From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
To: Stefan Weyergraf <stefan@weyergraf.de>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] implements MI "-file-list-exec-sections" (updated)
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 20:14:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40A285A8.50801@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200405070007.45521.stefan@weyergraf.de>
> -@code{"&" @var{c-string}}
> +@code{"&" @var{c-string} @var{nl}}
>
> @item @var{nl} @expansion{}
> @code{CR | CR-LF}
This part all looks correct, can you just post it separatly with a
ChangeLog.
OK
...
> -static void core_files_info (struct target_ops *);
> +static void core_files_info (struct target_ops *, struct ui_out *);
Again, just this part (through out) is all ok, can you please post it.
I'm not sure what exactly you mean here.
Do you mean that the change to the *_info(...) _interface_ is all ok?
Yes. By separating it out we make it mechanical and hence can slip it in.
Or the interface plus implementation (main work being in exec_info(), the
others (core, go32, hpux, child, monitor, etc..) considered as follow-ups)?
Or the changes to mi/cmd-file.cc and mi/mi-cmds.cc?
Or all 3? (which I hope)
>},
> +{start-address="0x0804970c",end-address="0x08049710",section-name=".bss"
>}]}] +(@value{GDBP})
> +@end smallexample
I like it. But lets get the other changes in first.
Are you really only talking about the doc-changes here? If that's true and
(thus) you are agreeing to my main (ie. gdb/mi source code) changes, why
would we want to wait here?
I've just looked at the doc. Next is to look at the updated and
separate implementation.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-12 20:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-22 21:56 Stefan Weyergraf
2004-04-22 22:22 ` Bob Rossi
2004-04-22 23:31 ` Stefan Weyergraf
2004-04-28 21:51 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-05-07 1:20 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-05-06 22:07 ` Stefan Weyergraf
2004-05-12 20:14 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2004-04-30 21:54 Nick Roberts
2004-05-01 4:09 ` Bob Rossi
2004-05-01 12:08 ` Nick Roberts
2004-05-02 13:25 ` Bob Rossi
2004-05-07 1:19 ` Andrew Cagney
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=40A285A8.50801@gnu.org \
--to=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=stefan@weyergraf.de \
/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