t*, JavaVMOption*, long,
> JavaVM_**, JNIEnv_**) () at /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/libjvmfwklo.so
Aha. So it's the known regression in the kernel breaking Java. I guessed that
at first,
though you claiming it works without -gtk2 was puzzling me...
Wouldn't have happened on amd64...
Regards,
Rene
ch) or a gdb backtrace?
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugReport/Debug_Information#GNU.2FLinux
And which desktop/window manager is this? A GTk(2) using one?
After removing -gtk2 do you have -gtk3 installed? Or "pure" LO UI?
That said, works for me.
Even with
rene@frodo:~$ export SAL_USE_VCLPLU
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 09:19:43PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_debug
> (which is also trivially findable by googling for "libreoffice gdb backtrace")
I am sorry, that of course was nonsense. I meant _th
back to Debian 8 the bug
> disappeared.
Well, ok, But that's 4.3.3...
Regards,
Rene
r both.)
That's why I ask again and the last time: does it work without the binary
nvidia drivers?
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 02:14:42PM +0200, nicolas.patr...@gmail.com wrote:
> Le 17/07/2017 07:34:11, Rene Engelhard a écrit :
>
> > Did you try without the binary nvidia drivers?
>
> I had a bug with libreoffice-gtk3 a long while ago so I uninstalled it.
> https://bu
(500, 'stable')
> Architecture: i386 (i686)
You might want to use amd64...
Anyways: Reassigning to the kernel.
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 07:34:11AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > X-Error: BadMatch (invalid parameter attributes)
> > Major opcode: 154
> > Minor opcode: 5
> > Resource ID: 0x4800019
> > Serial No:242 (242)
> > These errors
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 07:29:06AM +0200, nicolas.patr...@gmail.com wrote:
> Le 16/07/2017 21:19:44, Rene Engelhard a écrit :
>
> > That was not the question. I simply don't care wether other stuff does
> > work width it. Every stuff has it's own quirks and LO uses
On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 09:00:20PM +0200, nicolas.patr...@gmail.com wrote:
> Le 16/07/2017 20:43:28, Rene Engelhard a écrit :
>
> > Oh, no. nvidia. Does it also happen with drivers actually in Debian?
>
> I can run minetest fine, that uses the nvidia driver.
That was not the
On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 08:02:18PM +0200, nicolas.patr...@gmail.com wrote:
> Le 16/07/2017 16:04:00, Rene Engelhard a écrit :
>
> > This was a strace of the bash, not of LO..
> > You would have needed -f or -ff...
>
> > But I asked about a backtrace from gdb, not
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 04:04:00PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> This was a strace of the bash, not of LO..
> You would have needed -f or -ff...
>
> But I asked about a backtrace from gdb, not about a strace..
Thinking about it, maybe both would be helpful. But as said, you
Hi,
This was a strace of the bash, not of LO..
You would have needed -f or -ff...
But I asked about a backtrace from gdb, not about a strace..
Regards,
Rene
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 16. Juli 2017 um 15:24 Uhr
> Von: nicolas.patr...@gmail.com
> An: "Rene Engelhard"
> Cc:
t; APT prefers unstable
> APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
> Architecture: i386 (i686)
Sigh. Any reason you use this obsolee arch instead of amd64 (if you use -pae
ways)?
Regards,
Rene
r many commits wrt conditional formatting-.
Regards,
Rene
(True, iButtonHeight, "..., 8192) = 6578
6636 read(52, "", 8192)= 0
6636 close(52) = 0
6636 write(2, "Traceback (most recent call last"..., 35) = 35
6636 write(2, " File \"/usr/lib/libreoffice/pro"..., 131) = 131
6
.h
> src/msvc6/testrunner/DynamicWindow/SizeCBar.html
>
> (This is not exhaustive so please check over the entire package
> carefully and address these on your next upload.)
Thankfully cppunit 1.14 removed all these (obsolete)
MSVC6 thingies.
Regards,
Rene
9/msg0.html
2. In addition to those changes, the Technical Committee resolves
that packages providing a .desktop file shall not also provide a
menu file for the same application.
Obviously LO provides .dektop files, so..
Regards,
Rene
[ ALWAYS CC the bug so that stuff is recorded there. Private mail doesn't }}
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 09:20:44PM +0200, Alberto wrote:
> * I don't know the led status at the moment
??
> but system work fine without trouble thinking
Yes, obviously you didn't think when apt wanted to remove li
e and the GNOME control center, so I
> believe this bug is not what I observe because it affects package
> versions from jessie.
Yes, that is exactly my point. This bug is so old that it was in jessies
development, not something which would have been caused by cups 2.2.4.
