Created attachment 175770 [details] Sample document How to repeat: 1. Open the test document. 2. Change the text a bit, e.g. "Thank you!" to "Thanks!" 3. Save as PPTX. 4. Open saved PPTX in Office 365 and observe there's an extra bullet before the text.
Seen with current head and 7.2.3, not seen with 7.1.5 or 6.4.8. -> Regression -> Kindly asking for bibisection FAILS: Version: 7.3.0.0.alpha0+ / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 3f5fb07565d0e08773ddfcda4d5acbb1446aa2f2 CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.14; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8); UI: en-US TinderBox: Linux-rpm_deb-x86_64@86-TDF, Branch:master, Time: 2021-10-08_17:38:02 Version: 7.2.3.0.0+ / LibreOffice Community Build ID: da66ff3d83e5e975383615081eeffd3fa2f668f9 CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.14; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8); UI: en-US TinderBox: Linux-rpm_deb-x86_64@86-TDF, Branch:libreoffice-7-2, Time: 2021-10-14_23:39:58 Calc: threaded PASSES: Version: 7.1.5.0.0+ / LibreOffice Community Build ID: db6efbaf5f9d6ae818afccec6a9fab219268b621 CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.14; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8); UI: en-US TinderBox: Linux-rpm_deb-x86_64@86-TDF, Branch:libreoffice-7-1, Time: 2021-06-07_20:32:23 Version: 6.4.8.0.0+ Build ID: 99b065ec31d032fc08ab14f66430dac4fef904a5 CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.14; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3; TinderBox: Linux-rpm_deb-x86_64@86-TDF, Branch:libreoffice-6-4, Time: 2020-10-08_08:57:08 Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8); UI-Language: en-US
Created attachment 175772 [details] Visual comparison Office 365 vs LibreOffice 7.3
Confirmed using LO Version: 7.3.0.0.alpha0+ (191e5fc227e40d18a1fe4563ed145517117596ea) / Ubuntu. This regression started from the following commit, bibisected using repo bibisect-linux-64-7.2. Adding CC: to Attila Bakos. https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=b6b02e0b4c9d739836e1f61a886ea45b01e6696e author Attila Bakos (NISZ) <bakos.attilakaroly@nisz.hu> 2021-04-20 13:02:44 +0200 committer László Németh <nemeth@numbertext.org> 2021-04-29 10:48:27 +0200 tdf#111903 tdf#137152 PPTX export: fix placeholders
This no longer reproduced with current head, i.e., must have been addressed in the last month: Version: 7.3.0.0.alpha1+ / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 918b62bea6cf82ce952c8d225dcabd4d08a2abf7 CPU threads: 8; OS: Linux 5.15; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: en-US (en_US.UTF-8); UI: en-US Thanks to whoever did this!
Gerald, I'm afraid I can still repro it with the following build from two hours ago, can you please double-check? Version: 7.3.0.0.alpha1+ / LibreOffice Community Build ID: 59e70256a358db136f5fd23651aea96d218b1a64 CPU threads: 16; OS: Linux 5.4; UI render: default; VCL: gtk3 Locale: nl-BE (en_US.UTF-8); UI: en-US Calc: threaded
You're right, Aron. I had tested twice, and twice made the same mistake apparently. The bug is still here. Now, this is a really bad regression. Is there a way to label this as a release blocker?
OOXML bugs are of Normal severity, just regression is High. Reopen is where there was a wrong fix, here it's just New.
Created attachment 176498 [details] The issue with the ooxml and the difference Not a real regression: Before my commit the placeholders were custom shapes, and this problem can not be detected because PP. imported custom shapes as shapes (without bullet/numbering). After the patch placeholders are kept and PP. imports them placeholders which has bullet/numbering default in PP. In my attachment there can be seen a tag which disables this auto-numbering feature in PP: namely the <a:buNone/> tag. To prove this, try this: 1) create an empty pptx in PP use backspace to remove the bullet, save 2) unzip the copy of the saved file 3) find the /ppt/slides/slide1.xml 4) delete that tag 5) zip & and open in PP -> The bullet will be there. Solution: Impress should save this tag when bullet hidden, so I will implement this, hopefully this will be useful.
