Re: db_trace.c: use __func__ instead of hardcoding filename

2016-09-09 Thread Philip Guenther
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse wrote: > On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 01:54:46PM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse >> wrote: >> > Do we really want the filename to be printed in the message? If so we >> > should >> >

Re: db_trace.c: use __func__ instead of hardcoding filename

2016-09-09 Thread Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 01:54:46PM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse > wrote: > > Do we really want the filename to be printed in the message? If so we should > > use __FILE__. On the other hand, having the function name makes more sense >

Re: db_trace.c: use __func__ instead of hardcoding filename

2016-09-09 Thread Philip Guenther
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse wrote: > Do we really want the filename to be printed in the message? If so we should > use __FILE__. On the other hand, having the function name makes more sense to > me. This is a "not found" message in response to an explicit user comm

Re: db_trace.c: use __func__ instead of hardcoding filename

2016-09-09 Thread Todd C. Miller
On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 20:38:05 +0200, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse wrote: > Do we really want the filename to be printed in the message? If so we should > use __FILE__. On the other hand, having the function name makes more sense to > me. Much more useful, OK millert@ - todd

db_trace.c: use __func__ instead of hardcoding filename

2016-09-09 Thread Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse
Hi, Do we really want the filename to be printed in the message? If so we should use __FILE__. On the other hand, having the function name makes more sense to me. OK? Index: amd64/amd64/db_trace.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/amd