Eli Zaretskii schrieb: >> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:57:05 +0100 >> From: Markus Deuling >> CC: GDB Patches , Eli Zaretskii , >> Daniel Jacobowitz >> >> Eli, is the documentation ok like this ? > > I have a few comments: > >> ChangeLog Doc: >> >> * gdbint.texinfo (BITS_BIG_ENDIAN): Rewrite to match >> gdbarch_bits_big_endian. > > Actually, this should say something like: > > * gdbint.texinfo (Target Conditionals): Replace the > description of BITS_BIG_ENDIAN with a description of > gdbarch_bits_big_endian. > > Note that the text in parens is the name of the node in which you make > the change. > >> +@item gdbarch_bits_big_endian (@var{gdbarch}) >> +@findex gdbarch_bits_big_endian >> +Set this if the numbering of bits in the targets does @strong{not} match the > > "Set this" isn't right, because you don't "set" a function. I think > it's better to say "Define this to return non-zero it bits are > numbered in the big-endian order (i.e., the rightmost bit has the > largest number), zero otherwise." > > Btw, should we also document set_gdbarch_bits_big_endian? > Hi Eli, thank you very much for your review. I reworked the patch and added an entry for set_gdbarch_bits_big_endian. I also added it to the Target Conditionals node. Is that right? Is this ok ? ChangeLog: * gdbint.texinfo (Target Conditionals): Replace the description of BITS_BIG_ENDIAN with a description of gdbarch_bits_big_endian. Regards, Markus -- Markus Deuling GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE deuling@de.ibm.com