Created attachment 693540 [details] testcase ###!!! ASSERTION: can't call on root: '!IsRoot()', file layout/style/nsRuleNode.h, line 650
Hmm. Seems like this would get hit if aOldAnimRule is the least-specific rule involved, right?
Though it's not quite clear to me how you can end up with an animation rule that's least-specific if the animation comes from author rules...
In this case, when ReplaceAnimationRule is called aOldRuleNode is a rulenode for an animation rule and its parent is the root, and aNewAnimationRule is null, so it all makes sense.
5 years ago
Created attachment 694527 [details] [diff] [review] Be a bit more careful with our level assert in ReplaceAnimationRule.
Comment on attachment 694527 [details] [diff] [review] Be a bit more careful with our level assert in ReplaceAnimationRule. r=dbaron I presume you tested the crashtest aborted without the patch?
It doesn't abort, but it does assert without the patch, so fails tests.