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

Bug#424991: marked as done (openoffice.org-writer: [OO-writer] embedded calc table botched after save on amd64)

Your message dated Tue, 11 Mar 2008 22:27:42 +0100
with message-id <200803112227.42752.pp2ml.deb0609@nest-ai.de>
and subject line openoffice.org-writer: [OO-writer] embedded calc table botched after save on amd64
has caused the Debian Bug report #424991,
regarding openoffice.org-writer: [OO-writer] embedded calc table botched after save on amd64
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
424991: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=424991
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: openoffice.org-writer
Version: 2.0.4.dfsg.2-5etch1
Severity: normal


The embedded OO-calc table in the attached document is botched
after the document has been saved and reopened.

To reproduce:

*  open document in OO-writer
*  make minimal change and 'Save' or just 'SaveAs' w/o changes
   (document in OO is still OK, e.g. exportPDF or print
    work as expected)
*  close document
*  reopen document (doesn't matter, if OO itself is restarted)


Result:

1. The second table (which is an embedded OO-calc table) seems
   to be empty.
2. If I double-click the table, I see that the table's contents
   is still there, but the cells are BIG, so only some of them
   are visible.
3. If I then click outside the table, the table changes again:
   now its contents is magnified again, becoming so huge that not
   even the upper left cell is shown completely.
4. Double-clicking the table again gets it back to state 2).


Additional info:

This appears to be a 64-bit bug.
The document works as expected, if I edit it with the OO-writer
(same version) of a i386 system booted from a separate partition.


Other installed OO packages:
  openoffice.org-calc
  openoffice.org-common
  openoffice.org-core
  openoffice.org-help-de
  openoffice.org-java-common
  openoffice.org-l10n-de

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
  APT prefers proposed-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'proposed-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-amd64
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)

Versions of packages openoffice.org-writer depends on:
ii  libc6                2.3.6.ds1-13        GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii  libgcc1              1:4.1.1-21          GCC support library
ii  libicu36             3.6-2               International Components for Unico
ii  libstdc++6           4.1.1-21            The GNU Standard C++ Library v3
ii  libstlport4.6c2      4.6.2-3             STLport C++ class library
ii  libwpd8c2a           0.8.7-6             Library for handling WordPerfect d
ii  openoffice.org-core  2.0.4.dfsg.2-5etch1 OpenOffice.org office suite archit
ii  python-uno           2.0.4.dfsg.2-5etch1 Python interface for OpenOffice.or
ii  zlib1g               1:1.2.3-13          compression library - runtime

Versions of packages openoffice.org-writer recommends:
ii  gij [java2-runtime]  4:4.1.1-15          The GNU Java bytecode interpreter
ii  gij-4.1 [java2-runti 4.1.1-20            The GNU Java bytecode interpreter
ii  openoffice.org-java- 2.0.4.dfsg.2-5etch1 OpenOffice.org office suite Java s
ii  sun-java5-jre [java2 1.5.0-10-3          Sun Java(TM) Runtime Environment (

-- no debconf information

Attachment: wkh-orig.sxw
Description: Zip archive


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Hi,

I am closing this bug, as it seems not to be present in Lenny anymore.

Package: openoffice.org-writer
Version: 1:2.3.1-5
Kernel: 2.6.22-3-amd64

Best regards,

  Peter Pöschl

--- End Message ---
Reply to: