Description: Style formatting lost after undo redo Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open attachment 162238 [details] 2. CTRL+A 3. CTRL+C 4. CTRL+N 5. CTRL+V 6. CTRL+Z 7. CTRL+Y Actual Results: Title to the left (and not bold) F1 and F2 not bold anymore.. and probably some more differences Expected Results: Shouldn't happen; did work Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: No Additional Info: Found in Version: 7.1.0.0.alpha0+ (x64) Build ID: 43c60ce1ac7629a1462e927e6ff937469f58f743 CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 6.3 Build 9600; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: nl-NL (nl_NL); UI: en-US Calc: CL and in Version: 6.0.6.0.0+ Build ID: c30963b8b4bbbe42a24b97aafa161eff9d7ccdd4 CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 6.3; UI render: default; Locale: nl-NL (nl_NL); Calc: CL but not in Versie: 4.4.7.2 Build ID: f3153a8b245191196a4b6b9abd1d0da16eead600 Locale: nl_NL
Note: file opening is slow (on Windows) caused by embedded fonts
Source bug file: bug 134171
I confirm it with Version: 7.0.0.0.beta2 (x64) Build ID: 1c213561a365b5666167321de68c9977500c9612 CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 18363; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI: en-GB Calc: CL
*** Bug 134075 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This can be bibisected with a 5.1 repo
Bibisected with Win 5.1 repo - had to do a skip for the second-to-last step, so got these two related ones: https://git.libreoffice.org/core/+/93067f37cf22aa119db5878c4345fea500cbbb42%5E!/ tdf#91383: sw: prevent style preview from actually creating styles https://git.libreoffice.org/core/+/779b547ca6271156a59965569fa44fbeb3f63ce5%5E!/ tdf#90991: sw: fix style preview creating undo objects Adding Cc: to Michael Stahl
*** Bug 140678 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 125684 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
@Buovjaga Note: me getting slightly confused regarding the duplicates strategy. Where inherited bugs are dropped in bug report which got bibisected. (So I expect more or less the same identified commit) Don't deny those might be connected and the commit only uncovering something present for a long time.. but you can clean up the bug tracker to rigorously (and worst case mix things; With me as single reporter of the duplicates too, the 'flood of feedback' and mess that causes will be low. But well don't really follow the strategy (even I have to admit that I might cause a duplicate once in a while; not on purpose though)
(In reply to Telesto from comment #9) > @Buovjaga > Note: me getting slightly confused regarding the duplicates strategy. Where > inherited bugs are dropped in bug report which got bibisected. (So I expect > more or less the same identified commit) > > Don't deny those might be connected and the commit only uncovering something > present for a long time.. > > but you can clean up the bug tracker to rigorously (and worst case mix > things; With me as single reporter of the duplicates too, the 'flood of > feedback' and mess that causes will be low. But well don't really follow the > strategy (even I have to admit that I might cause a duplicate once in a > while; not on purpose though) Timur: can you explain why you duped inherited reports to this bibisected one?
(In reply to Buovjaga from comment #10) > Timur: can you explain why you duped inherited reports to this bibisected > one? While I may not be correct, I assumed that eventual dev should look at all those because they have the same steps and similar outcome with changed styles. Bugs were wrongly reported separately, more over by the same person, with just consequences like "Actual Results: this font, Expected Results: that font" when it's about style change. Bug 134178 attachment 162238 [details]: Title > Heading F, Heading 1 > Heading, Heading F > Text Body Bug 125684 attachment 151909 [details]: Preformatted Text > Default Paragraph Bug 140678 attachment 170074 [details]: Title > Paragraph style, Subtitle > Paragraph style
Dear Telesto, To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from https://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo'; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://web.libera.chat/?settings=#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
Still present in Version: 24.2.3.2 (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 433d9c2ded56988e8a90e6b2e771ee4e6a5ab2ba CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19045; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI: en-GB Calc: CL threaded
(In reply to Buovjaga from comment #6) > Adding Cc: to Michael Stahl Michael, I've just recognized, that you wasn't in cc.
(In reply to Dieter from comment #14) > (In reply to Buovjaga from comment #6) > > Adding Cc: to Michael Stahl > > Michael, I've just recognized, that you wasn't in cc. That was NOK to do, as in History you may see he removed himself.