If the Find & Replace dialog is combined with Format than exists no results
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Write the first line (paragraph)
3. Marke first paragraph and Format→ Character : DejaVu Serif
4. Edit→Find&replace→ Find : (.*)
5. Regular expressions yes , Paragraph Styles no
6. Format→ Font : DejaVu Serif, Text Flow : all options destroyed
7. Result: Below Find line exists not only the DejaVu Serif, but other parameters
8. Reset Format
9. oncemore Format→ Font : DejaVu Serif, and nothing more
10. Result: Below Find line exists not only the DejaVu Serif, but Orphan control 0 Lines, Widow control 0 Lines,
11. Replace : &
12. Format→ Font : Times New Roman
13. Find All
14. Result: Search key not found!
Search key not found
Search have to find the first paragraph = line
User Profile Reset: No
I can reproduce steps 1 to 10, but I don't understand steps 11 to 14.
Step 11 - 14 indicate that nobody don´t replace DejaVu Serif alone with Times New Roman, because it is not passible to find DejaVu Serif alone.
I confirm your behaviour with
Version: 22.214.171.124.alpha0+ (x64)
Build ID: f0c832acb53326ccc9a8c1a47401fbc9e1081feb
CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0; UI render: default; VCL: win;
TinderBox: Win-x86_64@62-TDF, Branch:master, Time: 2019-09-11_05:46:53
Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI-Language: en-US
And also with
Version: 126.96.36.199 (x64)
Build ID: 5896ab1714085361c45cf540f76f60673dd96a72
CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0; UI render: GL;
Locale: de-DE (de_DE); Calc: group threaded
But not with
Version: 188.8.131.52 (x64)
CPU-Threads: 4; BS: Windows 6.19; UI-Render: GL;
Gebietsschema: de-DE (de_DE); Calc: group
Steps to reproduce
1. Write some text
2. Open find & replace dialog
3. insert a word in search field, that exists in the text
4. Result: Word is found
5. Press format-button
6. Text flow tab => O. K. (change nothing in settings)
7. Orphan control 0 lines, widow control 0 lines is added to search criteria (that doesn't happen in LO 5.4)
8. Result: Search key not found.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 127725 ***
This appears to be a duplicate of a bug I reported previously. A commenter on another site suggests this may be limited to .deb packaged versions of LO.
(In reply to Alexis from comment #5)
> This appears to be a duplicate of a bug I reported previously. A commenter
> on another site suggests this may be limited to .deb packaged versions of LO.
Alexis, I culdn't reproduce your bug report, so I'm not 100% sure, that it is a duplicate. Since I'm using windows, bug 127784 is not only an Linux issue.
So I suggest to treat them separate. I also think, i's not a good idea to close a confirmed bug as duplicate of an unconfirmed on. I hope, you agree.
(Sorry, my english is very poor.)
But I am feeling that the other named bug which is discussed as a duplicate, is not a duplicate: In my case the both fonts are installed, but in the other bug the second font was not installed.
This sounds very similar to the already-fixed bug 126527.
Could you please install the latest 6.4 version and check?
(In reply to stragu from comment #8)
> This sounds very similar to the already-fixed bug 126527.
> Could you please install the latest 6.4 version and check?