SourceForge, so LibreOffice may want to include it to get DBF access for BASE. Don't quote me, but, as I remember, BASE had to have a Java plug-in to connect to a database entity. java-postgres-blah-blah java-mysql-blah-blah etc. There is no java-dbf-blah-blah because there is no dbf server. On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 23:48 +0100, John B wrote: Hi The standard for many years for Database files was *.dbf (dBase) and I have many. It is very strange that in LibreOffice this opens up in Calc and not Base, no matter how I try to force it. Calc is simply not good enough to handle Database files. This is also confirmed in the File Open lists:- dBase(.dbf) is listed in Calc and it is absent from Base Is this a bug - have I missed something ? regards John B Windows XP Pro Sp3 LibreOffice 3.4 -- Roland Hughes, President Logikal Solutions (630)-205-1593 http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com http://www.infiniteexposure.net No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol reserves. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
RE: [libreoffice-users] *dbf files open in Calc not Base
I don't think it is a bug. Microsoft Excel opens (imports) *.dbf files too. There is not much that Base opens directly. Is there a jDBC connector for *.dbf that you could use? Microsoft Access 2007 opens dBase III, IV, 5 I see (and it is the only one I have lying around that I can check). And, much to my surprise, dBase is still in production, but I guess you don't want that product. - Dennis -Original Message- From: John B [mailto:jo...@email2.me] Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 15:48 To: users@global.libreoffice.org Subject: [libreoffice-users] *dbf files open in Calc not Base Hi The standard for many years for Database files was *.dbf (dBase) and I have many. It is very strange that in LibreOffice this opens up in Calc and not Base, no matter how I try to force it. Calc is simply not good enough to handle Database files. This is also confirmed in the File Open lists:- dBase(.dbf) is listed in Calc and it is absent from Base Is this a bug - have I missed something ? regards John B Windows XP Pro Sp3 LibreOffice 3.4 -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] MSO's 80/20 rule: 80% of the people use about 20% of the functionality.
On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 10:39 +0200, lee wrote: planas jsloz...@gmail.com writes: Lee, On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 21:42 +0200, lee wrote: planas jsloz...@gmail.com writes: I believe that the 80/20 is somewhat misleading. As noted earlier must use approximately 20% but not the same 20%. I would estimate that somewhere around 50% of all the features are used reasonably often and the rest are rarely used. There are substantial features 100% of the users use, aren´t there? What´s the percentage of such substantial features compared to all features? If substantial features make for 20%, you would have 80% percent of all features of which 50% are rarely used. If I´m not mistaken, that makes already 60% of all features used reasonably often. When you need to make a package that provides 60% of all available features, you might find that there´s another 20% or 30% of all available features that need to be packaged as well because of dependencies. When you need to package 80--90% of all features anyway, how important is it to put effort into packaging only 10--20% of all features seperately? The current problem is we do not have any good information of what features are not very important and do not extend the functionality for all but a few users. The question is what mix of included and extensible features should be available beyond those that are important. Which features are important? Beyond the basic file manipulation, you have the basic data entry/handling needed for each application. The features, many wlll probably be included are useful for some but not all users. One of the problems is you need either a lot different users surveyed at the same time or smaller number surveyed over a longer period of time. For example, most of the time I do not use a table of contents in my documents but when I need the feature I must have it. How many people need this feature irregularly versus those that often use it? I do not know. There you go: When you need a particular feature, you must have it. When you need it, it is totally irrelevant how often you or other users use it. How often a feature is used and/or how many users use it doesn´t say anything about how important the feature is. When someone needs it, it has to be there. I would disagree, it takes time to code and debug a feature that is very rarely used by a small number users. These features may better added as extension. The problem is where to draw the line and say this one is included and this one will be a possible extension. One of the marketing tricks is tout all the features you have in your package without regard to how useful many are to all but a handful of users. Look carefully at some the commercial software ads and notice how often they tout features that look nice but you probably will never use. What´s worse? Having features you don´t need often or not at all in the software you use or having to look for other software you don´t use and that has the particular feature (and maybe not others) you happen to need (maybe only once ever) and use that instead? This will always be a problem for any software package. It is impossible to provide all the possible features that may get used very rarely. Also, it is very difficult to determine in advance all the ways users will find for the software. That is partly why macros are important, they provide a possible method to provide really unusual features at the cost of the user needing to know some programming. And what about one of the most important features: being able to create a text or a spreadsheet or a presentation or some other kind of document you can still use 20 or 60 years later? The problem is the fact many documents were produced on abandon ware or used deprecated file formats, eg old MS Word or Excel formats. Some of the problem is caused by users switching programs but doing the tedious chore of converting the old files to a newer format. Another problem is the obsolete storage media used. How many people have the ability to read a 3.5 floppy let alone a 5.25 floppy or old zip disks. Another issue is the life span of the storage media, most will degrade with time. The solution to file formats being unreadable is to use backward compatible formats that allow the opening of the older formats. But then you have the problem of how far back you must go for backward compatibility. It helps to use open/standard formats rather than proprietary formats, but this is still a partial solution. -- Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived
Re: [libreoffice-users] MSO's 80/20 rule: 80% of the people use about 20% of the functionality.
