Re: RFA: GDB manual: document tracepoint packets

[Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>]

On 11/19/05, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > + @node Tracepoint Packets
> > + @section Tracepoint Packets
>
> Suggest a @cindex entry here, something like "tracepoint packets".

D'oh.  Of course.

> > + Here we describe the packets @value{GDBN} uses to implement
> > + tracepoints (@pxref{Tracepoints}).
>
> I think it would be good to have an @xref from the "Tracepoints" node
> to here as well.

Added.

> > + Replies:
> > + @table @samp
> > + @item OK
> > + The packet was understood and carried out.
> > + @item
>
> Does this @item really need to be empty?  If so, why, and what do we
> want to appear here in print?

It does.  This appears as a pair of matched single quotes enclosing
nothing in both the Info and printable manuals.  The remote stub
returns an empty packet to indicate that it didn't understand the
command.  Blank @items are used elsewhere in the manual for this
purpose.

> > + A successful reply from the stub and indicates that the stub has found
>                                      ^^^
> That "and" seems extraneous.

It is.

> Other than that, this can go in.  Thanks again for working on this.

I'll commit it.  Thanks very much for your prompt review!