Hi,
On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 05:20:49PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> This bug is present in several libreoffice-l10n-?? packages
> and libreoffice-help-common. Maybe also in more packages
> depending on these failing ones since they cannot be tested.
Nah, that script was just ran on -help-*
severity 946131 minor
tag 946131 + wontfix
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 11:09:20PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> Attempting to use any of the email options under File->Send results in
> (in the terminal I started LibreOffice from, just silently doing nothing
> as far as the GUI is
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 07:56:57PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> And LO uses internal libraries - and that includes libepoxy.
s/LO/LO upstream/
Regards,
Rene
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 02:09:06PM +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> So the issue seems to be with this and not really with a system
> dependency. Note that the size of the two files are substencially
No, this is not a sign for anything.
I wouldn't be so sure. You are exchanging the binary and
On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 08:14:27PM +0100, negora wrote:
> I've made a break and have tried the version of LibreOffice from Debian
> Backports. The check-box works fine now.
OK, as guessed.
> Doesn't it mean that the bug was there, in LibreOffice?
I haven't said that the bug wasn't in
tag 944354 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 01:36:16PM +0100, negora wrote:
> When I try to save a CSV file, the option "Edit filter settings" of the
> "Save As..." dialogue box is disabled (greyed out). But, instead, it
> should be enabled.
>
> Steps to reproduce:
>
> 1. Create
tag 943873 + fixed-upstream
tag 943873 + pending
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 07:09:18AM +0100, Kamil Jonca wrote:
> I am not sure if it is really upstream things
It is.
> but I filled bug https: //bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128488
And
Am 28. Oktober 2019 07:05:51 MEZ schrieb Hideki Yamane :
>Hi,
>
> LibreOffice upstream based on time-based release model(*) and always
> releases two versions for users, one is newest release and older one
> is more stable one.
>
> *) https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan
>
> It seems
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 05:59:53PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > OK, thanks, reassigning to src:gcc-9 (libstdc++6 for now) then.
> >
> > no. based on what rationale?
And to prevent said gcc-9 version from migrating, to not break something
else (no
reassign 943401 libstdc++6
thanks
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 05:53:54PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Control: reassign -1 src:libreoffice
>
> On 25.10.19 17:31, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > reassign 943401 libstdc++6
> > found 943401 9.2.1-12
> > thanks
> >
>
reassign 943401 libstdc++6
found 943401 9.2.1-12
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:21:11PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > I guess I need to disable make check to get round this.. (Unless someone
> > at GCC tells me what change libstdc++6(?) might have to cause this or
> > some other
1 + help
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 07:21:47PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 06:19:55PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > So they might be just flaky? That is not new (in buildd builds they also
> > just som
>
> So, the last exception one (which I
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 06:19:55PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> So they might be just flaky? That is not new (in buildd builds they also just
> som
So, the last exception one (which I badly edited out of my last mail, after I
actually mentioned it.. - my bad.) is reproducible here in a
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 04:10:57PM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> As can be seen on [1], the autopkgtests started failing this Monday and
WTF? Did you even read the output?
Most of the failures since last monday was guess what? Test
dependencies uninstallable because of exactly your Qt
tag 940168 + moreinfo
tag 940168 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 11:09:30AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:02:53AM +0200, Johann Spies wrote:
> > *** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate
> > ***
>
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:02:53AM +0200, Johann Spies wrote:
> *** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
>
>* What led up to the situation?
>
>I had to import my signature (png) into a document sent to me.
>
>* What exactly did you do (or
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 01:37:50PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 01:34:44PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > See http://people.debian.org/~rene/libreoffice/6.3
> > (apt-gettable via "deb http://people.debian.org/~rene/libreoffice/6.3 ./"
>
[ always keep the bug in the Cc so that discussions about the bug are
recorded ]
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 05:38:38PM +0200, Frank B. Brokken wrote:
> By desktop you mean window manager? That's afterstep (2.2.12-12+b1). There's
No, I mean desktop.
> My VLC plugin versions are currently
tag 941655 + moreinfo
tag 941655 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 01:23:50PM +0200, Frank Brokken wrote:
> Exporting html pages of a libreoffice-impress document
>
>* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
> ineffective)?