Created attachment 176499 [details] The original sample pptx from PP
Created attachment 176500 [details] The copy of the original pptx without the tag
Removing regression keyword according to comment 8
(In reply to Xisco Faulí from comment #11) > Removing regression keyword according to comment 8 Xisco, I'd like to make the case and disagree. Technically the patch identified may not be incorrect, and purely technically not a regression. Practically, from a user perspective, saving the deck as PPTX and then viewing it in Office 365 used to work perfectly. Now it is broken. So from a *user* perspective, which is what matters in the end, we did regress. I got hit by this personally, and it was ... not good. Can we please treat this as a regression (that it is, IMHO)?
Sorry for the late reply. In comment8 my idea was a tag missing, i tried to fix it and the sample file stay the same (so it is an other issue), so i think there must be another problem. Well, this is a so strange issue*, but I think these might be the reproduction steps from scratch: 1) Open a PowerPoint with a new slide with a placeholder, and type something ("sample" for example) and remove the bullet with backspace. 2) Save and open it Impress (7.2) 3) Append something to the written text, a dot for example. 4) Save 5) Reload in PowerPoint ->There will be an extra bullet. I want to fix this except from it is a regression or not. But to solve this i have to know how make this issue from scratch exactly, so if someone have idea to reproduce this from a blank file and share that, it will so helpful. (Or just confirm my idea..) *I write the strange because, this must be a file-open issue too, because Impress does not put bullet to the text (and if PowerPoint is the reference it should...) Also, recently i had a fix connected to Master Slide property inheritance to slides (as i remember there the spelling language was wrong) and there was a commit what changed the numbering dialog and the settings scope and that commit caused that regression so that might be a good point to start, maybe...
Created attachment 176765 [details] There is a problem with Import too
Created attachment 176766 [details] Sample reproducer from Impress
Attila Bakos (NISZ) committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "master": https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/f57cfddb51b7d7409b7b425dc200aa73406a13bd tdf#145162 PPTX export: fix extra bullet regression It will be available in 7.4.0. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at https://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
Attila Bakos (NISZ) committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "libreoffice-7-3": https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/97ce03ccf1287c1fa79d5741a85fa419e03d9a35 tdf#145162 PPTX export: fix extra bullet regression It will be available in 7.3.0.0.beta2. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at https://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
Attila Bakos (NISZ) committed a patch related to this issue. It has been pushed to "libreoffice-7-2": https://git.libreoffice.org/core/commit/bfef95dcb38c1d004fc907a14af4eaaf99798b7e tdf#145162 PPTX export: fix extra bullet regression It will be available in 7.2.5. The patch should be included in the daily builds available at https://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More information about daily builds can be found at: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.
(In reply to Attila Bakos (NISZ) from comment #13) > I want to fix this except from it is a regression or not. Thank you, Attila! > But to solve this i have to know how make this issue from scratch exactly, > so if someone have idea to reproduce this from a blank file Sorry I could not provide that. I am, however, happy to report that with the latest daily build (which has your patch from what I can tell) this issue as originally reported by me is gone = resolved. :-) Cool detective work! Please let me know if there's anything I can do to help.
(In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #19) > (In reply to Attila Bakos (NISZ) from comment #13) > > I want to fix this except from it is a regression or not. > > Thank you, Attila! > > > But to solve this i have to know how make this issue from scratch exactly, > > so if someone have idea to reproduce this from a blank file > > Sorry I could not provide that. I am, however, happy to report that with > the latest daily build (which has your patch from what I can tell) this > issue as originally reported by me is gone = resolved. :-) > > Cool detective work! Please let me know if there's anything I can do to > help. Thank you for Verifying, and for good words. This is my task to solve the issues like this, so if something wrong again with anything i tried to fix, just cc me (not really mind that a regression or not). The reproduction is importand because if i know the problem exactly it is much easier to fix, and maybe there is less chance to make a newer regression... :)
Verfied (per my comment #19). (I feel this is going to be a really good release. :-)