[Bug default/30297] New: abg-dwarf-reader.cc:11251: execution should not have reached this point!

[Bug default/30297] New: abg-dwarf-reader.cc:11251: execution should not have reached this point!

[woodard at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30297

            Bug ID: 30297
           Summary: abg-dwarf-reader.cc:11251: execution should not have
                    reached this point!
           Product: libabigail
           Version: unspecified
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: default
          Assignee: dodji at redhat dot com
          Reporter: woodard at redhat dot com
                CC: libabigail at sourceware dot org
  Target Milestone: ---

With the latest trunk:

$ fedabipkgdiff --self-compare -a --from fc37 gcc-gdc

This is a new one that I haven't seen before:
Comparing the ABI of binaries between gcc-gdc-12.2.1-4.fc37.x86_64.rpm and
gcc-gdc-12.2.1-4.fc37.x86_64.rpm:

in compare_dies at: ../../../libabigail/src/abg-dwarf-reader.cc:11251:
execution should not have reached this point!

---

Well evidently it did. ;-)

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

[Bug default/30297] abg-dwarf-reader.cc:11251: execution should not have reached this point!

[woodard at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30297

Ben Woodard <woodard at redhat dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |29412


Referenced Bugs:

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29412
[Bug 29412] libabigail 2.2 Assertion metabug
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug default/30297] abg-dwarf-reader.cc:11251: execution should not have reached this point!

[dodji at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30297

dodji at redhat dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|29412                       |30334

--- Comment #1 from dodji at redhat dot com ---
This assert is due to the fact that libabigail doesn't yet support the
DW_TAG_interface_type DIE.

We ought to support this kind of DIE in the near future.


Referenced Bugs:

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29412
[Bug 29412] libabigail 2.2 Assertion metabug
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30334
[Bug 30334] Support DW_TAG_iterface_type DIEs (for languages like D and Java)
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.