From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24094 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2003 13:02:18 -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 24079 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2003 13:02:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO frigg.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.16) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Oct 2003 13:02:18 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.156.233]) by frigg.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.7-GR) with ESMTP id CXZ05327; Sat, 25 Oct 2003 15:02:07 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 13:02:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Jim Blandy Message-Id: <2914-Sat25Oct2003145706+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from Jim Blandy on 24 Oct 2003 22:59:39 -0500) Subject: Re: RFA: fix node name (revised patch) Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00763.txt.bz2 > From: Jim Blandy > Date: 24 Oct 2003 22:59:39 -0500 > > Here's a revision of the patch that fixes the menu in the parent node, > too. (Oops.) Thanks. This is approved. > I was trying to figure out why this hasn't bothered anyone yet --- the > node name with the single quotes has been in there for months --- and > I realized that it is because I'm using an older version of > texinfo.tex (circa 1999). So, Eli, if your response to this patch is > "You should update your texinfo.tex", then that's perfectly fine with > me. No, my response is that your patch is correct, for the resons I explained in my other mail in this thread.