From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9717 invoked by alias); 9 May 2012 18:48:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 9708 invoked by uid 22791); 9 May 2012 18:48:17 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il (HELO mtaout23.012.net.il) (80.179.55.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 May 2012 18:48:05 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M3R00D00QPMM300@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 09 May 2012 21:47:48 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.210.75]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M3R00DKLQVNLT10@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Wed, 09 May 2012 21:47:48 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 18:48:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [obv doc] Fix too wide @smallexample [Re: [patch 1/2] Provide $ddir substitution for --with-auto-load-safe-path] In-reply-to: <20120509181640.GA11556@host2.jankratochvil.net> To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83zk9hyyzd.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20120509154640.GA12692@host2.jankratochvil.net> <8362c51ccr.fsf@gnu.org> <20120509181640.GA11556@host2.jankratochvil.net> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg00299.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 20:16:40 +0200 > From: Jan Kratochvil > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > I think these lines just got too long for @smallexample. Did you try > > to produce the PDF version, and if so, did you see these lines > > overflow the margin? > > I do not see there any problem, do you? > http://people.redhat.com/jkratoch/smallexample.png This is fine. > But I have seen some other two cases which format more wide than the > surrounding paragraphs, checked in those as obvious. Thanks.