On 06/18/2011 07:52 PM, planas wrote: On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 10:39 +0200, lee wrote: planasjsloz...@gmail.com writes: snip There you go: When you need a particular feature, you must have it. When you need it, it is totally irrelevant how often you or other users use it. How often a feature is used and/or how many users use it doesn´t say anything about how important the feature is. When someone needs it, it has to be there. I would disagree, it takes time to code and debug a feature that is very rarely used by a small number users. These features may better added as extension. The problem is where to draw the line and say this one is included and this one will be a possible extension. snip I think that the use of Extensions for the functions that are not used very often [or rarely], or by few users, is the way to go. I see some old extensions that were created to add functions before they were added to the package. If there is a need for a function for Calc, Draw, Writer, etc., then maybe creating an extension is the proper route to go. There is a movement to make a replacement for Oracle's report builder extension. I do not think anyone would tell you they would want that report builder a default, internal, function of LibreOffice. That type of function is useful as an extension. To be honest, you could make a lot of the seldom used or rare functions or options into extensions so the user can pick and choose to add it to their LibreOffice install. Just like all the language dictionaries, if you do not need Lower Sorbian than you do not need it built into the package. When you do need it, then install the dictionary extension for it. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Too many variables in writer document problem
Hello everyone, I wrote this Bug report some Years ago against Open Office. Unfortunately I had not so much time ( frequent travelling ) to follow up. At that time I changed the document - reduced amount of variables - to make it working. But now I´m back again to the Problem and no way out. Problem: As I already stated, I use the writer feature set/display variable heavily with losts of calculations referring previously set/calculated variables. After defining ( too ) many variables, writers enters a strange behaviour: Instead of showing the value of the set/show variable, it shows the just the name of this partikular and all further new introduced variables. I´ve tried to show the problem taking screen shots. I will send these screen shots and the document together with the post. A telephone contact in Germany would be nice to get, hence it`s much easier to explain the problem interactively. The basic questions - as far as i think - are: 1. Is there a limit in the number or size of variables ? 2. a pointer reference problem ? PLEASE: don´t complain: I still use an Open Office version of the Debian distro. Be shure that the problem is still in Libre Office to. The version I recognized the problem is 1.xx. So it WILL be in Libre Office too. OpenOffice.org 3.2.1 OOO320m19 (Build:9505) ooo-build 3.2.1.4, Debian package 1:3.2.1-11+squeeze2 PLEASE:Don´t ask me to use Calc instead. I use Calc when it good for. Not for documents! Here the relates files. http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n3081935/TooManyVariables_CorrectOperation_SetVariable.png TooManyVariables_CorrectOperation_SetVariable.png http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n3081935/NK_SB_11_13_2010_ForLibreOffice.odt NK_SB_11_13_2010_ForLibreOffice.odt http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n3081935/TooManyVariables_WrongOperation_ChangeVariable.png TooManyVariables_WrongOperation_ChangeVariable.png http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n3081935/TooManyVariables_WrongOperation_InsertNewVariable.png TooManyVariables_WrongOperation_InsertNewVariable.png http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n3081935/TooManyVariables_WrongOperation_SetVariable.png TooManyVariables_WrongOperation_SetVariable.png Thanks for looking at it! -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Too-many-variables-in-writer-document-problem-tp3081935p3081935.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