>
> For the purpose of
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 01:34:44PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> See http://people.debian.org/~rene/libreoffice/6.3
> (apt-gettable via "deb http://people.debian.org/~rene/libreoffice/6.3 ./"
> in sources.list, but you should know that..)
Sorry, sent too fast, it's buil
forwarded 941185 https://github.com/hunspell/hunspell/issues/624
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 06:37:42AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> CVE-2019-16707[0]:
> | Hunspell 1.7.0 has an invalid read operation in
> | SuggestMgr::leftcommonsubstring in suggestmgr.cxx.
> [1]
# merging this bug with 921178
severity 940914 important
reassign 940914 libreoffice
found 940914 1:6.1.5-3+deb10u4
forcemerge 940914 921178
thanks
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 09:12:36PM +0200, Michel Le Bihan wrote:
> Thread 1 "soffice.bin" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
>
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 09:12:36PM +0200, Michel Le Bihan wrote:
> -- System Information:
> Debian Release: 10.1
> APT prefers stable-debug
> APT policy: (500, 'stable-debug'), (500, 'proposed-updates-debug'), (500,
> 'stable')
Just to see whether it had an affect I upgraded to
tag 940914 + moreinfo
tag 940914 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 09:12:36PM +0200, Michel Le Bihan wrote:
> Package: uno-libs3
> Version: 6.1.5-3+deb10u4
> Severity: grave
Why?
> Justification: renders package unusable
If this was true, yes.
Unfortunately
a) this version
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 08:58:43PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > 2. In debian/control, python:Provides is obsolete in general and was never
> > used for python3. It should be deleted.
> >
> > 3. debian/pycompat is obsolete and was never used
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 06:41:43PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I am going to accept your package, but there are some issues that should be
Thanks.
> 1. In debian/copyright, it would be good to be clear about which LGPL version
> is relevant. First, upstream probably needs to sort
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 02:14:39PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 01:51:38PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > can you use some sane title instead of just accusing people directly
> > there?
>
> Hello Rene!
>
> I did not plan to accuse an
reassign 940303
libreoffice-common,libreoffice-style-colibre,libreoffice-style-tango
severity 940303 normal
retitle 940303 libreoffice-common: circular dependency between -common
and -style-{colibre,tango}
tag 940303 + wontfix
thanks
Hi,
can you use some sane title instead of just accusing
user debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
usertags - py2keep
thanks
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 03:11:45AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 30.08.19 18:39, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > user debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
> > usertagis + py2keep
>
> typo
>
> > cd pythonp
clone 937190 -1
retitle -1 RM: src:ooolib-python: obsolete version, python2-only (python3
version in NEW with new source pkg name)
reassign -1 ftp.debian.org
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 07:29:13AM +, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Package: src:ooolib-python
> Version: 0.0.17-2.1
> Severity:
user debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
usertagis + py2keep
thanks
Hi,
cd pythonpath && \
/usr/bin/make
make[2]: Entering directory '/<>/pythonpath'
cp ../src/Soros.py org/Numbertext/
cp ../src/places.py org/Numbertext/
python ../bin/Convert.py ../data/ru.sor
[ Cc'ing the GCC maintainers ]
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 03:47:50PM +0200, Sorin Manolache wrote:
> When compiling a program with g++-9 (4:9.2.1-3) and linking with libcppunit
> then I get a segfault if the program uses std::stack.
Hrmpf.
> For example:
>
> void f() {
> std::stack s1;
>
severity 935632 wishlist
thanks
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 07:44:18PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Package: libreoffice-l10n-in
> Version: 1:6.3.0-2
> Severity: important
Definitely not. It is a wish to add two packages to a metapackage
-> wishlist
> Binary package libreoffice-l10n-in is
found 935182 1:6.3.0-1
thanks
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 08:47:00AM +0200, Gilles MOREL wrote:
> Actually, we were almost certain that the problem will be forwarded to the
> upstream, so we openned the bug on Document Fondation too.
Would have been nice to tell the upstream URL then in the report
close 935148
thanks
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 08:59:03AM +0200, Ing. Branislav Staron wrote:
>Debian Buster was installed as RC. And apparmor reported too many AVC
>denials. Profile changes were made with aa-logprof.
I was too lazy to diff them, to be honest. Why did you think you
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 03:44:36PM +1000, Trent W. Buck wrote:
> I still advocate solving only MY problem, with a simple change:
>
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?att=2;bug=929923;filename=929923.patch;msg=22
And I still say that it at least for en_GB is wrong. As said:
Hi,
sorry for dropping the ball on this.