Regards,
Rene
to blame.
I am actually not sure. This bug is so old that cups 2.2.3 vs. 2.2.4 didn't
exist
back then but is quite new.
What makes you think this is a cups 2.2.3 vs. 2.2.4 issue? (yes, I read your
above
steps, but...)
Regards,
Rene
(which is still there because i386
fails to build
- well, failing its testsuite - because of the Java clash clash regression).
Plase post a dpkg -l | grep libreoffice
Which doesn't make it a separate bug per se; this is expected in unstable. If
you don't want
to have stuff like this happening, don't use unstable.
Regards,
Rene
se i386 it's probably the known Java stack clash regression (see
https://lwn.net/Articles/727206/
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=865866
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=865303
Regards,
Rene
ed because they are too flaky and are
clearly accessibility
stuff:
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-openoffice/libreoffice.git/tree/patches/disable-flaky-tests.diff
That svx.Accessibility stuff is a constant nuisance/failure also on upstreams
Tinderbox.
Regards,
Rene
cted the almighty wizard instead. I set the severity to normal
> despite the fact that I can't write any letters.
Yeah, it's important at last. You can reuse old letters ;)
Regards,
Rene
> -- System Information:
> Debian Release: buster/sid
> APT prefers unstable
> AP
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 01:17:28PM +0200, jEsuSdA 8) wrote:
> I think you can mark this bug as closed.
> I'm using LO new version without problems. ;)
"LO new version" means? So I can mark it as fixed in that version.
Regards,
Rene
t; thingy, also
discussed in
#865866 and the mentioned kernel bug there.
Does a kernel downgrade work for you?
Regards,
Rene
to -2-, just downgrade -3-...)
> Writer also crashes with kernel 4.11.0-1-686-pae
Hrm, that would mean that the Fixed in version linux/4.11.6-1 is actually wrong
(at least
for i386...)
Regards,
Rene
talled all packages it provides?
> I own an old laptop with only 4 Gb of ram (the laptop can't manage
> more) + a T7200 CPU and sometime I need to get x86 libraries for
> specific old apps.
You can also do that on amd64. That is no reason, imho.
But I guess I need to create a i386 VM...
Regards,
Rene
el from
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=865303#94 work?
Regards,
Rene
P.S.:
> -- System Information:
> Debian Release: 9.0
> APT prefers stable
> APT policy: (500, 'stable')
> Architecture: i386 (i686)
Oh my, you installed a fresh system
ntal')
> Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
[...]
> Kernel: Linux 4.11.5 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Sigh. Impatient people.
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 02:31:02PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Otherwise: 5.2.7-1 should be able to be installed inside testing. Not built
> anymore,
> but that's not that important here.
Just tried:
# apt install libreoffice
Reading package lists... Done
Building d
e build for _all in unstable is separete step as for
amd64 and takes longer.).
But that is _unstable_, not _testing_.
What does apt-cache policy on said packages say?
Otherwise: 5.2.7-1 should be able to be installed inside testing. Not built
anymore,
but that's not that important here.
>--- Not a subscriber of this list.
And this is not s support list ;)
Regards,
Rene
lti-architecture
^^^^^
no?
Regards,
Rene
tag 865303 - unreproducible
severity 865303 important
severity 865303 libreoffice: Libreoffice Java features crash with Linux
3.16.43-2+deb8u1
reassign 865303 src:linux
found 865303 3.16.43-2+deb8u1
affects 865303 libreoffice
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 09:55:51PM +0200, Rene Engelhard
happens if you remove that terminologie?
Sorry, we can't support any random extension out there especially when
they themselves claim it's tested only with 3.5 and you use 4.3.3...
Regards,
Rene
tag 865303 + unreproducible
retitle 865303 libreoffice: Libreoffice crashes silently upon startup
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 07:21:20PM +0200, Eduardo Casais wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:12:20 +0200 Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 03:39:03PM +0200, Rene
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 03:39:03PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> There were linux and glibc updates indeed. No idea whether they broke it, can
> you
> try reverting them one-by-one and whether it fixes it?
>
> Guess I need to setup a oldstable VM and try...
Some other reports c
art. The banner
> "LibreOffice" is present for a very short time, then the programe exits
> without
> any message.
Hmm.
There were linux and glibc updates indeed. No idea whether they broke it, can
you
try reverting them one-by-one and whether it fixes it?
Guess I need to setup a oldstable VM and try...
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:56:03PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:16:17PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > The Debian LTS team would like to fix the security issues which are
> > currently open in the Wheezy version of graphite2:
>
ng a 1.3.10-1~deb7u1
should be easy.
