From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30544 invoked by alias); 29 May 2005 17:48:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 30534 invoked by uid 22791); 29 May 2005 17:48:21 -0000 Received: from legolas.inter.net.il (HELO legolas.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.24) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Sun, 29 May 2005 17:48:21 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-85-216.inter.net.il [80.230.85.216]) by legolas.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id EMF34715 (AUTH halo1); Sun, 29 May 2005 20:48:13 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 18:10:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20050529142633.GE23858@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Sun, 29 May 2005 10:26:33 -0400) Subject: Re: mi tty commands Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20050224203535.GA19967@white> <01c51b79$Blat.v2.4$4089e9a0@zahav.net.il> <20050225211911.GA21363@white> <20050225212201.GA3592@nevyn.them.org> <20050228162003.GA27783@white> <20050302025219.GA29948@white> <20050311022644.GA15563@white> <20050522210040.GB9231@white> <20050528230855.GE22435@nevyn.them.org> <20050529142633.GE23858@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00622.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 10:26:33 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 09:55:23AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > +Show terminal for future runs of program being debugged. > > > > I think the ``future'' part should be removed from this sentence: what > > this command outputs is the terminal used _now_ as well as in the > > future. > > That's not strictly true. It is the terminal that will be used the > next time we start the program; we don't know at this point whether > it's currently in use or whether the user has changed it since we last > started the program. That's true, but while for "set" we _know_ the value will be used only in the future, we don't know that for sure in the case of "show". If someone can come up with a better wording, I'll be glad to hear. But to say "show terminal for future runs" would be misleading, I think. > > * nto-procfs.c (procfs_create_inferior) > > * win32-nat.c (child_create_inferior): Use get_inferior_io_terminal. > > > > Note how I used the explicit name of the function used, instead of > > just "accessor function". > > Did you mean: > * nto-procfs.c (procfs_create_inferior): Use > get_inferior_io_terminal. > * win32-nat.c (child_create_inferior): Likewise. > > ? No, I meant what I wrote. > I thought it was incorrect to have no colon and log message > corresponding to a bullet. AFAIK, it _is_ correct.