Tested on 4.3.2. Following example: | row A | 0 | | 1 | =A2+B1 | | 2 | =A3+B2 | | 5 | =A4+B3 | | 4 | =A5+B4 | After sorting by "row A" it looks like (dont forget to mark "Contains row labels"): | row A | 0 | | 1 | =A2+B1 | | 2 | =A3+B2 | | 4 | =A4+B5 | <- this should be B3 | 5 | =A5+B3 | <- this should be B4 Any idea?
Hi Norbert, please see Bug 81633 & related bugs. I guess this case should be the same regardless of "Contains row labels" option.
ign_christian it seems U are right. But if its true what I read in Bug 81633 that there will be no backport of the fix for 4.3 - I can find no nice words for this. The conclusion should be to take the whole 4.3 series of the servers. This is a major regression and a bug which can lead to silent corrupted tables. This will nerve the users badly. U have to check really every spreadsheet U work with and sort lines!
Hi again Norbert.. I can understand what you feel, but the changes was by purpose because of many users request (if you read the root bug report about internal sorting) so it's not a regression. I think you have 3 options at present if old behavior is important for you: - go for 4.4 (the behavior is configurable in that version, but remember it's still development phase) - stick with 4.3.0.4 - stick with 4.2.6.3 (maybe it's prefered) Just pick what option suits you best. And please mark this as duplicate to Bug 81633 if you agree both are the same case.
Anyway please consider using parallel install to test new version: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Installing_in_parallel So you won't get headache regarding unexpected changes in new version ;)
I could name the bugs which let me use the latest of 4.3 series, but in short terms: I am still just a user, not a beta tester! and I am not alone.
> I could name the bugs which let me use the latest of 4.3 series, ... Yup..there are always some options to choose what is best fit for us. > I am still just a user, not a beta tester! Because of that there is another way for us as users to install in parallel. If you're using Windows, the easiest way is using portable app. > I am not alone. So lets close this thread and join the others. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 81633 ***