Define a new style based on another style, with fontsize 90%: the font size remain 90%.
Define a new style based on another style, with fontsize 100%: next time you open the style you see that the font size isn't expressed in percentage any more: it's converted to the value of the based on style.
This is a problem since if you modify the first style, you new style won't be
This bug oblige the user that wants to work with the % feature to use 99% or 101% values if he doesn't want to loose the connection with the based on font size.
- Define default style as Font=Times Pt 12
- Define Style "MyStyle" based on Default with Font size =101%
- Save and open, the size is still 101% as expected.
- Change MyStyle to font size=100% and save
- Edit the new style and look at the font size. The size is now 12 pt.
I can confirm this bug in 3.4.4 release.
1: Create a character style (*not* a paragraph style) named StCParent.
2: Create a character style StCChild, set "Linked with" to "StCParent".
3: Enter ie. 50% in Font Size of "StCChild".
4: Enter some text and apply "StCChild" character style to it.
5: Change Font Size of "StCParent" to let's say 36pt.
6: Text size will not change, when it should change to 18pt (50% of 36pt).
7: Go to character style properties dialog of "StCChild" and click Apply. Now the
text size changes, as expected earlier in step 6.
Everything works properly with paragraph styles, though.
It really is a shame, that after all these years, with all those new features
and improvements being introduced all the time to the software, such a seemingly
basic and crucial glitch has not been fixed yet.
[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:
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.
still present in 18.104.22.168, it's a very annoying long lasting bug: you cannot define a font size style as 100% of another style font size!
IMHO there are two different (but maybe related) bugs in this issue:
1) The original description (and the linked AOO bug report) talk specifically
about "defin[ing] a font size style as 100% of another style font size",
and so does comment #7.
2) Comment #1 mentions a (maybe even more important) general problem about
relative font sizes in character styles.
I can confirm both issues [REPRODUCIBLE] with LibreOffice 22.214.171.124 (Build ID: 4db6344), German langpack installed, on MacOS X 10.6.8 (Intel).
I have to lower the severity a bit, because "critical" are only bugs which cause crashes, massive data loss, etc. No offence! This does not mean that this bug is not important; it just means that there are even more important bugs ...
@ our Writer experts:
Hello Cédric, Michael, and Miklos,
this is yet another interesting bug report for Writer. The form of the report
is a bit unlucky (IMHO there are two related bugs involved in this issue,
see my comment #8; if you want I can split the bug into two distinct reports!),
but it is nevertheless important -- inconsistent behaviour is already especially annoying for users.
There is also a link to a related Apache OOO bug report which already contains some hints to the roots of at least one of both issues.
So please take a look at this report. Tell me if I (as a simple bugwrangler)
can do anything to help you with fixing this issue.
Thank you very much in advance!
Restricted my LibreOffice hacking area
Should be set to NEW not REOPENED. Changing per comment 8.
I agree with separating the 2 bugs of my submission and comment 1
https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=4279 is the working link for the corresponding Ooo bug
How much would it cost to fix this bug, at least the original formulation? any developer could fix it for money?
My suggestion is to reach out to some of the certified developers to ask - no one will answer directly on the bug but my guess is several hundred euros at least.
Anyone could suggest me what file should I work in order to try fixing the bug? thank you!
in editeng/source/item I'm seeing many checks for a value of 100 in the percentage and converts the value to an absolute one.
What it it for?
What about simply removing those checks so that the 100% value isn't converted?
I put a bounty on this bug:
Please add you own bounty if you want it to be fixed!
Dear Paolo Benvenuto,
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!
still present in version 126.96.36.199 (ubuntu 18.04 via ppa)
*** Bug 122566 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Some background from OOo is in https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=4279
*** Bug 70615 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***