From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3745 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2007 08:06:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 3735 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Feb 2007 08:06:04 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 18 Feb 2007 08:05:59 +0000 Received: from kahikatea.snap.net.nz (143.62.255.123.dynamic.snap.net.nz [123.255.62.143]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFA953D8F4A; Sun, 18 Feb 2007 21:05:56 +1300 (NZDT) Received: by kahikatea.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 500) id 73E574F708; Sun, 18 Feb 2007 21:05:56 +1300 (NZDT) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17880.2275.44474.18077@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 08:06:00 -0000 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Doc corrections to gdb.texinfo In-Reply-To: References: <17877.11293.529807.644028@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <17879.29881.362130.992800@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 22.0.93.10 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-02/txt/msg00221.txt.bz2 > > The cross reference name `file' doesn't mean anything to me. > > It refers to the fact that you specify a file, as the surrounding text > suggests. Moreover, at least in the stand-alone Info reader, the > ``file'' thing causes it to look for the string "file" in the > referenced node and put point there, if found. So it looks like in > this case, whoever added that ``file'' part, actually knew what they > were doing. You're probably right. I keep thinking I'm looking directly at info in Emacs and forget that, for some reason, it puts own unique spin on things. > > In any case I think that the section name being linked to is > > clearer. > > We can have them both: your change left the second argument of @pxref > empty. How about leaving ``file'' in the second argument, and adding > your 3rd arg? OK, I've done that and committed the changes. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob