From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5196 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2002 14:09:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 5187 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2002 14:09:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO systemhalted) (24.112.140.233) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Aug 2002 14:09:36 -0000 Received: from carlos by systemhalted with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17fhlW-0003EA-00; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:07:50 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 07:09:00 -0000 From: Carlos O'Donell To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Issue an internal warning on first deprecated function call Message-ID: <20020816140750.GD11845@systemhalted> References: <3D5C248D.4030003@ges.redhat.com> <1020815223303.ZM7495@localhost.localdomain> <20020816133012.GC11845@systemhalted> <3D5D030F.4050409@ges.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D5D030F.4050409@ges.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Useless-Header: oooohhmmm, chant the email mantra... X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00184.txt.bz2 > > My intent is for it to use ``internal-warning'' which means it will look > something like this: > It can stil be a large banner :) > (gdb) maint internal-error > /home/scratch/GDB/src/gdb/maint.c:121: gdb-internal-error: internal > maintenance > An internal GDB error was detected. This may make further > debugging unreliable. Quit this debugging session? (y or n) n > Create a core file containing the current state of GDB? (y or n) n > (gdb) > s/error/warning/ Would it be better if the message was more explanatory? 'internal maintenance - deprecated [multi-arch] function call' I have this feeling that we will want to make this message as clear as possible. We want to say "Hey you! Wakeup! Fix it or lose it!" > Since the user is going to need to interact with this, they will get > very annoyed with it pretty quick. This is why I'm also proposing > another command for gaging it :-) Or submit to the pain and torture that users will inflict on the mailing list ;) > I think ``internal-warning'' is correct since there is a very very good > chance that the deprecated interface will have been [unintentionally] > broken by the introduction of the new mechanisms. *nods* c.