From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23649 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2016 16:05:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 23639 invoked by uid 89); 17 Feb 2016 16:05:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:05:27 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 709C7C09FAA6; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:05:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u1HG5OM9004537; Wed, 17 Feb 2016 11:05:25 -0500 Message-ID: <56C49A44.3050805@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:05:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?TWFyY2luIEtvxZtjaWVsbmlja2k=?= , Eli Zaretskii CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] gdb/doc: Add documentation for tfile description section lines. References: <56BB482A.1060307@redhat.com> <1455135588-21970-1-git-send-email-koriakin@0x04.net> <56BBB7A6.7000400@redhat.com> <56C4424D.9020400@0x04.net> <83ziuzuy31.fsf@gnu.org> <56C499F4.7040209@0x04.net> In-Reply-To: <56C499F4.7040209@0x04.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2016-02/txt/msg00519.txt.bz2 On 02/17/2016 04:04 PM, Marcin Kościelnicki wrote: > On 17/02/16 16:59, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> The patch is OK, but I wonder what about that FIXME there? >> >> Thanks. >> > > Yeah, the FIXME is worded a bit weirdly and I wondered about it too, but > the only thing it could've referred to was the description section line > types (the trace frame section is already documented), so I figured it'd > be best to remove it. > I agree. Thanks, Pedro Alves