On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 04:11:30PM +1000, Trent W. Buck wrote:
> I can dig out the contemporary th_en_US_v2.dat from
> snapshots.debian.org, and do a three-way diff between it,
> mythes-en-au, and current (LO6.3) mythes-en-us. That will show
>
retitle 935182 Concurrent file open on the same host results file deletion
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 06:30:06PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 04:52:52PM +0200, Gilles MOREL wrote:
> > Package: libreoffice-core
> > Version: 1:6.1.5-3+deb10u3
>
forwarded 935182 https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127057
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 06:30:06PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> LO has lockinbg problems like this. This is nothing new. In fact, quick
> googling
> just gave me
> https://bugs.documentfo
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 04:52:52PM +0200, Gilles MOREL wrote:
> Package: libreoffice-core
> Version: 1:6.1.5-3+deb10u3
> Severity: grave
2 grave makes the package in question unusable by most or all users,
or causes data loss, or
introduces a security hole
tag 935148 + moreinfo
tag 935148 + unreproducible
thanks
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:01:49AM +0200, Branislav Staron wrote:
> Start-Date: 2019-08-19 07:56:26
> Commandline: apt-get upgrade
> Requested-By: branislav.staron (1903801450)
> Upgrade: libreoffice-wiki-publisher:amd64
tag 934779 + fixed-upstream
thanks
On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 02:17:20PM +0300, Сергей Фёдоров wrote:
> It is recognized in version 6.3.0.2 rc, but now Version: 6.3.0.4 and that
> do something about it?
Huh, what? This was reported in 6.3.0 rc2 (= 6.3.0.2), and it isn't
fixed in 6.3.0 (= 6.3.0 rc4
forwarded 934779 https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=126254
tag 934779 + upstream
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 09:28:12PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > background color of window is black, so pale gray letters
> > are almost invisible on a black background
severity 94779 important
tag 934779 - moreinfo
tag 934779 + confirmed
reassign 934779 libreoffice-gtk2
retitle 934779 "About LibreOffice" window unreadable with gtk2
found 934779 1:6.3.0-2
thanks
[ please keep the bug CCed on discussions, otherwise this just ends up
in my personal inbox and is
tag 934779 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 09:51:33PM +0300, Сергей Фёдоров wrote:
> Debian Release: bullseye/sid
> APT prefers unstable
> APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
^
> Architecture:
notfound 934678 6.3.0.4
# according to upstream bug
found 934678 1:5.0.0~rc5-1
forwarded 934678 https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104995
thanks
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 12:25:27PM +0300, Vangelis Skarmoutsos wrote:
>Package: libreoffice-writer
>Version: 6.3.0.4
Version:
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 11:24:20AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Are they using external liblangtag?
> (though the only locale-related patch I see in LOs code for liblangtag
> is to support ca_ES@valencia)
Looking at their .spec file
(https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libreoffice
Hi,
> Package: libreoffice-calc
Marked the bug affecting the versions you say below and fixed the title
(as it's not buster alone, as you say yourself)
Anyways:
Trying with 1:6.3.0-2 under GNOME (but the same symptoms are shown in
Xfce, too) in a Debian sid VM I get:
On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 08:18:53PM +0300, Timur Irikovich Davletshin wrote:
> I believe bug is to be reopened again to fix dependencies. Package
Did so (and fixed it in git)
> libreoffice-mysql-connector does exist for LO 6.3 and to be upgraded
> automatically or it will cause problem upgrading
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 08:21:55PM +0300, Timur Irikovich Davletshin wrote:
> If it was optional I don't get why it was changed? As far I understand
> it does exist in repo for LO 6.3.
