From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28219 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2002 12:43:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 28171 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2002 12:43:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Jan 2002 12:43:04 -0000 Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA16445; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 14:42:05 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 04:43:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz@is To: Pierre Muller cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] remove unwanted output in breakpoint_re_set_one In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20020114121954.00acc5b8@ics.u-strasbg.fr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00387.txt.bz2 On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Pierre Muller wrote: > 2002-01-14 Pierre Muller > > * breakpoint.c (breakpoint_re_set_one): Remove call to mention > for watchpoints to avoid unnecessary output > when dynamic libraries are loaded. This, of course, begs the question: why was the call to `mention' in breakpoint_re_set_one in the first place? Is this function called only when a dynamic library was loaded? If not, we might be shooting ourselves in the foot. Even if it is only called when a dynamic library was loaded, the question why the message was put there still remains.