Actually, let's just delete the now commented-out SAL_INFO lines

(It was I who added them in the first place.)

Next time somebody (falsely?) suspects a problem with mutex use and really
needs tracing, it's trivial to add temporary SAL_DEBUGs.

Change-Id: I3db02be777a728fbf4a1d1962f0ccfa16c630f15

sal/osl/unx/mutex.cxx

@@ -65,8 +65,6 @@ oslMutex SAL_CALL osl_createMutex()
 
     pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&aMutexAttr);
 
-//    SAL_INFO("sal.osl.mutex", "osl_createMutex(): " << pMutex);
-
     return pMutex;
 }
 
@@ -74,8 +72,6 @@ void SAL_CALL osl_destroyMutex(oslMutexImpl *pMutex)
 {
     SAL_WARN_IF(!pMutex, "sal.osl.mutex", "null pMutex");
 
-//    SAL_INFO("sal.osl.mutex", "osl_destroyMutex(" << pMutex << ")");
-
     if ( pMutex != 0 )
     {
         int nRet=0;
@@ -96,8 +92,6 @@ sal_Bool SAL_CALL osl_acquireMutex(oslMutexImpl *pMutex)
 {
     SAL_WARN_IF(!pMutex, "sal.osl.mutex", "null pMutex");
 
-//    SAL_INFO("sal.osl.mutex", "osl_acquireMutex(" << pMutex << ")");
-
     if ( pMutex != 0 )
     {
         int nRet=0;
@@ -129,8 +123,6 @@ sal_Bool SAL_CALL osl_tryToAcquireMutex(oslMutexImpl *pMutex)
             result = true;
     }
 
-//    SAL_INFO("sal.osl.mutex", "osl_tryToAcquireMutex(" << pMutex << "): " << (result ? "YES" : "NO"));
-
     return result;
 }
 
@@ -138,8 +130,6 @@ sal_Bool SAL_CALL osl_releaseMutex(oslMutexImpl *pMutex)
 {
     SAL_WARN_IF(!pMutex, "sal.osl.mutex", "null pMutex");
 
-//    SAL_INFO("sal.osl.mutex", "osl_releaseMutex(" << pMutex << ")");
-
     if ( pMutex )
     {
         int nRet=0;