Just as a dummy to upgrade to the new libreoffice-sdbc-mysql so that it
doesn't get lost in a upgrade.
in 6.1
tag 933835 + pending
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 07:17:40PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 07:54:21PM +0300, Timur Irikovich Davletshin wrote:
> > I was wrong, problem is not in atk*. I rolled back snapshot of buster
> > to it's original
reopen 933835
retitle 933835 libreoffice not start with fatal exception signal 11 when old
libreoffice-mysql-connector is installed
severity 933835 serious
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 07:54:21PM +0300, Timur Irikovich Davletshin wrote:
> I was wrong, problem is not in atk*. I rolled back
reopen 933835
retitle 933835 libreoffice not start with fatal exception signal 11 with old
libreoffice-mysql-connector installed
thanks
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 07:54:21PM +0300, Timur Irikovich Davletshin wrote:
> I was wrong, problem is not in atk*. I rolled back snapshot of buster
> to it's
close 933835
thanks
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 07:36:59PM +0300, Timur Irikovich Davletshin wrote:
> My complain was not about LO 6.3 in Debian Testing but about LO 6.3
Aha.
> from Buster backports. Well except me we have original reporter of this
> bug. Let's wait for him.
Which is - as I said -
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 06:03:09PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > If some version dependencies are wrong (it seems to be the case)...
>
> That's what you say. But why does it start on my laptop with busters atk
> then?
> And buster-backports' build is - of course - built a
reopen 933835
retitle 933835 too lax atk dependency? - libreoffice not start with fatal
exception signal 11
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 06:49:42PM +0300, Timur Irikovich Davletshin wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:30:50 +0200 Rene Engelhard
> wrote:
> > dependency informati
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 07:51:55AM +0300, Timur Irikovich Davletshin wrote:
> I believe this bug should be reopened.
Not sure.
> Right version of atk library is not in the dependencies of this build.
OK, but that would be a bug in atk that they are not giving us correct
dependency
On Sun, Aug 04, 2019 at 11:11:13AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> I think I saw this more or less exact backgtrace once when someone using
> siduction reported
> it to me via IRC.
>
> The cause here was siductions live system using overlayfs (and apparmor)
(Or on a not-updated De
tag 933835 + moreinfo
tag 933835 + unreproducible
tag 933835 - a11y
severity 933835 important
thanks
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 04, 2019 at 09:59:51AM +0200, sanskryt wrote:
> Package: libreoffice
> Version: 1:6.3.0~rc2-1
> Severity: grave
> Tags: a11y
> Justification: renders package unusable
No. It
Hi again,
On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 12:04:58AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 04:00:04PM -0500, william l-k wrote:
> >have linked sub-forms from two seperate tables for entering related data.
> >One of the databases started out as a l
[ please always keep the bug CCed so that the discussion gets recorded.
]
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 04:00:04PM -0500, william l-k wrote:
>The database is mariadb. Two database entry forms are now affected. Both
>have linked sub-forms from two seperate tables for entering related data.
>
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 03:20:20PM -0500, william l-k wrote:
> The pop up says that there is a problem with my SQL statement for MariaDB
> server version near ':link_from_ID)' at line one. But this isn't from a query
> I
MariaDB?
This sounds like
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 11:06:16PM +0200, Yvan Masson wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 09:17:05PM +0200, Yvan Masson wrote:
> > > > So apt install libreoffice would have shown that. But yes, tasksel
> > > > wouldn't have shown it.
> > > >
> > > That is exactly `apt show libreoffice` that
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 09:17:05PM +0200, Yvan Masson wrote:
> > So apt install libreoffice would have shown that. But yes, tasksel
> > wouldn't have shown it.
> >
> That is exactly `apt show libreoffice` that gave me the answer :-)
> The point is that not everybody has the abilities to use
severity 933271 wishlist
thanks
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 05:16:31PM +0200, Yvan Masson wrote:
> LibreOffice is not able to read/write to GVFS mounts (GIO) if
> libreoffice-gnome is not installed. If I am not wrong, libreoffice-gnome is
> installed automatically only in the following cases
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 05:34:41PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Could you make libreoffice (or another package like task-desktop) recommends
> > libreoffice-gnome?
>
> As shown above, task-desktop recommends task-gnome-desktop which already
> does what you want.
An
close 912140 1:6.2.0~rc1-1
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 09:51:40PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 07:11:03PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > But so we can remove --package $DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE without a risk
> &
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 01:22:02PM +1000, Trent W. Buck wrote:
> This part isn't important, but I'll address it for the record.
>
> 1. My original problem is "Australian English users cannot click Tools >
> Thesaurus".
>
> 2. One fix is "apt-get install mythes-en-au" (note "AU" not
tag 929923 - wontfix
retitle 929923 mythes-en-us: add symlinks for en_AU etc.
