From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29691 invoked by alias); 13 May 2006 18:56:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 29682 invoked by uid 22791); 13 May 2006 18:56:28 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 13 May 2006 18:56:26 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-83-130-243-9.inter.net.il [83.130.243.9]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id DIU24888 (AUTH halo1); Sat, 13 May 2006 21:56:16 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:03:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Sandra Loosemore CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <4465ED4D.4020505@codesourcery.com> (message from Sandra Loosemore on Sat, 13 May 2006 10:29:33 -0400) Subject: Re: PATCH: copy-edit File-I/O section of manual Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <4465ED4D.4020505@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00303.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 10:29:33 -0400 > From: Sandra Loosemore > > When I was implementing the File-I/O protocol recently, I noticed a lot of > spelling and grammatical mistakes in that section of the manual. Here's a patch > to clean it up. Thanks. However, could you please submit these as two separate patches, one that fixes only the spelling and grammar, the other with the rest? I'd like to understand the motivation for moving stuff around, for starters. Also, when you send the patch for spelling and grammar, please try not to reformat lines, so that unmodified lines don't appear in the diffs. The way you did it (refilling the paragraphs after changing them) makes the diffs unnecessarily voluminous and hard to read. TIA > 2006-05-13 Sandra Loosemore > * gdb.texinfo (File-I/O remote protocol extension): General > copy-editing to fix spelling, grammar, formatting issues. > Moved a few paragraphs around to more logical places. The ChangeLog entries should mention the node name for each change; it is not sufficient to name only their parent node. > ! The File-I/O protocol uses the @code{F} packet as the request as well > as as reply packet. ^^^^^ This is still not right. Thanks again for working on this.