This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] Wording of "catch syscall <number>" warning
On Thursday 24 September 2009, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > One alternative is to not print the warning at all if system call
> > names are unavailable.
>
> I'm slightly leaning towards not printing any warning at all. This is
> mostly because I dislike warnings when there is nothing I can do about
> them.
I was going to reply Doug's message saying that I'd prefer a warning to be
printed, but anyway, here is what I think... I may be misunderstanding things
here, but I think that warnings are not always intended to ask the user to
intervent and fix something. Sometimes, warnings are just intended to tell
the user "hey, something went wrong while I was working, so you will not be
able to use feature XYZ".
Of course, this is what I understand by "warning messages", and I will not
complain if the majority decides to remove them from this piece of code :-).
My two cents.
--
Sérgio Durigan Júnior
Linux on Power Toolchain - Software Engineer
Linux Technology Center - LTC
IBM Brazil