Re: [RFC] Wording of "catch syscall <number>" warning

["Sérgio Durigan Júnior" <sergiodj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

Hi Doug,

On Friday 25 September 2009, Doug Evans wrote:
> It wasn't clear that this addressed my concerns when !HAVE_LIBEXPAT so
> I applied the patch and gave it a spin.

[I am assuming that you are talking about our little discussion on IRC, about 
fix the testsuite so that it doesn't fail when the user doesn't have 
libexpat.]

You are right, this patch does not address your concerns about !HAVE_LIBEXPAT, 
mainly because we discussed that on IRC _after_ I sent this patch :-).  I will 
resubmit another version that addresses this issue as well.

> Two nits:
> I still see a warning at start-up, and
> When I do "catch syscall" I still get
> warning: The number '20' does not represent a known syscall.
> for every invocation. [Did I misunderstand?  Or did we want this
> warning, which is issued in breakpoint.c, to only happen once if
> !HAVE_LIBEXPAT.]

That's because you took the wrong version of the patch :-).  Please, take a 
look at my other message following this one.

http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-09/msg00826.html

-- 
Sérgio Durigan Júnior
Linux on Power Toolchain - Software Engineer
Linux Technology Center - LTC
IBM Brazil