[Libreoffice] manipulating cursors/selections in writer with accessibility api's (bug 43390)

Hi, I'm working for CodeWeavers on a project that uses accessibility API's (specifically at-spi 2) to manipulate text fields. I cannot publicly disclose the exact nature of this project before its release, though it may be possible to provide access to this project for selected developers. We're

Re: [Libreoffice] [REVIEW-3-4] Reverted - Fix overly zealous check in Zip package consistency

Michael Meeks wrote: > Are we even certain that this new fix is correct ? I would really > rather see this bed-down in 3.5 and get some wider testing than see it > in 3.4.5 - can't we just revert the original fix there ? > Yes, sure. I'm sorry for boldly suggesting the original patch for 3.4.

Re: [Libreoffice] unit-test dependencies (Re: Tests on release build)

On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 22:13 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote: > so i had overlooked that we actually list all the components that the > test uses; i assumed it uses the office services.rdb or something. :-) > i've just tweaked the library<->component dependencies a bit so the > component is no

Re: [Libreoffice] unit-test dependencies (Re: Tests on release build)

On 16/12/11 11:05, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > On 12/15/2011 07:25 PM, Michael Meeks wrote: >> Hah :-) so - one thing that I wondered about ... is - is it possible >> that our gnumake dependencies on .component files do not include >> dependencies to the libraries they are for ? such that we can

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] Fix for fdo43460 Part XI getLength() to isEmpty()

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Please find attached a partial fix for Easy Hack FDO43460 Part XI Module cui - -- Olivier Hallot Founder, Board of Directors Member - The Document Foundation LibreOffice translation leader for Brazilian Portuguese +55-21-8822-8812 -BEGIN PGP SIG

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] building with gcc-trunk

On Friday 16 of December 2011, Matúš Kukan wrote: > Hi, > > The build was not successful, there is problem in > testtools/source/bridgetest but > I created two patches. First is because of new c++ feature but I have > no idea if the second one is ok and what was the problem. If "type ‘GraphicDesc

Re: [Libreoffice] [REVIEW-3-4] Reverted - Fix overly zealous check in Zip package consistency

Hi Thorsten, On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 09:33 +0100, Thorsten Behrens wrote: > I'll be putting that to -3-5 in a minute - for -3-4, unfortunately, > 3.4.5 RC1 does not read password-protected odf documents It worries me that (you suggest) due to this last minute fix (that I obviously didn't do

Re: [Libreoffice] [Patch] Remove OOoImprovement

On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 12:22 +0100, Christoph Noack wrote: > I'm not fully sure whether you refer to the OpenOffice.org improvement > program. If yes, then this issue had been discussed some months ago. I > also had some discussions with others (e.g. with Michael at the > LibOConf) how to get that

Re: [Libreoffice] duplicate bugs

Hello Winfried, all, On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 14:18, Winfried Donkers wrote: > Is it an option to push it to 3.4.5 as well? In case you haven't known this yet: if you want to do this, you have to send a mail to this dev list with a subject like [REVIEW] $subject and pointing to your commit. The

Re: [Libreoffice] Remember the RTL interface

Lior Kaplan schrieb: As 3.5.0 enters the first beta (ok, ok - beta0), I'd like to remind you on the RTL stuff from the conference last month. Hi, please review, correct and complete my modifications on and

Re: [Libreoffice] Git pull problems

Hello Alex, all, On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 17:38, Alex Thurgood wrote: > Le 14/12/2011 11:18, Bjoern Michaelsen a écrit : >>  git reset --hard 28b86ca7b704d2789cad69f7516203434202c082^ >>  git pull [cut] > Unfortunately not : > git reset --hard 28b86ca7b704d2789cad69f7516203434202c082 > fatal: unab

[Libreoffice] [PUSHED] Decoview cleanup #9 - ImplDrawFrame

Hi Matteo, On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 21:29 +0100, Matteo Casalin wrote: > * Share code between draw/nodraw on window devices (this needs review >for sure, I didn't understand clearly the conditions to be met for >the nodraw case); I think you got it right; the idea is simply not to dr

[Libreoffice] [Bug 37361] LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 Bug 37361 depends on bug 43480, which changed state. Bug 43480 Summary: EDITING: cell text *contents* from Calc pasted to Writer is pasted at bottom of document, unless paste special is used https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43480

[Libreoffice] [Bug 37361] LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 Bug 37361 depends on bug 43458, which changed state. Bug 43458 Summary: LibreOffice does not start with a second monitor connected https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43458 What|Old Value |New Value

Re: [Libreoffice] [RFC] COMPRESSMODE_FULL

On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:08:26 +0100, Matteo Casalin wrote: Hi, this is off-topic, however since you are the only italian active code developer of LibO (Italo Vignoli is not involved into coding but into marketing), I'm inviting you to join the Italian OOo/LibO discussion group here at: https://

[Libreoffice] [Bug 37361] LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 Roman Eisele changed: What|Removed |Added CC||b...@eikota.de Depends on|

Re: [Libreoffice] libicudata ICU data info

Hi, On Friday, 2011-12-16 12:07:53 +, Caolán McNamara wrote: > Anyway, point is that > savings are worthwhile for universal Linux builds too I guess. Yeah, right. Mike, are you willing to invest some time and effort in this? Eike -- LibreOffice Calc developer. Number formatter stricken

