Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make cygwin use .gdbinit
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 08:09:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011125193544.GA2355@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5137-Sun25Nov2001211400+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>

On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 09:14:00PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 13:58:07 -0500
>> From: Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
>> >
>> >Sigh.  Unfortunately, this wording is inaccurate and might be
>> >misleading: it gives an impression that gdb.ini is only used on
>> >MS-DOS.  This is not true, since the DJGPP port works on Windows as
>> >well, but still uses gdb.ini there.
>> 
>> >From www.delorie.com/djgpp:
>> 
>> "DJGPP is a complete 32-bit C/C++ development system for Intel 80386
>> (and higher) PCs running DOS."
>> 
>> I guess this documentation is about as misleading as the first sentence
>> of this web page.
>
>Perhaps.  However, DJ's Web page is not something I need to approve ;-)

Ok.  You're obviously critical of the wording changes and I apologize
for assuming that this was an obvious fix.  I will note that while DJGPP
is mentioned in the documentation as "development tools to MS-DOS and
MS-Windows".  This sentence is followed by "djgpp programs are 32-bit
protected-mode programs that use the DPMI (DOS Protected-Mode Interface)
API to run on top of real-mode DOS systems and their emulations."

There's a lot of "DOS" in the above.  And there's a lot of "DOS" in the
subsequent paragraphs.

However, neither your sighing nor my nit picking is going to improve
the documentation to what you would consider acceptable.  What are your
suggestions for how I can improve the documentation?  Do you just want
me to revert it?  Do you want me to change the MS-DOS's to DJGPP's?
Should I keep the existing documentation and just say Unix/Cygwin?

cgf


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make cygwin use .gdbinit
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:35:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011125193544.GA2355@redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20011125113500.1D-25wSZVSoO-WqI_h5Ov8jeOMWHD51POLil7ZU5YeQ@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5137-Sun25Nov2001211400+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>

On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 09:14:00PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 13:58:07 -0500
>> From: Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
>> >
>> >Sigh.  Unfortunately, this wording is inaccurate and might be
>> >misleading: it gives an impression that gdb.ini is only used on
>> >MS-DOS.  This is not true, since the DJGPP port works on Windows as
>> >well, but still uses gdb.ini there.
>> 
>> >From www.delorie.com/djgpp:
>> 
>> "DJGPP is a complete 32-bit C/C++ development system for Intel 80386
>> (and higher) PCs running DOS."
>> 
>> I guess this documentation is about as misleading as the first sentence
>> of this web page.
>
>Perhaps.  However, DJ's Web page is not something I need to approve ;-)

Ok.  You're obviously critical of the wording changes and I apologize
for assuming that this was an obvious fix.  I will note that while DJGPP
is mentioned in the documentation as "development tools to MS-DOS and
MS-Windows".  This sentence is followed by "djgpp programs are 32-bit
protected-mode programs that use the DPMI (DOS Protected-Mode Interface)
API to run on top of real-mode DOS systems and their emulations."

There's a lot of "DOS" in the above.  And there's a lot of "DOS" in the
subsequent paragraphs.

However, neither your sighing nor my nit picking is going to improve
the documentation to what you would consider acceptable.  What are your
suggestions for how I can improve the documentation?  Do you just want
me to revert it?  Do you want me to change the MS-DOS's to DJGPP's?
Should I keep the existing documentation and just say Unix/Cygwin?

cgf


  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-11-25 19:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-11-10 12:38 Christopher Faylor
2001-11-10 13:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-11-10 21:53   ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-25 11:14     ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-11-11  1:14       ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-11-11  8:09       ` Christopher Faylor [this message]
2001-11-11  9:57         ` DJ Delorie
2001-11-11 10:33           ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-11-25 23:55             ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-11-26 10:32             ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-12 13:13               ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-12 14:43               ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-11-12 21:19                 ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-26 12:34                   ` Christopher Faylor
2001-11-26 11:23                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-11-26 10:42               ` DJ Delorie
2001-11-12 13:22                 ` DJ Delorie
2001-11-25 20:09           ` DJ Delorie
2001-11-25 11:35         ` Christopher Faylor

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20011125193544.GA2355@redhat.com \
    --to=cgf@redhat.com \
    --cc=eliz@is.elta.co.il \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox