As you know, the phrase "the set of all sets that don't contain themselves" caused a paradox that "broke" (made trivial) Naive set theory. How much mathematics had to be redone because of this? Most mathematics was being formulated in it, so it was obviously bad that it was inconsistent. On the other hand, things like Pythagoras' Theorem or Euclid's Proof of the Infinitude of Primes or the irrationality of $\pi$, would work the same regardless of foundation.
How much mathematical labor had to be redone or was simply lost when the paradox was found?