From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "John R. Moore" To: gdb-patches Subject: Re: [RFA] tiny spelling corrections in gdbint.text Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:57:00 -0000 Message-id: References: X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00438.html Oops, change the change log to say: * gdbint.texinfo: Fixed three misspellings. ------------------------------- On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, John R. Moore wrote: > > 2001-07-17 John R. Moore > > * gdbint.texinfo: fixed three misspelling words. > > Index: gdb/doc/gdbint.texinfo > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/cvsfiles/devo/gdb/doc/gdbint.texinfo,v > retrieving revision 1.173 > diff -p -u -r1.173 gdbint.texinfo > --- gdb/doc/gdbint.texinfo 2001/07/13 23:56:09 1.173 > +++ gdb/doc/gdbint.texinfo 2001/07/17 20:48:53 > @@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ to debugger commands. > > @value{GDBN} should be relatively permissive, such as for expressions. > While the compiler should be picky (or have the option to be made > -picky), since source code lives for a long time usuazlly, the > +picky), since source code lives for a long time usually, the > programmer doing debugging shouldn't be spending time figuring out to > mollify the debugger. > > @@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ user says to continue, @value{GDBN} will > instruction, single-step, re-insert the trap, and continue on. > > Since it literally overwrites the program being tested, the program area > -must be writeable, so this technique won't work on programs in ROM. It > +must be writable, so this technique won't work on programs in ROM. It > can also distort the behavior of programs that examine themselves, > although such a situation would be highly unusual. > > @@ -4921,7 +4921,7 @@ owned by the Free Software Foundation" a > changes in many programs (not just @value{GDBN}, but GAS, Emacs, GCC, > etc) can be > contributed with only one piece of legalese pushed through the > -bureacracy and filed with the FSF. We can't start merging changes until > +bureaucracy and filed with the FSF. We can't start merging changes until > this paperwork is received by the FSF (their rules, which we follow > since we maintain it for them). > >