From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id yW4mGRh7gGSbgCAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 07 Jun 2023 08:42:00 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 51D2F1E11E; Wed, 7 Jun 2023 08:42:00 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=qW6KI83G; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9E611E111 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2023 08:41:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 479993857702 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2023 12:41:59 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 479993857702 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1686141719; bh=tVKq5GSXzHMEagzr+K4fhcR4X/dxRPlxveRge3KonZ0=; h=Date:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=qW6KI83GMUPcXL2z+rFHqIyl8Gdy1CLgkMzYqxyuENM8rtsZn9wRZdMXahSpC/Mkp 7JKH5fIx7dr8TmoFilrxPOY6Vdqea+ubreV+eJSeldcrdZvph33SF6PYD96wamAf/8 80leNGeF9Xxp6QcIkEq4j6xkcIPX2TnuJ24waGDI= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC7C33858C54 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2023 12:41:40 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org EC7C33858C54 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q6sTs-0001By-9j; Wed, 07 Jun 2023 08:41:40 -0400 Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q6sTr-0005bm-Pb; Wed, 07 Jun 2023 08:41:40 -0400 Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2023 15:41:43 +0300 Message-Id: <834jnj4f7c.fsf@gnu.org> To: Andrew Burgess Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: (message from Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches on Wed, 7 Jun 2023 11:01:18 +0100) Subject: Re: [PATCHv8 6/6] gdb: rename unwindonsignal to unwind-on-signal References: X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > Cc: Andrew Burgess > Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2023 11:01:18 +0100 > From: Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches > > We now have unwind-on-timeout and unwind-on-terminating-exception, and > then the odd one out unwindonsignal. > > I'm not a great fan of these squashed together command names, so in > this commit I propose renaming this to unwind-on-signal. > > Obviously I've added the hidden alias unwindonsignal so any existing > GDB scripts will keep working. > > There's one test that I've extended to test the alias works, but in > most of the other test scripts I've changed over to use the new name. > > The docs are updated to reference the new name. If the only changes in the documentation are mechanical renaming, can I blindly approve the documentation part? Or would you prefer a real review? Thanks.