From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10052 invoked by alias); 13 May 2006 22:11:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 10029 invoked by uid 22791); 13 May 2006 22:11:20 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from intranet.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.6) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 13 May 2006 22:11:05 +0000 Received: (qmail 16733 invoked from network); 13 May 2006 22:11:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.5?) (sandra@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 13 May 2006 22:11:03 -0000 Message-ID: <446659B7.3040306@codesourcery.com> Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 03:29:00 -0000 From: Sandra Loosemore User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: PATCH: copy-edit File-I/O section of manual References: <4465ED4D.4020505@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00308.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Thanks. However, could you please submit these as two separate > patches, one that fixes only the spelling and grammar, the other with > the rest? You're basically asking me to throw out the work I did and start over. I don't think I'm motivated enough to want to do that. > I'd like to understand the motivation for moving stuff > around, for starters. There were three pieces I moved around. I moved the separate sections on the restrictions on isatty() and system() to the (respective) sections where the actual functions are documented, so that all the information is in one place instead of split in two different places. The third piece was the section on memory access, which I moved to the "Protocol specific representation of datatypes" section. Again, the motivation was to collect related information in one place. > Also, when you send the patch for spelling and grammar, please try not > to reformat lines, so that unmodified lines don't appear in the diffs. > The way you did it (refilling the paragraphs after changing them) > makes the diffs unnecessarily voluminous and hard to read. I *did* avoid reformatting lines as much as possible. However, there were a lot of lines that needed some sort of edit or another, even though many of the changes were very minor. Rather than trying to make sense of the line-by-line diffs, I suggest that the right way to review this change is to apply them and proofread the resulting text. If you spot additional problems, let me know and I can provide a revised patch to address them. -Sandra