From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18248 invoked by alias); 20 Nov 2005 19:27:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 18238 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Nov 2005 19:27:59 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from romy.inter.net.il (HELO romy.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.66) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 20 Nov 2005 19:27:58 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-33-37.inter.net.il [80.230.33.37]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id DAB35223 (AUTH halo1); Sun, 20 Nov 2005 21:27:13 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 04:47:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Jim Blandy CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <8f2776cb0511192143h21c1d647yc766a09e1bcc3184@mail.gmail.com> (message from Jim Blandy on Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:43:58 -0800) Subject: Re: RFA: GDB manual: document tracepoint packets Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <8f2776cb0511191231y11805c1bqb4b4eb426b0e31fa@mail.gmail.com> <8f2776cb0511192143h21c1d647yc766a09e1bcc3184@mail.gmail.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: 2005-11/txt/msg00381.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:43:58 -0800 > From: Jim Blandy > Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > > > + @item OK > > > + The packet was understood and carried out. > > > + @item > > > > Does this @item really need to be empty? If so, why, and what do we > > want to appear here in print? > > It does. This appears as a pair of matched single quotes enclosing > nothing in both the Info and printable manuals. The remote stub > returns an empty packet to indicate that it didn't understand the > command. Blank @items are used elsewhere in the manual for this > purpose. Should we perhaps say "(empty)" to prevent readers from thinking it's a typo?