2011/9/7 Caolán McNamara <caol...@redhat.com>: > On Mon, 2011-09-05 at 23:57 +0200, Knut Olav Bøhmer wrote: >> 2011/9/5 Caolán McNamara <caol...@redhat.com>: >> > On Sun, 2011-09-04 at 00:29 +0200, Knut Olav Břhmer wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> This patch solves a serious problem experienced by many companies and >> >> need to be included in libreoffice. >> >> I'm using this patch with my own build for my customers with ooo 3.2.1 >> >> >> >> http://openoffice.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114485 >> > >> > Which patch exactly, my patch from #12 or #15 above or something >> > additional ? >> >> I think I was using the "update patch to handle real-world documents". >> But it was so long time ago that I compiled it so I don't remember. >> Do you remember what you needed to improve to make it correct? Is >> there any example where the patch would not work? > > The reason I didn't go ahead with that patch IIRC, is because there > appear to be *three* places where the hyperlink gets set, and the patch > sets two of them, but not the two that really matter. i.e. there's the > inline hyperlink in the field itself, there's some hyperlinks stored in > the DocumentSummaryStream metadata, and then there's hyperlinks in the > data stream associated with basically some FormField structure linked to > the field. > > I think my patch set the DocumentSummaryStream one, but hacking > documents manually showed that word used the FormField one if it exists > over the metadata one, so I don't think the patch is quite right.
Well, in my buggy.doc the hyperlink was located 3 places. Hyperlinks in theese two location was wrong (as I already explaind in the bugreport): gsf cat buggy.doc WordDocument # (I guess this is where FormFields are located) gsf cat buggy.doc Data This was right: gsf cat buggy.doc DocumentSummaryInformation And that's what your patch is using. If LibreOffice would use anything else for this docs, it would be wrong. So if you change it again, I can not use it. Harald, can you confirm that this patch fixes the problem for your docs too? > Noel was playing with the fieldfield stuff IIRC, new parsers and the > like, which might have some bearing on these, at least on getting the > parser right to read the same hyperlink value as word reads. I don't know, but if there is no hyperlink in DocumentSummaryInformation, then word might use the FormField link over the "Data" one. Best regartds -- Knut Olav Bøhmer _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
