From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29757 invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2002 20:43:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29750 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2002 20:43:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freya.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.14) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Jun 2002 20:43:07 -0000 Received: from Zaretsky ([80.230.2.40]) by freya.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.1.0.58-GA) with ESMTP id BNA71626; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 23:41:04 +0300 (IDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 13:43:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: keiths@redhat.com Message-Id: <9003-Tue18Jun2002233910+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from Keith Seitz on Tue, 18 Jun 2002 11:34:29 -0700 (PDT)) Subject: Re: [RFC/MI] Event Records vs Commands Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00330.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 11:34:29 -0700 (PDT) > From: Keith Seitz > > This is the approach I've taken with my next attempt (which also includes > the fixes recommended by Eli, following the convention with two spaces > after @value{GDBN} -- if people want me to switch them all to use @., I > can submit separate patch for that). Thanks, approved.