From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14521 invoked by alias); 14 May 2005 10:19:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 14474 invoked from network); 14 May 2005 10:19:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO legolas.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.24) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 14 May 2005 10:19:35 -0000 Received: from zaretski (IGLD-83-130-254-105.inter.net.il [83.130.254.105]) by legolas.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.6-GR) with ESMTP id EJJ61724 (AUTH halo1); Sat, 14 May 2005 13:19:28 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 11:17:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Andreas Jaeger Message-ID: <01c5586d$Blat.v2.4$f24c66a0@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: (message from Andreas Jaeger on Sat, 14 May 2005 11:23:13 +0200) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix Texinfo usage in pexecute.txh Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <01c55861$Blat.v2.4$8742c860@zahav.net.il> X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00338.txt.bz2 > From: Andreas Jaeger > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 11:23:13 +0200 > > > * pexecute.txh: Enclose multi-word data types in @deftypefn in > > braces. Minor wording fixes. Use --- for em-dash. Use > > em-dash? I don't see any changes like this in your patch It's in this hunk: @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ The standard input (output) of the program should be read (written) in binary mode rather than text mode. These flags are ignored on systems which do not distinguish binary mode and text mode, such as Unix. For -proper behavior these flags should match appropriately--a call to +proper behavior these flags should match appropriately---a call to @code{pex_run} using @code{PEX_BINARY_OUTPUT} should be followed by a call using @code{PEX_BINARY_INPUT}. @end table See that "---"? That's what produces em-dash in print. The original was using "--", which produces a single hyphen in print; that is not what we want here. Thanks for reviewing the patch.