From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: ac131313@cygnus.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] gdbserver 2/n - signals Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 11:34:00 -0000 Message-id: <20010720113429.A30864@nevyn.them.org> References: <20010719120143.A19963@nevyn.them.org> <3B574A5D.6030403@cygnus.com> <20010719141742.A25968@nevyn.them.org> <3B5755C9.8070003@cygnus.com> <20010719145237.A28070@nevyn.them.org> <9003-Fri20Jul2001103107+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <20010720083249.A21309@nevyn.them.org> <9743-Fri20Jul2001213136+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00516.html On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 09:31:36PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Well, the way I see it is that the signal numbering convention is part > > of the remote protocol, and so should be documented in the manual; at > > the same time I didn't really want to duplicate the hundred and > > something signals inline in the texinfo documentation. > > Then perhaps this info shouldn't be in the manual. > > > I don't really understand why the remote protocol is documented in the > > user's manual, either :) > > There's a difference between documenting a protocol and talking about > enumerations from GDB sources. The signal numbers are a part of the protocol. I think they should be documented somewhere beside GDB source; would you prefer that I simply list them in the manual somewhere? -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer