Bug 133401 - Image at the wrong spot (and different order)
Summary: Image at the wrong spot (and different order)
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: LibreOffice
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Writer (show other bugs)
Version:
(earliest affected)
6.2.0.3 release
Hardware: All All
: medium normal
Assignee: Not Assigned
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: bibisected, bisected, regression
Depends on:
Blocks: Format-Filters
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2020-05-26 08:57 UTC by Telesto
Modified: 2023-10-16 10:19 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Crash report or crash signature:


Attachments
Example file (1.01 MB, application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text)
2020-05-26 08:58 UTC, Telesto
Details
Screenshot (662.56 KB, image/png)
2020-05-26 09:20 UTC, Telesto
Details
Bibisect log (3.21 KB, text/plain)
2020-06-30 09:01 UTC, Telesto
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Telesto 2020-05-26 08:57:47 UTC
Description:
Layout of a document different between 4.4.7.2 (and older) and 5.0 and up

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Open the attached file with 4.4.7.2 or older
2. Open the attached file with 5.0 or newer 
compare

Actual Results:
Different results.. even images at different positions

Expected Results:
No clue what to do.. the old layout look better.. however, the new look is around for a long long time now.. Didn't check changes in behaviour


Reproducible: Always


User Profile Reset: No



Additional Info:
Version: 7.0.0.0.alpha1+ (x64)
Build ID: 21875558f6c478f07d68ff39e025d7ffd451674f
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

but not in
4.4.7.2
Comment 1 Telesto 2020-05-26 08:58:07 UTC
Created attachment 161291 [details]
Example file
Comment 2 Telesto 2020-05-26 08:59:40 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)
Comment 3 Telesto 2020-05-26 09:20:53 UTC
Created attachment 161292 [details]
Screenshot
Comment 4 Telesto 2020-05-26 09:50:25 UTC
This is a bug. Delete the first flamegraph on the second page.. and press Undo.. result looks like 4.4.7.2
Comment 5 Heiko Tietze 2020-05-28 12:19:07 UTC Comment hidden (no-value)
Comment 6 Xisco Faulí 2020-06-29 15:08:03 UTC
it seems like a similar issue to bug 134051

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 134051 ***
Comment 7 Telesto 2020-06-29 16:31:09 UTC
(In reply to Xisco Faulí from comment #6)
> it seems like a similar issue to bug 134051
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 134051 ***

Marking this a duplicate of bug 134051 is certainly wrong

Anyway, I'm wrong with my bibisect..

The same layout as in 4.4.7.2  with
6.0
6.1

and
Version: 6.2.0.0.alpha0+
Build ID: b9652803096b68a33702601aac52e78c8a4250c6
CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 6.3; UI render: default; 
Locale: nl-NL (nl_NL); Calc: CL
Comment 8 Telesto 2020-06-30 09:01:59 UTC
Created attachment 162545 [details]
Bibisect log

Bisected to
author	Michael Stahl <Michael.Stahl@cib.de>	2019-03-06 12:03:32 +0100
committer	Thorsten Behrens <Thorsten.Behrens@CIB.de>	2019-03-10 01:20:50 +0100
commit f8c00f23660e6816dd0a15708702c986c0cb4062 (patch)
tree 9a00e9e87bafe40bb14d75415eca5434d7d8f474
parent c1a0cd9f3272f484a15ab2d6c1d9fe727a2b27f1 (diff)
tdf#116195 sw: remove DisableOffPagePositioning handling from ODF import
SwXMLImport::SetConfigurationSettings() needs to handle only those
settings for which the default is different vs. old OOo/LO versions;
DisableOffPagePositioning however defaults to false, so we can just rely
on that default.  The inverted bDisableOffPagePositioning check is
wrong.

(regression from fe3d5766fa3c42f6cf8d1ea47af820e0b1c1cf48)

https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=f8c00f23660e6816dd0a15708702c986c0cb4062
Comment 9 Xisco Faulí 2020-06-30 09:04:34 UTC
@Telesto, according to the commit message, it was a fix for another regression.
can you check if the issue is reproducible before https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=fe3d5766fa3c42f6cf8d1ea47af820e0b1c1cf48 ?
Comment 10 Xisco Faulí 2020-06-30 09:05:47 UTC
OTOH, the commit is from 2019 while the summary talks about differences between 4.4 and 5.0. Either the summary is wrong or the commit is incorrect
Comment 11 Telesto 2020-06-30 09:10:33 UTC
So this back and forward dance.

4.4.7.2 and previous (assumed good)
5.0 - 5.4 assumed to be broken
6.0 - 6.1 back to 4.4.7.2 standard (assumed good)
6.2 broken again 

To fix it.. 
1) Move the image slightly to the left (will jump to the previous page)
2) Press Undo
Comment 12 Telesto 2020-06-30 09:27:53 UTC
To be clear
author	Patrick Jaap <patrick.jaap@tu-dresden.de>	2018-04-10 15:29:56 +0200
committer	Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.co.uk>	2018-04-18 09:43:09 +0200
commit fe3d5766fa3c42f6cf8d1ea47af820e0b1c1cf48 (patch)
tree 4b83e47d5a7477a12d2aee48ac4894ca7a61a991
parent 00ff4d198313265ba736a6e234b4278166d1c3e4 (diff)
tdf#116195 swap a compatibility value
There was a minor bug in the compat flag, leading
to a regression from commit 8d62b79f168180c6992eb483ec864d473050635f

Fixed the issue, but comment 8 broke it again.. while everything started with comment 2
Comment 13 Telesto 2020-07-25 19:19:49 UTC
Adding CC: to Michael Stahl 

This started with commit: 0a6a151c4b7c78a363fb64598fbda39db4f42d07 (2015-02-11 12:00:03)
Got resolved by commit fe3d5766fa3c42f6cf8d1ea47af820e0b1c1cf48 (2018-04-18 09:43:09 +0200)
And broken again with commit f8c00f23660e6816dd0a15708702c986c0cb4062 (2019-03-06 12:03:32 +0100)
 f8c00f23660e6816dd0a15708702c986c0cb4062 is also causing bug 135132
Comment 14 Buovjaga 2020-11-30 14:53:29 UTC
I confirm the change