[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#244188: openoffice.org: crash on rw-open, perms problem?



Package: openoffice.org
Version: 1.1.1-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable


Opening any type of document from the commandline ('openoffice test.sxw')
fully opens openoffice, applicable additional windows, renders the document on the
screen, then displays the following dialog window:
"An unrecoverable error has occured.

All modified files have been saved and can probably be recovered at
program restart."
After which ooo closes.

Opening ooo without parameters, then using the file -> open dialog has
the following effect:
1) if you select the read-only checkbox, the file opens fine
2) if you do not select ro, the same dialog box and program closure
occur.


Running ooo with root permissions ('sudo openoffice') seems to resolve
the problem.
The files I tested with are definitely writable for the user.

I tried removing the .openoffice and .sversionrc, with no avail


I did some extensive stracing openoffice for file permissions, but I
couldn't locate the problem. (probably due lack of stracing skills)
If it helps, I can send the strace files.


PS: I also suffer from the already reported bug where saving a document
(even autosave) crashes openoffice, makes it dissapear without notice.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.5j2-usbserial
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=nl_BE@euro

Versions of packages openoffice.org depends on:
ii  debianutils           2.8.1              Miscellaneous utilities specific t
ii  dictionaries-common [ 0.22.8             Common utilities for spelling dict
ii  openoffice.org-bin    1.1.1-1            OpenOffice.org office suite binary
ii  openoffice.org-debian 1.1.0+1.1.1rc3-1+1 Debian specific parts of OpenOffic
ii  openoffice.org-l10n-e 1.1.1-1            English (US) language package for 

-- no debconf information



Reply to: