*** Bug 76781 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

@arnen: The point is that there are possibly many ways for creating endnotes and crossrefs and only the specific one you use might fail. Thus please provide information in the "steps to reproduce/expected behaviour/actual behaviour"-format.

Hey! I know what an endnote is and how to make a cross-reference (to an endnote at that). I've tested and find no problem with a cross-reference to an endnote (n.46) in a document with 33 pages.

If you want help, it helps to be more helpful in telling us what you want. We're not being paid, you know?

Then you have not tested it thoroughly. What happens to the number of 
the endnote, if you add another endnote before the current one?
No matter if you are paid or not your product must work right. I 
reported the bug to you to help you improve it, and I am not paid to do 
that either. Also, I am not paid for spending a lot of time correcting 
the errors, that Libre Office had made, when I returned to Open Office 
(Apache Open Office). It works perfectly.
Arne

Den 02-07-2014 08:24, bugzilla-daemon@freedesktop.org skrev:
> Kuma-ra <mailto:kumarasubs@gmail.com> changed bug 76794 
> <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76794>
> What 	Removed 	Added
> Status 	UNCONFIRMED 	NEEDINFO
> CC 		kumarasubs@gmail.com
> Ever confirmed 		1
>
> *Comment # 3 <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76794#c3> 
> on bug 76794 <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76794> from 
> Kuma-ra <mailto:kumarasubs@gmail.com> *
> Hey! I know what an endnote is and how to make a cross-reference (to an endnote
> at that). I've tested and find no problem with a cross-reference to an endnote
> (n.46) in a document with 33 pages.
>
> If you want help, it helps to be more helpful in telling us what you want.
> We're not being paid, you know?
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You are receiving this mail because:
>
>   * You reported the bug.
>

(In reply to comment #4)
> Then you have not tested it thoroughly. What happens to the number of 
> the endnote, if you add another endnote before the current one?

Works fine on my side with LO4.1.6.2: Number increases by one, after a short delay.

Sorry, seem like to have to be more specific, or provide a sample file.

Created attachment 102881 [details]
ODT example showing xref to endnotes LOv4302

(In reply to comment #5)
> Works fine on my side with LO4.1.6.2: Number increases by one, after a short
> delay. Sorry, seem like to have to be more specific, or provide a sample file.

Here is an example file created under Debian 7 x86_64 using v4.3.0.2 Build ID: 14ed55896fdfcb93ff437b85c4f3e1923d2b1409. 

Steps to reproduce:
1. Place cursor after "B" on first line.
2. Insert a new endnote.

Observed behaviour:
Cross-reference to endnote on C (Reference) remains as "ii".

Expected behaviour:
Cross-reference to endnote on C (Reference) is incremented to "iii".

Also tested under these configurations (behaviour is the same): 
- Debian 7 x86_64 running v4.1.6.2 Build ID: 40ff705089295be5be0aae9b15123f687c05b0a
- Crunchbang 11 x86_64 running v4.2.5.2 Build ID: 61cb170a04bb1f12e77c884eab9192be736ec5f5
- Crunchbang 11 x86_64 running v4.4.0.0.alpha0+ Build ID: 3fdd4f069d5436cf39708004af7fda8175fbc4c2 (2014-07-09)

The natural workaround is to use Tools > Update > Fields (F9) to update all cross-references in a document. Personally, I think this is fine, but this bug needs an example anyway, so here it is.

(In reply to comment #8)
> Even with the Automatically box ticked (in Tools → Options → LibreOffice
> Writer → General, Update, Fields), the fields ***aren't*** updated automatically.

Correction above.

(In reply to comment #8)
> I double confirm.

Thanks Kumāra. I can also report the same behaviour under Crunchbang 11 x86_64 running v3.5.7.2 Build ID: 3215f89-f603614-ab984f2-7348103-1225a5b (for both the provided and new documents). It has possibly always behaved like this. Version set to 3.5.7.2 release.

*** Bug 112882 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Repro 7.3+.

Dear arnen,

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 https://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://web.libera.chat/?settings=#libreoffice-qa

Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone!

Warm Regards,
QA Team

MassPing-UntouchedBug