Regards,
Rene
-1 encoding, but it seems that
> it's wrong.
>
> Using one ru_RU distionary works fine.
Does it also happen with current upstresm (1.6.1)? It's in experimental right
now but will
be uploaded to unstable shortly after the stretch release.
Regards,
Rene
pe wrote:
> On 12-06-2017 17:55, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 01:28:14PM -0300, felipe wrote:
> >> After updating libreoffice to the latest experimental build the program
> >
> > From? 5.2.7 from sid of the 5.3.3 which was in experimental before the
:35PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 10:55:19PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > crashes with the message:
> > >
> > >"/usr/lib/libreoffice/program/soffice.bin: symbol lookup error:
> > >/usr/lib/lib
those, but does it
help if you upgrade this to 5.4, too? Did your "clean" attempt also install
5.4 of those? Does it come back when you dowgrade them to 5.3.0?
Regards,
Rene
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 10:55:19PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > crashes with the message:
> >
> >"/usr/lib/libreoffice/program/soffice.bin: symbol lookup error:
> >/usr/lib/libreoffice/program/lib
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 11:54:26PM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> Please go ahead (needs -sa since orig tarball is new)
Ah, right. Almost forgot, thanks.
Done.
Regards,
Rene
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 11:07:02PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 06:13:05PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > Source: libmwaw
> > Severity: grave
> > Tags: security
> >
> > Please see https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvena
0 +0200
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+libmwaw (0.3.1-2+deb8u1) jessie-security; urgency=medium
+
+ * backport upstream patch to fix CVE-2017-9433 (closes: #864366)
+
+ -- Rene Engelhard Wed, 07 Jun 2017 22:47:10 +0200
+
libmwaw (0.3.1-2) unstable; urgency=low
* upload to unstable
diff -Nru libmwaw-0.3.1/deb
tters: I of course have a Intel card in my laptop :)
Anyways: 5.2.7 is a dead end, upstream support will end on Sunday[1] and
we in Debian will only support it for stretchs lifetime with security
backports.
Can you also try 5.3.3 from experimental and tell whether it works, too?
Regards,
Rene
[1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan/5.2
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 08:27:36PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Anyways: There is? The last comment said it's back?
What I forgot to write here:
We don't have 5.3.0 anymore of course but 5.3.3 is in experimental, maybe
it would make sense to check whether it is really fixed th
?
>
> Maybe the patch could be backported to stretch before the release?
No. At least not whether it really helps and besides you seem to have
missed the last debian-devel-announce post. A upload just for this.. mmmh..
Regards,
Rene
the document...
And maybe even try with 5.3.3, that's
the current upstream series. 5.2.x is basically dead upstream by now (see
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan/5.2)
Hmm, actually it seems this is
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106086
Regards,
Rene
a update recently for exactly a OLE security fix.. I prepared the
wheezy-lts update
baded on Ubuntus patch for 3.5.7, though and it got amended later because mine
was apparently
incomplete and did't fix this issue. Maybe it made it too strict? CC'ing -lts.
Regards,
Rene
it was relevant for upcoming Debian release.
Not really as it's only normal (and I'd aargue important and more severe would
be overinflating severity) and TTBOMK there's no patch there yet anyways...
I assume this also happens in 5.3.2?
Regards,
Rene
the webmail where just by chance the stuff
ends in...
No offense to you intended either.
Regards,
Rene
didn't work?
And there factually is no en_SE.UTF-8 locale. Where did you invent it?
> LibreOffice is still unable to open the file though.
I'd try with a actually existing (and honoured by the system) locale first.
locales is not a "random" xx_YY combination ;-)
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:09:39PM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Tue, 2017 Mar 28 09:35+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > >
> > > If LibreOffice is installed without Java runtime support, then how
> > > is the failed installation of Java-based third-party ex
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 03:28:31AM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Tue, 2017 Mar 28 08:36+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > >
> > > > That installation would fail with a non clear message if the Java
> > > > support is not there. -> Bad.
> &
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 01:49:04AM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Mon, 2017 Mar 27 11:01+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >
> > The metapackage is supposed to install (mostly) everything.
> >
> > This includes the Java stuff.
> >
> > Think of people want
mmon/JRE dependencies. But then it is necessary to
> always have the two dependencies in tandem---if a package Depends: on
> one, then it Depends: on the other. If it Recommends: one, then it
> Recommends: the other. There can't be any instance where a package
> depends on only one of the two, or has a hard dep on one and a soft dep
> on the other.