[Libreoffice] [ANN] LibreOffice 3.5.0 Beta1 available

Dear Community, The Document Foundation is happy to announce the first beta release of LibreOffice 3.5.0. The upcoming 3.5 will be our third major release line, packed with many exciting new features. Please be aware that LibreOffice 3.5.0 Beta1 is not ready for production use, you should continue

Re: [Libreoffice] Remember the RTL interface

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 02:45:27AM +0200, Lior Kaplan wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Khaled Hosny wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 02:18:41AM +0200, Lior Kaplan wrote: > > Hi Guys, > > > > As 3.5.0 enters the first beta (ok, ok - beta0), I'd like to remind you > o

Re: [Libreoffice] assertion in SwIndexReg::~SwIndexReg

On 16/12/11 15:04, Terrence Enger wrote: > On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 12:05 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote: >> On 16/12/11 10:52, Stephan Bergmann wrote: >>> >>> Yes. I would assume that the destructor's expectation is legitimate, >>> and that the code keeping the container non-empty is in error. >> >> we

Re: [Libreoffice] postgresql bits in minutes of tech. steering call

On 15/12/11 19:46, Michael Meeks wrote: > On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 19:11 +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote: >> On this, someone said on the talk "we use only libc" (and I implicitly >> understood: in the binaries we distribute). > > You have to be quite careful with claims from Fridrich, they are

Re: [Libreoffice] assertion in SwIndexReg::~SwIndexReg

On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 12:05 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote: > On 16/12/11 10:52, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > > > > Yes. I would assume that the destructor's expectation is legitimate, > > and that the code keeping the container non-empty is in error. > > well yes it means that there is some cursor st

Re: [Libreoffice] [Patch] Remove OOoImprovement

On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 00:20 -0500, August Sodora wrote: > somebody mind reviewing/pushing this? I was forced to upgrade and am > still waiting for my gpg key to be changed. Oh ! you filed a sysadmin bug vs. freedesktop for that ? if so you want to poke me privately with the bug # to expid

Re: [Libreoffice] libicudata ICU data info

On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 23:44 +0100, Eike Rathke wrote: > Given that only systems where ICU doesn't already exist > (Windows and?) would benefit from this it's surely a benevolent task for > some merciful soul ;-) While distro packagers can get away with a system-icu alright, our "universal" Linux

Re: [Libreoffice] [Patch] Remove OOoImprovement

Hi all, I'm not fully sure whether you refer to the OpenOffice.org improvement program. If yes, then this issue had been discussed some months ago. I also had some discussions with others (e.g. with Michael at the LibOConf) how to get that back working. Here is one of the mails: http://lists.free

Re: [Libreoffice] assertion in SwIndexReg::~SwIndexReg

On 16/12/11 10:52, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > On 12/15/2011 04:29 PM, Terrence Enger wrote: >> So, I take it, the helpful question to investigate is the >> reason why the state of the object violates the >> expectation--the expectation that the container is empty-- >> that the destructor asserts. O

[Libreoffice] [Bug 37361] LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 --- Comment #56 from j...@dpets.co.uk 2011-12-16 02:58:36 UTC --- Propose bug https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35023, base is unusable until this is resolved. While it seems to be a Java bug, we already appear to have had at least one

[Libreoffice] [Bug 37361] LibreOffice 3.5 most annoying bugs

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37361 j...@dpets.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||35023 -- Configure bugmail: https://b

Re: [Libreoffice] [RFC] COMPRESSMODE_FULL

Matteo Casalin wrote: > From my understanding, if we remove these 2 calls that set te > COMPRESSMODE_FULL flag then there is no reason to keep the code that > depend on that, unless the svstream acquires the flag from the stream > itself or that it's set by calling the set function with a "magic

Re: [Libreoffice] [RFC] COMPRESSMODE_FULL

Hi Thorsten Thorsten Behrens wrote: (16/12/2011 01:55) > Matteo Casalin wrote: > > set: > > /binfilter/binfilter/bf_svtools/source/filter.vcl/filter/svt_filter.cxx > > /core/svtools/source/filter/filter.cxx > > > Both can go. >From my understanding, if we remove these 2 calls that set te COM

Re: [Libreoffice] unit-test dependencies (Re: Tests on release build)

On 12/15/2011 07:25 PM, Michael Meeks wrote: Hah :-) so - one thing that I wondered about ... is - is it possible that our gnumake dependencies on .component files do not include dependencies to the libraries they are for ? such that we can build and install the .component file - without

Re: [Libreoffice] assertion in SwIndexReg::~SwIndexReg

On 12/15/2011 04:29 PM, Terrence Enger wrote: Nowhere is it written that you will understand everything. Sometimes there are surprising side-effects. :) So, I take it, the helpful question to investigate is the reason why the state of the object violates the expectation--the expectation t

[Libreoffice] [REVIEW-3-4] Reverted - Fix overly zealous check in Zip package consistency

Michael Meeks wrote: > Great; I did the same git grep and it seems it's only fiddle with on > writing so we should get it in :-) > Sigh, well, that writing had a bug - Moggi's password.ods unit test uncovered, that we write out inconsistent compression mode values in that case. This is fixed