From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-63020-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 13789 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2009 09:23:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 13781 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Apr 2009 09:23:56 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout3.012.net.il (HELO mtaout3.012.net.il) (84.95.2.7)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:23:51 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.i_mtaout3.012.net.il by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) id <0KI800300N8QS300@i_mtaout3.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:23:48 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.183.184]) by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0KI800HOTNFNCCB0@i_mtaout3.012.net.il>; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 12:23:48 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:23:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFA] print error message if (auto) disassembly failed
In-reply-to: <20090416235944.GP7585@adacore.com>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
Cc: tromey@redhat.com, teawater@gmail.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83prfbk50b.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20090416173918.GP7557@adacore.com> <m3vdp4b5nr.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20090416235944.GP7585@adacore.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-04/txt/msg00414.txt.bz2

> Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:59:44 -0700
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> > The default is "auto", which means:
> > 
> >    If AUTO (which is the default), or there's no line info to determine
> >    the source line of the next instruction, display disassembly of next
> >    instruction instead.  */
> > 
> > But I agree with you that this is the wrong default.
> > I think the default should be "off".
> 
> Would anyone object to changing the default to "off"?

My vote is to set it to "off", since this is additional functionality
that evidently not everyone likes.