>
> I would prefer to have a single dependency instead of two parallel ones,
> but maybe this approach is more to your liking?
No, how it is right now is my liking ;) (well, it's not ideal, but the
alternatives are worse.)
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
oops.
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 10:12:01AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> They are not. If you used one of them (which you probably won't run into
> given even the wizards are Java) you get told you want Java. Basically it's
[...] are NOT java anymore but python [...]
Regards,
Rene
a JRE would be fine---as long as that
> was the only JRE dependency, that would then allow me to decline all Java-
> requiring components by declining lo-java-common.
If at all, only a Suggests: (see above)
But this discussion is artificial, if there was a Recommends: there *any* module
which needs Java needs *extra* Depends on it as - as you say yourself - one
can install without Recommends and _THEN_ the package would be broken. So any
package requiring Java would still needs to Depend on Java _in addition_.
Regards,
Rene
>
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 12:10:35AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> [...] *And* it will also tell people to install libreoffice-java-common [...]
Actually that's untrue - the patch is disabled, probably because it didn't apply
anymore and it was forgotten to update.. ;/
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 12:01:53AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:00:22PM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> > # apt-get -s install libreoffice default-jre- | grep '^Inst' | egrep
> > 'jre|jdk|java'
> > Inst libreoff
s installed (huh?), and wiki-publisher went in just
> fine (will that even work in light of its hard dep on lo-java-common?).
That is interesting, though. They are *extensions* to LO, though, whereas
-sdbc-hsqldb is a _core_ component. But yeah, probably they should depend
on default-jre etc, too - as -sdbc-hsqldb does.
But not -java-common, as outlined in my first reply.
Regards,
Rene
of -sdbc-hsqldb).
Of course, if you disable Recommends:, you won't see it, but it's there.[1]
The current structure is a result of long thinking about it and shuffling around
various times and you need a compromise there. Knowledgeable users can avoid
Java by avoiding the libreoffice m
r/share/idl/libreoffice \
Making this a (RC) bug in Debian, too. It's not in any way new in 5.3.x but
there in Debian since 1:5.2.3~rc1-1.
Regards,
Rene
lly believe the authors think this bug is a feature as table data can
> be entered
> and edited only if the table has a primary key.
OK.
Asked someone who knew better and she suggested the same - though I didn't
really believe this.
Something learned :)
Regards,
Rene
applicable.
And you don't want to force -gtk(2) on people who want -gtk3 or even -kde.
Regards,
Rene
What if you would try with libreoffice-sdbc-postgresql which is a "native"
PostgreSQL connector using postgresqls libraries.
Regards,
Rene
ce, so
shouldn't libreoffice-writer get the preference here?
Regards,
Rene
TS *does*
Mergin the bugs and assigning it to both as fixing one package will
fix the issue.
Regards,
Rene
> Editing cell text. When entering new text the old text is still visible in
> the cell making the new text impossible to see.
Works for me. Current testing with 1:5.2.5-2. (FWIW, with gtk3)
What desktop do you use?
Regards,
Rene
such sorry
> state. Firefox, Chrome have exact same problem. I think one capable developer
> who knows Hangul can fix it quickly.
Does that mean that this is also a problem nowadays, years after that 4.3.3
is basically dead and out of (upstream) support?
Do you also have that problem with 5.2.5?
Regards,
Rene
I too don't think it
>is related to libreoffice.
Good.
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 08:22:41AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > This is the same behavior when running localc, loimpress, lodraw and
> > lomath. If you install the libreoffice metapackage then it will install
> > JRE.
>
> This is intended. Only stuff re
people people "usually" don't use LXDE with -gtk2 (or even -gtk3),
so people don't notice.
(And task-lxde-desktop also doesn't install -gtk2).
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:17:58PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 01:50:39PM +0100, Stefan Weil wrote:
> > Indeed it would be nice to have a Debian package for LibreOffice Online.
> > I finished installing it manually on Debian Stretch, and it works
192. That the JSON component is missing is completely
normal there. If POCO would have used something with a free license
See also https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103678 for the
wish upstream to remove that specific usage of POCO.
Regards,
Rene
>
ontroller (rev 06) (prog-if 00
[VGA controller])
---
% lspci | grep -i gra
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 4th Gen Core Processor
Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 06)
same for me. And as said, it works here.
Regards,
Rene
iled against 5.7.1)
>
> Tested against galaxy, breeze, sifr.
Ok, so it looks KDE-specific since it works in my gtk3-environment.
That said, even with installing libreoffice-kde and export
OOO_FORCE_DESKTOP="kde4"
to force KDE UI I *do* get tooltips (just tried the toolbar buttons)...
