Created attachment 47994 [details] Screenshot of error message Hello, the behavior of the advanced filter is very strange. Please see the attached screenshot. An advanced filter copies the *formulas* and not the *values*, this leads to the error messages in the screenshot (columns UVW) because the formulas frequently loose their context after copying. In Excel only the values are copied - this is something I would also suggest for Libreoffice, also because imported xls files (like the one from the attached screenshot) produce errors when the filter is applied.
[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
Dear bug submitter! Due to the fact, that there are a lot of NEEDINFO bugs with no answer within the last six months, we close all of these bugs. To keep this message short, more infos are available @ https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA/NeedinfoClosure#Statement Thanks for understanding and hopefully updating your bug, so that everything is prepared for developers to fix your problem. Yours! Florian
problem with copying formulas instead of data reproduced in 3.3.4 and 3.6.1 on Fedora 64 bit in Data->Filter->Standard Filter and in Data->Filter->Advanced Filter I agree that copying formulas instead of data is strange. And formulas become not working in result. IMHO should added option to force copying results of formulas instead of formulas itself. Or problem with copying incorrect formulas should be fixed. Or changed default behaviour to copying results of formulas instead of formulas.
Can you attach a document and give precise steps on how to reproduce? I just did a really simple test and used a filter and it did copy the formulas but it copied them correctly so no #Null values were given. I think it makes more sense to have formulas copied/sorted correctly rather than just copy the value (many people would still want the formula). Marking as NEEDINFO until document and steps are attached. Please reopen as UNCONFIRMED once this is done. Apologies for the long delay, we're working on a big backlog. Thanks for your patience
Created attachment 70418 [details] Test case for sorting and filtering with formula problem This attachment contains explanations how to use Sort and Advanced filter and test results. Function Sort mentioned here because it is more simply and more frequently used. But appears that suffers from the same problem. IMHO we may use it for testing instead of Advanced filter Reproduced in 3.6.3 on RFR 17 64 bit Expected: correct values or formulas Actually: only zeros
With respect to sorting, it may be the same issue as in bug 45146
I agree that the root of this is the same as 45146 - in general we would mark that one as a duplicate of this one as this one is older BUT since that one has already been confirmed, just going to mark this as a dupe. @Georg - if you disagree please let us know @mohican - thanks for pointing in the direction of that dupe, I was pretty sure I had confirmed a similar one at some point :) *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 45146 ***
This bug is not a duplicate of bug 45146. Indeed, even if the status of bug 45146 is not clear, the behavior described in it changed with the changes in sorting with reference provided by bug 81309 and bug 81633. This one is about copying formula instead of the data in advanced filter and nothing changed after bug 81309 in LO 4.4. Set status back to NEW. Best regards. JBF
Hi all, this is totally wrong, must easily be corrected and has great importance to every user who is analyzing a big bunch of data! There is no conceptual work related to eliminating this bug. It's simply about copying values instead of formulas when using special/advanced filtering because adjusted cell pointers in new places never work. Any workaround is a long work around this bug. So, please, as we are all waiting since 2011, can somebody please have a look to it. For those affected by this bug, the importance is nearly a blocker! I can supply a testcase if you are in need. Many thanks. Regards, fury
@Fury - http://joelmadero.wordpress.com/2014/10/11/user-expectations-and-the-reality-of-our-community/
*** Bug 89479 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to Joel Madero from comment #13) > @Fury - > http://joelmadero.wordpress.com/2014/10/11/user-expectations-and-the-reality- > of-our-community/ "manipulating priorities", LO-developers will avoide the bug completely!? Are you crazy??? If you had spent a second on the history of this bug, you would have recognized that it is known since nearly 4 years. If you had thought about the meaning of the bug you would have recognized that for LO-users using advanced filters this IS a blocker. As there had nothing been done on this bug since it was mentioned at first it is obvious that nobody pays any attention to it. As I am interested in having this bug fixed I am trying to tell this in my post. I am begging for sb to have a glance at the problem and to confirm that a solution is easy. As you may have overread I am explaining my willingness to come up with a testcase. As you evenly have overread sb (it was you yourself over 2 years ago, btw) has asked for one. Instead you have preferred to send me your knee-jerk reaction of this link to a lengthy text suggesting that I have a dishonest behaviour. Joel, stop sending bullshit like this to people. Better start working on the problem and start thinking before reflex-like sending affronts to strangers. Nonetheless and without any personal history in this forum or with LO, I confess, I suggest a more tight relation in regard to priorities of developers and users. Priorities are about talking, about understanding and about familiar relationships: Priorities are good! Kind regards and thank you to everybody working in their spare time on this wonderful product, fury
@ Fury - Couple points here: 1. First warning - next one you will be banned at least temporarily from using bugzilla for violating The Document Foundation bugzilla rules (swearing and being verbally abusive towards community members); 2. The priority/severity literally has no real impact on getting the bug resolved, we use it internally only for general guidance - setting this to an ultra mega blocker is not going to convince a volunteer to fix the bug. You have admitted there are workarounds - by definition if there is a workaround we usually place the bug as minor, if it prevents high quality work, it's a normal bug, if it crashes and results in loss of data, then it's major or above - clearly this does not result in loss of data or crashes. 3. For more information on how our FRIENDLY community works please read the following: http://joelmadero.wordpress.com/2014/10/11/user-expectations-and-the-reality-of-our-community/ 4. I should have reverted it back to minor which I am doing now (and again, this literally has no impact on whether a volunteer looks at the bug or not, it's simply giving us accurate information as to what the bug does) 5. For more information feel free to join our chat (so long as you're going to be productive and not an interruption to our meritocratic community): http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa Best, Joel
Uhh, that's a very professional representation of your organisation, Joel. LO is deleted from my PC and won't be advocated any more at my customers. There are quite a few alternatives who can presumably react on feedback appropriately. Please, delete my account with your organization right away. Have a nice day, fury
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding ** To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present on a currently supported version of LibreOffice (5.0.5 or 5.1.2 https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the version of LibreOffice and your operating system, and any changes you see in the bug behavior If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a short comment that includes your version of LibreOffice and Operating System Please DO NOT - Update the version field - Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) - Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to "inherited from OOo"; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add "regression" to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa Thank you for your help! -- The LibreOffice QA Team This NEW Message was generated on: 2016-04-16
I am not sure if this is really a bug or only a misunderstanding of what are relative and absolute references. Indeed, in the test case provided by Sasha, if you change the references in B3:B10 from relative to absolute, then the filter works as expected. @Markus, please could you give your developer point of view? Is it the intended behavior to copy the cell content (formula if it is a formula) instead of the value of the cell? Best regards. JBF
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding ** To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo'; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
I agree with comment19 "I am not sure if this is really a bug or only a misunderstanding of what are relative and absolute references. Indeed, in the test case provided by Sasha, if you change the references in B3:B10 from relative to absolute, then the filter works as expected." My opinion its a misunderstanding off relative and absolute references. I think it can be closed as WFM Best regards
Dear Georg Hörmann, To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year. There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present. If you have time, please do the following: Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/ If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice. Please DO NOT Update the version field Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker) Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case) If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ 2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo'; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone! Warm Regards, QA Team MassPing-UntouchedBug
According to comments #19 and #21, closing as WorksForMe. Please feel free to reopen if you disagree. Best regards. JBF