From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6629 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2009 19:29:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 6620 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2009 19:29:17 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_JMF_BL,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout6.012.net.il (HELO mtaout6.012.net.il) (84.95.2.16) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:29:06 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout6.012.net.il by i-mtaout6.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KF8006005T7IP00@i-mtaout6.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:28:45 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.82.14]) by i-mtaout6.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KF8008HM63WF3D0@i-mtaout6.012.net.il>; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:28:45 +0200 (IST) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:45:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: MI solib notification In-reply-to: <200902172208.37427.vladimir@codesourcery.com> To: Vladimir Prus Cc: drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, nickrob@snap.net.nz Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: References: <200901310010.46738.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <20090201182917.GF4597@caradoc.them.org> <200902172208.37427.vladimir@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2009-02/txt/msg00359.txt.bz2 > From: Vladimir Prus > Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 22:08:37 +0300 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , > gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, > nickrob@snap.net.nz > > On Sunday 01 February 2009 21:29:18 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 01, 2009 at 08:22:28PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > That'd be okay as well, although I don't really understand why it is > > > better than my suggestion. > > > > It's not a big difference; I find it more natural to have the output > > all grouped together and looking similar to GDB's expected output. > > I'd prefer this approach to, because that's how the rest of MI docs do it. Do we have such long @item's elsewhere in the MI docs? I made a quick scan and didn't find any, but perhaps I missed something. > But -- who to I force a break inside @item ? You can't, AFAIK. Maybe you could use @itemx for all lines but the first one, but that would be a kludge. P.S. Please in the future show the original code/Texinfo that prompted the response above: that was 2 and a half weeks ago, and I no longer remembered what was this about, nor had the original message in my mailbox. I had to go to the archives to know what we were talking about. TIA