Regards,
Rene
And it even is actually designed for
KDE4...)
> Kernel: Linux 4.10.0-towo.1-siduction-amd64
Can you please stop filing non-Debian bugs in Debian. You use siduction,
not Debian. (Yeah, I know it's a sid snapshot/based on sid. still.)
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 01:36:49PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > selecting insert > document
> >
> > the enclosed error occurs
> >
> > read error
> > error reading file
>
> Correct. Writer is not supposed to be able to import PDF.
Actu
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 02:46:27PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 12:13:07PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> > > /usr/share/doc/libreoffice/sdk would also be possible AFAICS since it's
> > > no symlink and has (afai
not switch to symlink
dpkg: error processing archive
/home/rene/Debian/Pakete/LibreOffice/libreoffice/apt/./libreoffice_5.2.5-2_amd64.deb
(--unpack):
subprocess new pre-installation script returned error exit status 1
Given libreoffice does contain nothing as it's a metapackage I'd say o
don't like /usr/share/doc/libreoffice-core/sdk at
all. There's nothing -core'ish here. It's the SDK docs.
/usr/share/doc/libreoffice/sdk would also be possible AFAICS since it's
no symlink and has (afaicr) never been used for the docs.
Regards,
Rene
>
>
> Andreas
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:16:54PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> The last time this mess came up was #804317 which changed the path. And you
> as the reporter didn't react to the report...
>
> Policy 12.3 says that the docs in /usr/share/doc/libreoffice-dev is preffered:
age-doc in this example). However, installing the
documentation into the documentation directory of the main package is preferred
since it is independent of the packaging method and will be easier for users to
find."
Hints how to get out of this (without moving the path, besides the policy
abo
[ unarchived the bug. probably was archived due to being fixed in 5.2.x
and 5.3.x only in experimental... ]
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 03:13:57AM +, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Closes: 841253 842316
> Changes:
> libreoffice (1:5.2.3~rc3-1) unstable; urgency=medium
[...]
>
e "*.a"
./build/tests/libgraphite2-base.a
./build/tests/vm/libvm-test-common.a
./build/tests/libgraphite2-segcache.a
And LO creates a static library just by custom-compiling all files and putting
them into an .a...]
Regards,
Rene
ing anything. Did you loose directories and recreated them on your
own?
fs problems?
In any case, I can't see any bug in any of the involving packages.
Regards,
Rene
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 09:11:39PM +0100, Elrond wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 17:45:18 +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> [...]
> > Exactly my point since years. I don't see the need in multi-arch since
> > years.
> [...]
>
> Okay, I do still th
point since years. I don't see the need in multi-arch since
years.
> > > fonts-opensymbol (from the same source package) is already
> > > marked Multi-Arch=foreign, so what's different here?
> >
> > In that it's a font also generally usable and at least in the past also
> > used as a (build-)dependency of other packages.
>
> Right, dependency in cross architecture situations.
> And that's exactly the same here.
No, it isn't.
Regards,
Rene
inary "rest" for a working LO. How
would libreoffice-common on/for x32 help?
And I assume the UNO thingies will have severe problems with multi-arch
anyway.
No, won't do that.
Regards,
Rene
still happen in 5.2.4 as in stretch/sid? (Which is what you apparently
are aiming to use, so...)
And it also might be worth to try with 5.3 (experimental).
Regards,
Rene
tag 847572 + upstream
forwarded 847572 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123710
close 847572 1:4.4.0~alpha1-1 # from looking at cgit in the history the patch
is in 4.4.0 alpha1
thanks
Hi,
On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 10:56:14AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> But anyway, googling
rogram/libsvtlo.so
[...]
Here e.g. #0 misses info...
But anyway, googling for "TabBar::Resize crash libreoffice" gives me
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123710
Can you try with -dbg and/or confirm the stuff mentioned in that bug?
(the profile removal stuff, TabBar::ImplShowPage) etc. Maybe even test
with LO from bpo.
Is it with ODGs as described above?
Regards,
Rene
actually saw this, but I didn't care, this is experimental and beta1
is supposed be there next week.
That alpha1 has been in NEW for 3 weeks, enough
that I stopped caring about it already.
Regards,
Rene
w
* new upstream alpha release
[...]
* debian/rules, debian/control.mozilla.in, patches/install-fixes.diff,
debian/scripts/gid2pkgdirs.sh: remove nsplugin stuff; removed
upstream...
[...]
-- Rene Engelhard Sun, 19 Oct 2014 23:15:33 +0200
Got removed upstream. Over two years ago. So
801 - 900 of 13600 matches
Mail list logo
