Re: [rfc] Return old cleanup when doing a restore_cleanups()

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

> At the moment, the only caller of restore_cleanups() is
> catch_errors(), so the assert could just as easily go in
> restore_cleanups() without causing any more breakage than placing the
> assert in catch_errors().

Oops, didn't notice that detail.

> If all (future) callers of restore_cleanups are supposed to drain the
> cleanup chain first, then I think the assert belongs in
> restore_cleanups().  If you think there might be a good reason to
> violate this rule, then the assert belongs in the caller.  Personally,
> I'd rather see the assert go in restore_cleanups() until someone can
> demonstrate a good reason for not draining the cleanup chain.

Yes, it is more being convinced that having the assertion there won't 
mysteriously break something ... :-/

I guess we're sufficiently early in the 5.2 release cycle to do it the 
right way.  I'll suck it and see.

Patch withdrawn.

	Andrew