**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install Accounting
- In Accounting settings, activate "Intrastat"

- Create a product with Intrastat info
- Create a bill:
  * Product: [the created Intrastat product]
  * Intrastat Country: [any]
  * Intrastat Transport Mode: [any]
- Confirm the bill
- Make sure that the bill name contains a hyphen character (i.e. "-")
For example, "BILL/2026-06/0001".
Use the "Resequence" action from the bills list view if needed.

- Go to "Accounting / Reporting / Audit Reports / Intrastat Report"
- Expand the line to display the bill name

**Issue:**
The bill name is not fully displayed.
It is cropped right before the hyphen character (i.e. BILL/2026).

**Cause:**
A regex is used to retrieve the bill name from the report line name, but it is only allowing "/" character.

**Solution:**
Just allow "-" character in addition.
No other character is allowed to limit the risk of matching something that should not.

opw-6299854

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120979

## Issue
When a user sets their notification to "Handle in Odoo" (`inbox`) and a sign requested is completed, they do not receive the expected notification.

## Steps to reproduce
1. Install *Sign* (`sign`)
2. Sets the current user's notification preference to "Handle in Odoo" (`inbox`)
3. Create a sign request and send it to Marc Demo
4. As Marc Demo, sign the request
5. **The user who sent the sign request did not receive a notification to notify them that the request was signed.**

## Fix
This is a partial backport of both https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/463d6a2aae536356e6dee6b902f2e881dbc4fbda (saas-18.2) and a related fix https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/41395dba4fd31222f5fd9fc94a84c977cf9334f9 (19.0). Before the first commit, users would not receive inbox notification when sign requests would be completed.

## Note to reviewer
The issue only occurs in 18.0, as it is fixed by https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/463d6a2aae536356e6dee6b902f2e881dbc4fbda in 18.2, but we can backport the fix from https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/commit/41395dba4fd31222f5fd9fc94a84c977cf9334f9 from 18.2 to 18.4 if desired.

opw-6251702

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#122519
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120740

### Summary

When `dev_mode` includes `reload`, `ThreadedServer`'s FSWatcher reacts to a file change by sending the process a `SIGHUP` to trigger a phoenix restart. `signal_handler` turns `SIGHUP` into `KeyboardInterrupt`, which `ThreadedServer.run()`'s wait-loop catches. The catch is too narrow — a reload `SIGHUP` can kill the process through **three** windows that all sit outside the wait-loop's `try/except`, so the exception escapes `run()`/`main()`. Under Docker's default `restart: no`, PID 1 dies and the container stays down.

### The three windows

1. **Teardown duplicate (exit 130).** One file change can emit several FS events; the FSWatcher's `if not odoo.phoenix:` dedup races across threads and fires more than one `SIGHUP`. The first begins the phoenix teardown; the second lands during `stop()` / `watcher.stop()` / `_reexec()` and `KeyboardInterrupt` escapes.
2. **Exec-gap (exit 129).** `os.execve()` resets caught signal handlers to their default disposition (`SIGHUP` terminates) but preserves `SIG_IGN`; a `SIGHUP` arriving after the exec but before the re-exec'd process re-installs its handler kills the process outright.
3. **Startup (exit 130).** In the re-exec'd process, a `SIGHUP` anywhere in the startup section that precedes the wait-loop — `start()`, `preload_registries()` **and** `cron_spawn()` — escapes `run()`.

### Reproducer (deterministic)

Boot a `ThreadedServer` (`--workers 0`) on any initialised db, then signal PID 1 a few times in quick succession:

```bash
docker exec <container> sh -c 'i=0; while [ $i -lt 8 ]; do kill -HUP 1; sleep 0.1; i=$((i+1)); done'
```

Unpatched the process exits 130 or 129. Patched it stays up after one clean phoenix reload. Verified live on 17.0 and 18.0: stock `server.py` dies; the patched `server.py` survives sustained bursts (20/20 across repeated reload cycles on each version); `SIGINT`/`SIGTERM` still exit 0.

### Fix

Minimal, in `signal_handler` + `run()` + `_reexec()`; `SIGINT`/`SIGTERM` untouched; one new instance attribute, no new module globals:

- **Teardown duplicate:** ignore a `SIGHUP` once `quit_signals_received` is set (a restart/shutdown is already pending; the re-exec reloads fresh code).
- **Startup:** a per-instance `in_preload` flag marks the entire startup section (`start()` + `preload_registries()` + `cron_spawn()`); a `SIGHUP` there sets the phoenix flag + counter and returns instead of raising, so the wait-loop exits right after startup and runs the normal restart.
- **Exec-gap:** `signal.signal(signal.SIGHUP, signal.SIG_IGN)` just before `os.execve` so a `SIGHUP` in the gap is dropped rather than terminating the process.

