Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 06:33:28PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> > > > Suse ships 1.33 in 10.2 so they probably didn't see this and 2.2.0-x
> > > > also did get build with the old boost. In t he meanwhile, we're at 1.34
> > > > a
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 06:33:28PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> > > Suse ships 1.33 in 10.2 so they probably didn't see this and 2.2.0-x
> > > also did get build with the old boost. In t he meanwhile, we're at 1.34
> > > and even ppc (who did work before) doesn
Hi,
Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> > Suse ships 1.33 in 10.2 so they probably didn't see this and 2.2.0-x
> > also did get build with the old boost. In t he meanwhile, we're at 1.34
> > and even ppc (who did work before) doesn't work anymore when rebuilt
> > (this time with boost 1.34). And boost actu
On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 06:01:31PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
> Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Ariel Garcia wrote:
> > > it came to my mind that perhaps it would be worth trying building OO "the
> > > Debian way" but without the debian patches, as perhaps the problem lies
> > > not on the linked
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 425528 - help
Bug#425528: openoffice.org-draw 2.2.1-rc1 gets basic shapes wrong
Tags were: help confirmed
Bug#425276: Shape problems in Impress
Tags removed: help
> tag 425528 + pending
Bug#425528: openoffice.org-draw 2.2.1-rc1 gets basic
tag 425528 - help
tag 425528 + pending
thanks
Hi,
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Ariel Garcia wrote:
> > it came to my mind that perhaps it would be worth trying building OO "the
> > Debian way" but without the debian patches, as perhaps the problem lies
> > not on the linked libs but on some patch it
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Ariel Garcia wrote:
> > it came to my mind that perhaps it would be worth trying building OO "the
> > Debian way" but without the debian patches, as perhaps the problem lies
> > not on the linked libs but on some patch itself.
>
> Maybe yes. But most of those patches didn
Ariel Garcia wrote:
> it came to my mind that perhaps it would be worth trying building OO "the
> Debian way" but without the debian patches, as perhaps the problem lies
> not on the linked libs but on some patch itself.
Maybe yes. But most of those patches didn't change from 2.2.0 to 2.2.1.
The
Hi Rene,
it came to my mind that perhaps it would be worth trying building OO "the
Debian way" but without the debian patches, as perhaps the problem lies
not on the linked libs but on some patch itself.
I took a look at the OO-2.2.1~rc1-1.diff.gz package and i must confess i
don't quite unde
Hi,
I did some more tests.
** I checked that a draw file created with debian's oodraw 2.2.1-rc1 (which
shows and exports(pdf) the wrong shapes), opens with the right shapes
under the previous debian-OO version 2.2.0-7. So it is only
the "interpreting" of the shapes which goes wrong, not the
Hi,
Ariel Garcia wrote:
> selecting the shape (most of them but not all) and trying to draw it shows
> the issue. For instance the isoceles triangle is drawn as a right
> triangle, a rectangle w/ rounded corners as a quarter of a circle, but a
> rectangle and right triangle are fine.
Yes, neve
I now tested with Cairo and OpenGL disabled (Options -> Openoffice.org ->
View -> Use hardware acceleration / opengl )
(and restarting afterwards just in case) and the problem persists.
Actually the problem doesn't need a document from an older version, just
selecting the shape (most of them but
Hi,
Same problem here, on i386. Running
apt-get install openoffice.org=2.2.0-6 openoffice.org-core=2.2.0-6
openoffice.org-writer=2.2.0-6 openoffice.org-calc=2.2.0-6
openoffice.org-impress=2.2.0-6 openoffice.org-draw=2.2.0-6
openoffice.org-base=2.2.0-6 openoffice.org-math=2.2.0-6
openoffice.or
13 matches
Mail list logo