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 12:51:44PM +1000, Trent W. Buck wrote:
> Do you agree so far?
Yes
> The solution
>
> I think on non-Debian, LibreOffice knows that en_* should use
> th_en_US_v2 because
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 10:04:02PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> $ apt-cache show mythes-en-us
> Package: mythes-en-us
> Source: libreoffice-dictionaries
Sorry, edited and sent too fast. This is the key point here. This mythes
dict is *exactly* what gets shipped in LibreOffice its
tag 929923 + wontfix
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 07:21:47PM +1000, Trent W. Buck wrote:
> Package: mythes-en-us
> Version: 1:5.2.5-1
> Severity: normal
>
> Hi Rene et al.
>
> My users are in en_AU.UTF-8 locale.
> They reported that Tools > Thesaurus doesn't work with mythes-en-us
Hi,
I am sorry for Stephanes premature bug closings.
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 05:08:32PM +0200, Oliver Sander wrote:
> > This kind of bug is not specific to Debian. I recommend you register on the
> > bugtracker of LO and follow it.
>
> This is indeed what I did before filing the Debian report.
Hi,
just taking this bug as an example.
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 04:57:07PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Your message dated Mon, 13 May 2019 16:44:21 +
> with message-id <44f260c350815076a58d87a9ba245...@legtux.org>
> and subject line libreoffice-calc: Chart, x-y scatter with
reassigm 928228 src:libreoffice
severity 928228 wishlist
retitle 928228 please package "my" l10n
thanks
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:14:20AM +0100, Marcus Tomlinson wrote:
> Package: libreoffice
> Version: 1:6.2.3~rc2-1
> Severity: normal
Definitely not. It's a wish for a new package -> wishlist
2019 at 07:41:19AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:44:27PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Indeed, after adding "Debian" as a copy of "Oracle Corporation" javaldx
> > works again.
>
> I retract that, no idea what I did when testing
retitle 926009 new "Debian" as java.vendor breaks libreoffice
reassign 926009 src:openjdk-11
thanks
Hi,
> > so maybe some backports for libreoffice are needed? is that fixed in 6.2.x?
>
> I don't even know yet what needs to be changed... That said, I actually
> first noticed this the day before
[ initally sent it to the wrong bug... ]
Hi,
ah, so it seems this is fixed in openjdk-8 from stable-security
now since
https://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/2019/msg00054.html
See e.g.
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=911925#144 ff.
and the security team confirms
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 06:41:07PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> *shrugs*. So another
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=913641 where this
> isn't fixed in (current) stable even after months after it was fixed
> for other suites?
>
> It has a build w
# so let's assign it back to both until this is sorted out..
reassign -1 src:libreoffice, src:openjdk-11
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 01:40:09AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Control: reassign -1 src:libreoffice
>
> > IMHO correctly so, some of the changes are so far away from the
> >
On Sat, Mar 09, 2019 at 08:46:16PM -0300, Filipe Mosca wrote:
>Hi !! Sorry for the delay. I was not notified by your answer.
Then you need to fix your mail filter to not reject valid mails ;-)
>The problem still persists. I tried to install a flatpak but the same
>occurs.
Aha, that
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 09:58:52AM +0100, Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
> > And send where? Upstrem? Where we have a different build config than
> > them? (Let alone think about external libraries). Do we really want our
> > LO to "phone home" on a crash? Do we want to set up a web service for
> >
tag 992925 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 10:47:48PM +0100, Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
> I would love to have the LO crash tracker in Debian, so that I could use Deb
> packages to report bugs with a good trace. Would it be
> possible?
And send where? Upstrem? Where we have a
tag 922764 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 01:04:16PM +0100, Wim Bertels wrote:
> U can use copy/paste between calc and base to create a database table form
> calc data.
Please don't use "U", ther's no real saving here compared to "You" and
it just looks bad.
> I tested this
retitle 911859 libreoffice-base: " is no SQL conform identifier" if
containing non-SQL-92-allowed
characters
thanks
Hi,
sorry for the late answer.
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 12:06:12PM +, John Talbut wrote:
> I found that the setting:
> "Use SQL-92 naming constraints"
> in Edit > Database >
severity 922370 minor
tag 922370 + unreproducible
tag 922370 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi,
[ somehow never appeared in my mailbox... ]
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 02:46:50AM -0300, Filipe Mosca wrote:
> After installed upgrade from debian strecth to debian buster/testing.
