From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7897 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2003 14:41:15 -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 7871 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2003 14:41:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 4 Feb 2003 14:41:14 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h14Ef8H14845; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 08:41:08 -0600 Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2003 14:41:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200302041441.h14Ef8H14845@duracef.shout.net> To: eliz@is.elta.co.il Subject: Re: [rfa/doc] correct info about best C++ compilers/debug formats Cc: carlton@math.stanford.edu, drow@mvista.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00112.txt.bz2 Hi Eli, > Let me explain myself: I'm grateful that you did _any_ testing at all; it > should have been my job, except that I don't have time to do anything > these days except read the patches and approve them. We all do what we can and somehow the releases come out. It looks like I need texinfo, tetex, and info in my baseline software. I will go spruce up my baseline. For chasing the cross-references, I can do this by hand for a while. And then maybe write testsuite/info.doc with some 'expect' automation, running on 'info' rather than gdb! Michael C