From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31451 invoked by alias); 23 Mar 2004 19:51:30 -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 31431 invoked from network); 23 Mar 2004 19:51:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO aragorn.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.23) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Mar 2004 19:51:29 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.155.157]) by aragorn.inter.net.il (MOS 3.4.5-GR) with ESMTP id CQD08509; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 21:51:18 +0200 (IST) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:51:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Andrew Cagney Message-Id: <9681-Tue23Mar2004214811+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <405F5AF0.5040108@gnu.org> (message from Andrew Cagney on Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:30:24 -0500) Subject: Re: [6.1] TUI in doco? Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <4057859D.1020900@gnu.org> <405F5AF0.5040108@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00530.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:30:24 -0500 > From: Andrew Cagney > > The attached is hopefully getting there. Thanks. My comments below. > I also noticed an inconsistency in its name. "Terminal User > Interface" is what HP use, it fixes that as well. FWIW, the previous interpretation of TUI was better: it's a text-mode UI; "terminal" doesn't necessarily imply "text-mode". Oh well... > +@pindex @code{gdbtui} There's no need to use @code in @pindex entries, these entries are automatically typeset in the same typeface as arguments of @code. > +Activate the Terminal User Interface when starting. The Terminal User The first occurence of "Terminal User Interface" would look better in @dfn. Also, a @cindex entry for "Terminal User Interface" somewhere, probably where you have an index entry for TUI, could be a good idea. > +The TUI is enabled by invoking @value{GDBN} using either > +@pindex gdbtui > +@samp{gdbtui} or @samp{gdb -tui}. This is the second time we have a @pindex entry about gdbtui; one of them is redundant and should be removed, I think. Otherwise, fine with me.