I noted this bug in version 3.5.1. Then I upgraded to 3.5.2 and the problem persists. I'm running it under Slackware 13.37 (with pt_BR language-pack). The script used to create a package from the binary RPM tarball is attached The steps to reproduce is just to start libreoffice calc and to type Ctrl+F. It is always reproducible for me. The output messages when starting it fro command line are the following: fellype@toka:~$ /opt/libreoffice3.5/program/scalc Warning: failed to launch javaldx - java may not fuction correctly (soffice:14095): Gtk-WARNING **: /opt/libreoffice3.5/program/../ure-link/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.11' not found (required by /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so) (soffice:14095): Gtk-WARNING **: /opt/libreoffice3.5/program/../ure-link/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.11' not found (required by /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so) The program 'soffice' received an X Window System error. This probably reflects a bug in the program. The error was 'BadMatch (invalid parameter attributes)'. (Details: serial 7626 error_code 8 request_code 42 minor_code 0) (Note to programmers: normally, X errors are reported asynchronously; that is, you will receive the error a while after causing it. To debug your program, run it with the --sync command line option to change this behavior. You can then get a meaningful backtrace from your debugger if you break on the gdk_x_error() function.) fellype@toka:~$ NOTE: running with the option --sync the crashes doesn't occurs.
[Unreproducible] with "LibreOffice 3.5.2.2 - Build ID: 281b639-6baa1d3-ef66a77-d866f25-f36d45f - GNU/Linux Debian testing (32bit) English UI"
This is not a LibO bug. It seems that your system is not working correctly with Libreoffice. Please contact the maintainer of your package.
Just googling a little searching about "GLIBCXX_3.4.11 slackware" and found this: http://www.linuxfloat.org/slackware-cant-install-libreoffice-problem Now perhaps you've already tested this. Anyway, it doesn't seem a LO bug so I put this bug to RESOLVED/NOT OUR BUG.