Description: After conversion to HTML lists element's content appears out of list Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open attached document 2. Save it as html 3. Reopen html file Actual Results: List with two elements: 1 First.First 2 First.Second Expected Results: List with open element which represent list with two elements 1.1 First.First 1.2 First.Second Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: No Additional Info: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0
Created attachment 142084 [details] file that is converted wrongly with LibreOffice
Reproducible with Version: 6.1.0.0.alpha1+ (x64) Build ID: 775d0f26beecffccf3ed27a6a011aff20d91f842 CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0; UI render: default; TinderBox: Win-x86_64@42, Branch:master, Time: 2018-04-26_01:05:25 Locale: en-US (de_DE); Calc: CL
Regression introduced in range Regression introduced in range https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/log/?qt=range&q=9ae9b2f665b3caa9cc584512c26dfa899e1d2d45..6874228b090b9d910651ddf6ec82b16ac9ecb6de
Still present in Version: 7.1.1.2 (x64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: fe0b08f4af1bacafe4c7ecc87ce55bb426164676 CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19042; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI: en-GB Calc: CL
Dear zhiganoff.rd, 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: 7.5.1.2 (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: fcbaee479e84c6cd81291587d2ee68cba099e129 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
Still reproducible on Version: 24.8.0.0.alpha0+ (X86_64) / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 43f49c3b50b406f0334085dcf302180718f3ecb3 CPU threads: 4; OS: Linux 6.5; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: zh-CN (zh_CN.UTF-8); UI: zh-CN Calc: threaded
Xisco Faulí: Based on your bibisected range, I tried to do a bisect from source building. However, the bibisect range seams to be not correct. Bug exists on commit 02d03eb4ad6e64744659c5fe04282b25b66c28d8 (i.e. the first bad commit identified by bibisect), but the bug also exists on commit 9ae9b2f665b3caa9cc584512c26dfa899e1d2d45 (i.e. its parent commit), even if I do "make clean" for each build. Would you please rerun the bibisect of you still have the 4.2 bibisect repo? I remove bibisected keyword and add bibisectRequest instead.
I can reproduce the bug with oldest commit in linux bibisect-41max repo.
For me this bug already exists in LO 3.3.0.