From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 88259 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2018 18:43:40 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 88244 invoked by uid 89); 10 Sep 2018 18:43:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=telling, baldwin, Baldwin, HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-HELO: mail.baldwin.cx Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (HELO mail.baldwin.cx) (96.47.65.170) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 18:43:38 +0000 Received: from John-Baldwins-MacBook-Pro-2.local (ralph.baldwin.cx [66.234.199.215]) by mail.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4AE4B10B4CE; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:43:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Add a new 'info proc files' subcommand of 'info proc'. To: Eli Zaretskii , Simon Marchi References: <20180908003659.37482-1-jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20180908003659.37482-3-jhb@FreeBSD.org> <83bm98trel.fsf@gnu.org> <83worvqm52.fsf@gnu.org> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: John Baldwin Message-ID: Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 18:43:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83worvqm52.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-09/txt/msg00293.txt.bz2 On 9/8/18 10:23 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> CC: >> From: Simon Marchi >> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2018 23:30:36 +0100 >> >>>> + add_cmd ("files", class_info, info_proc_cmd_files, _("\ >>>> +List of open files."), >>> >>> IMO, this doc strings is too terse. I suggest to expand it telling >>> that the command shows the files open by the process being debugged. >> >> The info proc commands accept a pid, which allows you to refer to any >> process, not only those debugged by GDB. > > Then let's say > > List of files open by the specified process. I'm fine with that, but we should probably make the descriptions under 'info proc' a bit more consistent in general as a followup. Most of them use 'of the process' without including "specified", and 'info proc mappings' (which I based the original description off of) doesn't include "process" in its description. -- John Baldwin                                                                            Â