From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-54100-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 1978 invoked by alias); 15 Feb 2008 08:28:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 1968 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Feb 2008 08:28:41 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (213.8.233.22)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:28:22 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-83-130-247-140.inter.net.il [83.130.247.140]) 	by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) 	with ESMTP id JEG63046 (AUTH halo1); 	Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:25:33 +0200 (IST)
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:28:00 -0000
Message-Id: <u63wqk4j5.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: "Doug Evans" <dje@google.com>
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <e394668d0802141451q37be78aepd9556e3911beb9d3@mail.gmail.com> 	(dje@google.com)
Subject: Re: [RFA] new command to search memory
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <20080214021915.F3FE51C72F0@localhost> <uabm3jow0.fsf@gnu.org> <e394668d0802141451q37be78aepd9556e3911beb9d3@mail.gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-02/txt/msg00246.txt.bz2

> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:51:40 -0800
> From: "Doug Evans" <dje@google.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > > Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:19:15 -0800 (PST)
> >  > From: dje@google.com (Doug Evans)
> >
> > >
> >  > I didn't get a response to the non-doc portions of this patch.
> >  > [Eli, thanks for the doc review, I made the suggested changes,
> >  > though I went a different route in shortening the length of the
> >  > line specifying the find command syntax.  The end result is still
> >  > rather short.]
> >
> >  You mean, rather long...
> >
> >  The patch is okay with me, but could you (or someone else) please see
> >  whether these two long lines
> >
> >
> >  > +@item find @r{[}/@var{sn}@r{]} @var{start_addr}, @@@var{len}, @var{val1} @r{[}, @var{val2}, @dots{}@r{]}
> >  > +@itemx find @r{[}/@var{sn}@r{]} @var{start_addr}, @var{end_addr}, @var{val1} @r{[}, @var{val2}, @dots{}@r{]}
> >
> >  survive the typesetting for the printed manual (either by TeX or
> >  pdftex) without overflowing the page margin?  I'm afraid they will
> >  overflow, since the items of this table are typeset with @code, and
> >  @code specifies a chunk of monospaced font that cannot be broken
> >  between lines.
> 
> Is looking at gdb.pdf (created with cd doc && make gdb.pdf) sufficient?

Yes, thanks.