Description: Using Data->Validity with a cell range gives illogical results and makes the application behave badly. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Create a first sheet 2. Create a second sheet (named "Breeds") with a list of categories to choose from (say dog breeds) 3. On the first sheet, create an array with 3 columns ['Name', 'Age', 'Breed'] 4. Select the 'Breed' column and click Data->Validity... in the menu 5. In the newly opened popup, in the Criteria tab, select Allow: Cell range 6. Check Show selection list 7. [PROBLEM] To select source, try using the selection tool (It doesn't work for me) 8. Type $Breeds.A1:A120 9. Validate with OK 10. [PROBLEM] Select individual cells of the columm and go back to Data->Validity... Observe how the source range is offset according to the cell's row 11. [PROBLEM] Try to navigate to the "Breeds" sheet (clicking has no effect for me) 12. Try closing the application (nothing happens and I have to use the Task Manager to kill it) Actual Results: Data validity is based on cell range is not usable as is (or needs to be set for each individual cell of the sheet, which does scale poorly with data size) Application becomes unrealiable : cannot swap sheets, cannot close it properly Expected Results: Regarding data validity, I except the same cell range to be applied to each cell of the selected column Regarding the reliability, I expect the application to behave normally after such operations Reproducible: Always User Profile Reset: Yes Additional Info: Version: 25.8.1.1 (X86_64) Build ID: 54047653041915e595ad4e45cccea684809c77b5 CPU threads: 12; OS: Windows 11 X86_64 (build 26100); UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: en-CA (en_CA); UI: en-US Calc: CL threaded
This could be a duplicate of Bug 156263. Bug Details: Bug 166527
Seems to be fixed with dev version. Please could you test it with dev version in next few days? You can download it here: http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/master/ Thank you
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 166527 ***
*** Bug 168553 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 156263 ***