### Related

- #21209 (merged) — introduced the phoenix flag; did not guard these windows.
- #206898 (merged), #207930 (open) — PreforkServer reload.

### CLA

Covered by Codeforward B.V.'s corporate CLA; #269240 adds me to its contributor list (pending merge).

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#269247

Current behavior:
--
With an active automation rule (base_automation) whose action creates an activity (e.g. a "Time Off Approval" activity) on hr.leave creation, every newly created time off request has a duration of 0 days / 0 hours, regardless of the requested dates.

Expected behavior:
--
The leave duration is computed from the requested dates, unaffected by the presence of an activity-creating automation rule.

Steps to reproduce:
--
- Create an automation rule on hr.leave, trigger "On Creation & Update".
- Add an action that creates an activity (type "Time Off Approval").
- Create any time off request for an employee with a working schedule.
- The request shows a duration of "0 days" (or "0 hours").

Cause of the issue:
--
date_from/date_to and number_of_days/number_of_hours are stored compute fields the duration (number_of_days/number_of_hours) depends on the dates (date_from/date_to). The rule's action creates a mail.activity whose notification renders the leave's display_name. Computing display_name pulls in dashboard_warning_message, which re-enters _compute_date_from_to. Inside that in-progress compute, _compute_duration is evaluated while date_from/date_to are still False in the ORM cache, so _get_durations returns (0, 0). The dates are correct afterwards, but the duration was already computed and stored as 0, and nothing in the create flow re-triggers its compute, so a stale 0 is persisted to the database (it is only recomputed if a dependency such as the request dates or leave type is later modified).

Fix:
--
Once date_from/date_to are settled at the end of _compute_date_from_to, add the duration fields (number_of_days, number_of_hours, duration_display) back to the compute queue so they are recomputed against the correct dates.

opw-6235902

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

### Steps to reproduce:

- Have two companies: company1 and company2
- Create a producct P available in both company1 and company2
- with company1, create a kit bom for a product P
- with company2, create and confirm a sale order for 1 unit of P
- with company1, change the bom type of P from kit to manufature
#### > UserError: As long as there are some sale order lines that must be delivered/invoiced and are related to these bills of materials, you can not remove them.

### Cause of the issue:

Changing the bom type from a kit (phantom type) to a non kit will launch a call of the `_ensure_bom_is_free` in order to ensure data integrity if the kit bom was used by a relevant sale order line: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f4c76be062bec47b68ee42505d7d42fed31ac0f2/addons/sale_mrp/models/mrp_bom.py#L15-L18
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f4c76be062bec47b68ee42505d7d42fed31ac0f2/addons/sale_mrp/models/mrp_bom.py#L24-L42
However, this check does not take the company of the bom into account and in the present flow, the company of the bom is different from the company of the supposedly problematic sol.

opw-6290304

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#273486
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#271119

Steps to reproduce
1. Create a service product: Invoicing Policy = Prepaid/Fixed Price, Track Service = Timesheets, Unit of Measure = Days
2. Confirm a Sales Order with 2 days of that product at 800/day
3. Register 1 hour on the generated task
4. Open Timesheets > Reporting, add the "Timesheet Revenues" measure

Issue
`timesheet_revenues` in `timesheets.analysis.report` was computed per analytic line as `(SOL.price_subtotal / SOL.qty_delivered) * (unit_amount * sol_uom.factor / ts_uom.factor)` (https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/16f170619d9cc5fd86529a3f17e349da37607f73/addons/sale_timesheet/report/timesheets_analysis_report.py#L42-L44).

`SOL.qty_delivered` is a stored float rounded to the day UoM precision (0.01d). For 1 hour timesheeted, qty_delivered = 1/8 = 0.125d rounds to 0.13d, so the formula yields (1600 / 0.13) × (1/8) = 1538.46 instead of the correct 100. Because `qty_delivered` is recomputed each time a timesheet is added, all existing rows shift their revenue figure with every new entry.

Additionally, using `price_subtotal / qty_delivered` as the per-unit rate ignores any line discount: the rate derived from a discounted subtotal divided by a delivered quantity that differs from the ordered quantity is not the effective price per day.

For prepaid lines, the effective per-unit rate is `price_subtotal / product_uom_qty` — the ordered quantity is stable and the subtotal already reflects any discount — multiplied by the timesheet hours converted to the SO line UoM.

opw-6150555

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272910
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#262524