[Bug default/24139] Ability to hint libabigail when enum values are unused

[Bug default/24139] Ability to hint libabigail when enum values are unused

[seppo.yliolli+bugs at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24139

--- Comment #1 from seppo.yliolli+bugs at gmail dot com ---
Note that this is not an isolated case, we keep bumping to this category of
issues almost weekly in freedesktop-sdk while trying to update things. It's not
really possible currently to suppress these things without also suppressing
real ABI breaks. (as far as I've understood from manual)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug default/24139] Support suppressing some enumerator changes

[dodji at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24139

dodji at redhat dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #3 from dodji at redhat dot com ---
This should now be fixed by commit
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=libabigail.git;a=commit;h=3826ab5308915990e36f194c120c88fd9bbcc46a
in the master branch of the git repository.

To suppress changes about the enumerator named FOO_ENUMERATOR_COUNT, which is
part of the enum type named FooEnumType, you can now write the suppression
specification below, which now supports the new 'changed_enumerators' property:


[suppress_type]
  type_kind = enum
  name = FooEnumType
  changed_enumerators = FOO_ENUMERATOR_COUNT


Thank you for taking the time to file this enhancement request!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug default/24139] Support suppressing some enumerator changes

[dodji at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24139

dodji at redhat dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|Ability to hint libabigail  |Support suppressing some
                   |when enum values are unused |enumerator changes

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug default/24139] New: Ability to hint libabigail when enum values are unused

[seppo.yliolli+bugs at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24139

            Bug ID: 24139
           Summary: Ability to hint libabigail when enum values are unused
           Product: libabigail
           Version: unspecified
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: default
          Assignee: dodji at redhat dot com
          Reporter: seppo.yliolli+bugs at gmail dot com
                CC: libabigail at sourceware dot org
  Target Milestone: ---

Orignal issue: 23:10 <nanonyme> Dodji, so, did you have any tips on whether we
could somehow suppress altogether
https://github.com/intel/libva/issues/273#issuecomment-456727867 this category
of issue? Somehow tell libabigail certain
enum values are harmless when they move up or something


Some commentary from Dodji:
0:11 <Dodji> nanonyme: so there are two things: first we can teach libabigail
to ignore this change:
10:11 <Dodji> 1 enumerator insertion:
10:11 <Dodji>                   
'_VAProcColorStandardType::VAProcColorStandardExplicit' value '13'
10:12 <Dodji> inserting an enumerator at the *end* of an enum, for instance, is
not (generally) a problem.
10:12 <Dodji> so I should probably teach libabigail to automatically suppress
that change
10:13 <Dodji> however this change is a potentially problematic ABI change:
10:13 <Dodji> 1 enumerator change:
10:13 <Dodji>                   
'_VAProcColorStandardType::VAProcColorStandardCount' from value '13' to '14' at
va_vpp.h:304:1
10:14 <Dodji> so I understand that
_VAProcColorStandardType::VAProcColorStandardCount is a sentinel and so in that
particular case, we should ignore this altogether
10:15 <Dodji> so I am thinking that I should add a feature to the suppression
specification to enable us to ignore this
particular king of change in *enums*
10:16 <Dodji> because right now, unfortunately, we cannot :(

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug default/24139] Support suppressing some enumerator changes

[dodji at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24139

dodji at redhat dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2019-01-30
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from dodji at redhat dot com ---
Right, so what I am looking at right now is to be able to ignore changes in the
value of some particular enumerators in a given enum.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.