From: "dodji at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: libabigail@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug default/29650] "Assertion `__abg_cond__' failed." with with libabigail 2.1
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 16:22:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-29650-9487-BIFu5d1kPm@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-29650-9487@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29650
--- Comment #9 from dodji at redhat dot com ---
"romain.geissler at amadeus dot com"
<sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org> writes:
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29650
>
> --- Comment #8 from Romain Geissler <romain.geissler at amadeus dot com> ---
> Thanks !
>
> When I upgraded to abigail 2.1 I had actually not just one project hitting
> this, but quite some among all the ones I maintain. Maybe it's not the exact
> same issue, but in all case it was an assertion failure (the root cause of the
> failure may be different for each).
If they are all C++ libraries, then maybe it's the same bug (if the
assert is at the same location). Sorry for that.
> Do you plan on cutting a "bugfix" release in the coming days or this is not
> critical and it can way for a bigger release 2.2 in some months ?
I don't have a planned release really soon, but I might cherry-pick the
fix into the Fedora and EPEL packages of libabigail if that can be
useful, leading to a libabigail-2.1-2 package. Would that be helpful?
> If you plan for a release soon I will wait for it, otherwise I will
> migrate again to 2.1 with a cherry-pick of your patch for this bug.
Ah, if you can cherry-pick the fix into your 2.1, then it might be best
to do that until we release 2.2, which I hope won't be too far down the
road. I definitely wouldn't want to wait as long what we did for 2.1.
Please let me know what you'd prefer.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-10 16:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-03 19:14 [Bug default/29650] New: " romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2022-10-03 19:22 ` [Bug default/29650] " romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2022-10-03 19:23 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2022-10-03 19:24 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2022-10-03 19:25 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2022-10-07 20:30 ` dodji at redhat dot com
2022-10-10 15:19 ` dodji at redhat dot com
2022-10-10 15:20 ` dodji at redhat dot com
2022-10-10 15:24 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2022-10-10 16:22 ` dodji at redhat dot com [this message]
2022-10-10 18:36 ` romain.geissler at amadeus dot com
2022-10-11 9:49 ` Dodji Seketeli
2022-10-10 21:23 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2022-10-11 9:49 ` dodji at seketeli dot org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-29650-9487-BIFu5d1kPm@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
--cc=libabigail@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).