> When i openned the new instaled
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 08:06:13AM +0700, Andika Triwidada wrote:
> Recent translation activities preceeding upstream 6.2 release has pushed
> LibreOffice Indonesian Help translation to reach around 90%.
>
> Afterward, most new help translation to 6.2 was backported to 6.1.
>
> We would
On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 01:37:32PM +, Toni Mueller wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 11:03:21AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Neither do I, but do you really attempt to use 3840x2160 and are suprised
> > this is small on
> > a 15"?
>
> I don't "r
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:29:11PM +, Toni Mueller wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 07:41:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > screen #0:
> > dimensions:1920x1080 pixels (290x170 millimeters)
> > resolution:168x161 dots per inch
> > depths (7):
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 08:39:28AM +, Toni Mueller wrote:
> > At leat in my GNOME here on my new laptop this is quite small on
> > 1920x1080 but not unbearable even with my eyes..
>
> I have a 15" laptop and 294 dpi. But I noticed something else, that the
> resolution is set to 96x96,
On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 10:37:38PM +, Toni wrote:
> on my HIDPI display, most UI elements, and especially the file dialogue,
> are too small. I tried setting environment variables, as suggested in
> the Arch wiki, but to no avail (I tried both GTK3 and QT settings).
This is pretty subjective,
forwarded 920859 https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=123077
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 01:48:43AM +0100, Michael Weghorn wrote:
> On 30/01/2019 22.34, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Upstream says:
> >
> > 14:44 < _rene_> bubli:
> >
found 920859 1:6.2.0~rc2-1
tag 920859 + confirmed
tag 920859 + upstream
forwarded 920859 Michael Weghorn
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:22:28PM +0100, Helmar Gerloni wrote:
> LibreOffice crashes when minimizing the file save dialog. Steps to reproduce:
>
> 1. Start LibreOffice
> 2. File
Hi,
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 09:12:58PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Jup, replacing python3 with python3.6 makes this work
>
> For some reason the problem seems to be 32bit-only now:
> https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/lightproof.html
Not really. Still fails
Am 26. Januar 2019 18:05:07 MEZ schrieb Andreas Beckmann :
>On 2019-01-26 17:51, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> (...)
>> Would like to avoid that, though; there's nothing arch-dep in this
>> package.
>
>The alternative is to put your own transition code in the maintainer
&g
Am 26. Januar 2019 17:58:13 MEZ schrieb Andreas Beckmann :
>On 2019-01-26 17:25, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> the package changed any (well, arch-specific) to all (transitional
>package), maybe
>> that confuses dpkg-maintscript-helper? Any suggestion to get out of
>this?
>
Hi again,
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 05:25:14PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Preparing to unpack .../11-libreoffice-mysql-connector_6.2.0~rc3-1_all.deb ...
> dpkg-query: no packages found matching libreoffice-mysql-connector:all
> dpkg-query: package 'libreoffice-mysql-connector' is not
tag 919298 - pending
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 07:35:53PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
> 'sid' to 'experimental'.
>
> >From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
>
> Preparing to unpack
>
unmerge 919800
unmerge 919801
unmerge 919831
unmerge 919874
unmerge 919875
unmerge 919876
unmerge 919878
unmerge 919883
unmerge 919895
unmerge 919968
unmerge 920020
forcemerge 919883 920020
reassign 919798 src:antlr4
reassign 919800 src:jackson-databind
reassign 919801 src:libgoogle-gson-java
Am 24. Januar 2019 16:53:57 MEZ schrieb Amr Ibrahim
:
>Package: writer2latex
>
>Please update to version 1.6.1, and please update the watch file to
>keep
>track of upstream.
>
>Version history:
>https://sourceforge.net/p/writer2latex/code/HEAD/tree/branches/stable1.6/source/distro/History.txt
>
reassign 902331 src:libreoffice
block 902331 by 919883
found 902331 1:6.1.5~rc1-1
notfound 902331 1:6.1.4-1
severity 902331 serious
retitle 902331 uninstallable - arch-indep parts missing
thanks
See #919883. The arch independent parts failed to build so are not available.
Ask the openjdk people
401 - 500 of 12405 matches
Mail list logo
