<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Crash deleting content since 6.3 (tracking changes enabled)" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=134770#c8">Comment # 8</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Crash deleting content since 6.3 (tracking changes enabled)" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=134770">bug 134770</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:lo_bugs@iseries-guru.com" title="Terrence Enger <lo_bugs@iseries-guru.com>"> Terrence Enger</a> <pre>I see the bug in bibisect-linux-64-6.3 version oldest. The closest preceding version that I have is bibisect-linux-64-6.2 master, and it procedes through the given STR without obvious problem. Those commits are 6 months apart, so this determination is unhelpful. However, after bibisect-linux-64-6.2 master procedes through the given STR, <ctrl>+Z produces Application Error (Signal 6). Work on debian-buster in bibisect-linux-6.1 points the introduction of this behavior to: commit s-h date -------- -------- ------------------- good 43c2ce41 b524de95 2018-04-11 14:43:30 bad dfd95d65 7db137e8 2018-04-11 15:11:32 and the commit message is: commit 7db137e87177dbe381186491ca36e3e8fd62ddc2 Author: Michael Stahl <<a href="mailto:Michael.Stahl@cib.de">Michael.Stahl@cib.de</a>> AuthorDate: Wed Apr 11 14:31:47 2018 +0200 Commit: Michael Stahl <<a href="mailto:Michael.Stahl@cib.de">Michael.Stahl@cib.de</a>> CommitDate: Wed Apr 11 17:11:32 2018 +0200 <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED FIXED - EDITING: Replication of frames when record changes (redlining) is on" href="show_bug.cgi?id=50057">tdf#50057</a> sw: fix duplication of at-paragraph anchored flys The problem is that the flys that are anchored to the first paragraph of a SwRedline do get copied by SwRangeRedline::CopyToSection(), but they don't get deleted by DelCopyOfSection(). Copying is enabled because the setting of the SetRedlineMove() was made conditional in commit 65de5382a389cc7edf1cdf506da4fb43a4d33a9f "#100619# fixed problem with hiding deleted graphics", which isn't justified in any way and which i can't imaginge a good reason for, given that the flys anchored in the first paragraph are all skipped in DelFlyInRange(), so why would you want to copy them; hence this reverts that commit. The interesting check for the redline_fly_duplication_at_para_end_inside case is actually the one that was added in commit 23e52c207760c596cc2f841ef59f3100c110d591 Change-Id: I96fb294a5456e7f1172a5f408ebcb21cf211c276 Reviewed-on: <a href="https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/52729">https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/52729</a> Tested-by: Jenkins <<a href="mailto:ci@libreoffice.org">ci@libreoffice.org</a>> Reviewed-by: Michael Stahl <<a href="mailto:Michael.Stahl@cib.de">Michael.Stahl@cib.de</a>> As what I have bibisected is not the reported bug, I am leaving keyword bibisectRequest.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>