Created attachment 67547 [details] Lotus 1-2-3 file that crashes LibreOffice trying to open some old lotus 1-2-3 files for work to be able to save them into another format. LibreOffice consistantly crashes when I try to open any of the lotus files. I have attached a file that causes this problem
Created attachment 67561 [details] Tl900719.zip I retrieved a file with extension .006, is it normal? Could you zip the file and attach it?
hope this helps. It is a very normal file for the very old lotus system. These are files from an old data logger for measuring stream temperature. On 9/22/2012 10:54 AM, bugzilla-daemon@freedesktop.org wrote: > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55222 > > --- Comment #1 from Julien Nabet <serval2412@yahoo.fr> 2012-09-22 17:54:13 UTC --- > I retrieved a file with extension .006, is it normal? > Could you zip the file and attach it? >
Should be fixed in master and 3.6.2.2
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 53713 ***
To comment 1: .006 is not a Lotus123 extension. They used .wks, wk1 .. .wk4 and last .123. .123 extensions work for import in LO 3.6.2.2RC2 .wk4 produces a read error. I tried your file and it did not read. In order to read the file(s) you have 2 options: 1) get a ibm/lotus Smartsuite (they sell it for around $30.- on the internet) load them and then save them as XLS (Excel 5) which you can then read in LO without too much formating loss. 2) try to import them into Excel (you will need a full version with free Lotus extension, Starter does not do it) and save them as .ods for use in CALC.
Not a duplicate -- files have a different format. This one is a valid 1-2-3 document and can be opened with 20 years old software, but not LO.
(In reply to comment #6) .. > This one is a valid 1-2-3 document and can be opened with 20 years old > software, but not LO. Even if it was 30 years old soft, it's not a surprise that this file could be opened by the soft which allowed to create it. Moreover this soft has its development status to "discontinued" (see wiki page) and has a close format. So we can easily understand that LO, with scarce human resource (mainly for dev part but also for Q/A part) and few files to test, may have some problems to open some 1-2-3 files. Now if you've got some traces, perhaps a patch, don't hesitate to send them, it'll be greatly appreciated!
The crash is already fixed so please leave this bug report marked as duplicate. This was a general problem in the Lotus import filter. If there are other problems for this file please open new bug reports. We should never use the same bug report for two different problems.
(In reply to comment #8) > The crash is already fixed so please leave this bug report marked as > duplicate. This was a general problem in the Lotus import filter. If there > are other problems for this file please open new bug reports. > > We should never use the same bug report for two different problems. Markus, I have to disagree with you. We fixed the import for .123 files. Older versions .wk? return a "read error...". See my comment #10 in bug 55066. Tested it in LO 3.6.2.2RC.
(In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > The crash is already fixed so please leave this bug report marked as > > duplicate. This was a general problem in the Lotus import filter. If there > > are other problems for this file please open new bug reports. > > > > We should never use the same bug report for two different problems. > > Markus, I have to disagree with you. We fixed the import for .123 files. > Older versions .wk? return a "read error...". See my comment #10 in bug > 55066. > Tested it in LO 3.6.2.2RC. Crash != Read error. Therefore please open a new bug report. The reporter mentioned a crash and this crash is 100% fixed so the other problem requires a new bug report. Using a bug report for two different bugs only leads to confusion and makes it much harder for us developers to track bug reports. So just open a new bug report and attach the file with a new description what is wrong.
(In reply to comment #10) Opened new bug 55786 for the raed errors.
(In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > Opened new bug 55786 for the raed errors. Thanks a lot. I might find some time at the LibO con next week to look into that regression.