From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19340 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2004 22:10:25 -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 19329 invoked from network); 11 Feb 2004 22:10:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (216.129.200.20) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 11 Feb 2004 22:10:24 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (toocool.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.72]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C23B18001D2; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:10:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <402AA84F.7040705@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 22:10:00 -0000 From: Jeff Johnston User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC]: new set breakpoint pending and show breakpoint pending commands References: <402974E1.8090909@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00310.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:18:41 -0500 >>From: Jeff Johnston >> >>I have included a doc patch but will wait on posting a change to pending.exp >>until everyone is ok with the interface. A change is not required to make >>pending.exp work, it would just exercise the new functionality. I have tested >>the new settings manually. >> >>Ok? > > > Thanks. A few minor comments about the documentation patch: > > >>+If a specified breakpoint location cannot be found, it may due to the fact > > ^^^ > I think there's a "be" missing at the spot I marked. > Arrr, there be. > >>+that the location is in a shared library that is yet to be loaded. In such >>+a case, you may want @value{GDBN} to create a special breakpoint (known as >>+a pending breakpoint) that > > > Please put "pending breakpoint", just this once, in @dfn{}, so that it > stands out. (This is generally a good practice when introducing new > terminology.) > Done. > >> When a breakpoint location is unrecognized, >>+you are queried to see if a pending breakpoint should be created. > > > I'd rephrase this slightly: > > When @value{GDBN} cannot find the breakpoint location, it queries > you whether a pending breakpoint should be created. > Done. > Otherwise, it can go in when the code patch is approved. > > Thanks.