Created attachment 42982 [details] Shows how the comment is initially displayed in LibreCalc both by mouseover and Comment-Show; and, the same comment box with the background changed to gray to show the white text. When accessing Excel spreadsheets (.xls) created in a Mac OS-X environment with LibreCalc, all text in cell comments with the default color of black are changed to white, rendering the text virtually invisible given the near-white background color of comment boxes. Attachment A shows how the comment is initially displayed in LibreCalc both by mouseover and Comment-Show; and, the same comment box with the background changed to gray to show the white text. (Note that when I accessed the same comments using the spreadsheet product Gnumeric in my Ubuntu environment the comments displayed correctly.
Randy, could you please attach a file that demonstrates this problem?
Created attachment 48265 [details] Sample Excel spreadsheed that demonstrates the problem The attached sample spreadsheet demonstrates the described problem. The first cell in the example shows that the comment font color is correctly interpreted when the font color is explicitly defined, e.g., "Black". The second cell shows the comment font color changed to white when the font color was defined as "Automatic" (black) in the Mac OS-X Excel environment.
Randy, this issue is confirmed in Ubuntu 11.04, 32-bit via the Terminal: cd ~/Desktop && wget -c https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=48265 -O example.xls && localc -nologo example.xls notice the comments font color of cell A5 is white. Open the same file in Excel 2003 and the font color is black. lsb_release -rd Description: Ubuntu 11.04 Release: 11.04 apt-cache policy libreoffice-calc libreoffice-calc: Installed: 1:3.3.2-1ubuntu5 Candidate: 1:3.3.2-1ubuntu5 Version table: *** 1:3.3.2-1ubuntu5 0 500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ natty-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1:3.3.2-1ubuntu4 0 500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ natty/main i386 Packages Microsoft Office Excel 2003 (11.5612.6505)
[This is an automated message.] This bug was filed before the changes to Bugzilla on 2011-10-16. Thus it started right out as NEW without ever being explicitly confirmed. The bug is changed to state NEEDINFO for this reason. To move this bug from NEEDINFO back to NEW please check if the bug still persists with the 3.5.0 beta1 or beta2 prereleases. Details on how to test the 3.5.0 beta1 can be found at: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/BugHunting_Session_3.5.0.-1 more detail on this bulk operation: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RFC-Operation-Spamzilla-tp3607474p3607474.html
Unreproducible in: LOdev 3.5.0beta2 Build ID: 8589e48-760cc4d-f39cf3d-1b2857e-60db978 Microsoft Windows Vista Business 6.0.6002 Service Pack 2 Build 6002
a.jansons@gmail.com, please do not reopen bugs without providing a comment as to why. This issue is still unreproducible in: lsb_release -rd Description: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Release: 12.04 apt-cache policy libreoffice-calc libreoffice-calc: Installed: 1:3.5.3-0ubuntu1 Candidate: 1:3.5.3-0ubuntu1 Version table: *** 1:3.5.3-0ubuntu1 0 500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise-updates/main i386 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1:3.5.2-2ubuntu1 0 500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ precise/main i386 Packages
I am still seeing this bug in lsb_release -rd Description: Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS Release: 12.04 apt-cache policy libreoffice-calc libreoffice-calc: Installed: 1:3.5.4-0ubuntu1.1 Candidate: 1:3.5.4-0ubuntu1.1 Version table: *** 1:3.5.4-0ubuntu1.1 0 500 http://mirror.umd.edu/ubuntu/ precise-updates/main amd64 Packages 500 http://mirror.umd.edu/ubuntu/ precise-security/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 1:3.5.2-2ubuntu1 0 500 http://mirror.umd.edu/ubuntu/ precise/main amd64 Packages I'm attaching another example, this one was created with a MS-Windows version of Excel.
Created attachment 67292 [details] Small Excel file with invisible comments. Comments appear in white text and are not visible either with mousever or show comments.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 51300 ***