From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12939 invoked by alias); 14 May 2003 20:14:59 -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 12850 invoked from network); 14 May 2003 20:14:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (146.82.138.56) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 May 2003 20:14:58 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19G2ei-00010R-00; Wed, 14 May 2003 15:15:16 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19G2eD-0002nt-00; Wed, 14 May 2003 16:14:45 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 20:14:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: "Theodore A. Roth" Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Correct double negative in gdbint.texinfo Message-ID: <20030514201445.GA8463@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Theodore A. Roth" , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00220.txt.bz2 On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 11:26:07AM -0700, Theodore A. Roth wrote: > Hi, > > This patch is strictly a grammar change. > > I'm not sure if "need not do anything" or "need do nothing" sounds > better though. > > Ok to commit? OK as an obvious fix, thanks. I think I prefer "need not do anything". > > Ted Roth > 2003-05-14 Theodore A. Roth > > * doc/gdbint.texinfo: Correct a double negative. > > Index: doc/gdbint.texinfo > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/doc/gdbint.texinfo,v > retrieving revision 1.144 > diff -u -r1.144 gdbint.texinfo > --- doc/gdbint.texinfo 5 May 2003 17:56:57 -0000 1.144 > +++ doc/gdbint.texinfo 14 May 2003 17:55:56 -0000 > @@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ > breakpoints somehow; for instance, a ROM monitor may do its own > software breakpoints. So although these are not literally ``hardware > breakpoints'', from @value{GDBN}'s point of view they work the same; > -@value{GDBN} need not do nothing more than set the breakpoint and wait > +@value{GDBN} need not do anything more than set the breakpoint and wait > for something to happen. > > Since they depend on hardware resources, hardware breakpoints may be -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer