From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-109358-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 1433 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2014 20:06:25 -0000
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
Received: (qmail 1423 invoked by uid 89); 15 Jan 2014 20:06:24 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:06:24 +0000
Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25])	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s0FK6JKX020786	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);	Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:06:20 -0500
Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-85.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.85])	by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s0FK6IlL021698	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);	Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:06:19 -0500
From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: pmuldoon@redhat.com
Cc: Hui Zhu <hui_zhu@mentor.com>, gdb-patches ml <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make "backtrace" doesn't print python stack if init python dir get fail
References: <52974146.70805@mentor.com> <8761r7w85h.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>	<529D8865.80503@mentor.com> <87li01smua.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>	<529EDCA7.1090903@mentor.com> <87eh5j2vw0.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>	<52AAF43B.5060603@mentor.com> <87vbxmwnn3.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>	<87ha96wje5.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>	<20140114213218.GA24832@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:06:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <20140114213218.GA24832@localhost.localdomain> (Phil Muldoon's	message of "Tue, 14 Jan 2014 21:32:18 +0000")
Message-ID: <87ppntovr9.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00560.txt.bz2

>>>>> "Phil" == Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com> writes:

Phil> I think the suggestion in the warning text is still good though?

Yeah, good point.

>> I lean toward the simpler solution of changing the warning message and
>> clearing the flag.

Phil> I think so too, it makes things simpler for the user.  But in this
Phil> patch you deleted the warning, so not sure if the patch you posted is
Phil> your preferred solution?

No, the patch left the message there.  I looked again just now to make
sure :)

Tom