RFA: fix node name

RFA: fix node name

[Jim Blandy]

2003-10-24  Jim Blandy  <jimb@redhat.com>

	* gdb.texinfo (The F request packet, The F reply packet): Renamed
	from "The `F' request packet" and "The `F' reply packet", to make
	texi2dvi happy.

Index: gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/cvsfiles/devo/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo,v
retrieving revision 2.317
diff -c -c -F'^(' -r2.317 gdb.texinfo
*** gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo	23 Oct 2003 17:42:06 -0000	2.317
--- gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo	24 Oct 2003 22:56:53 -0000
***************
*** 20497,20503 ****
  After having done the needed type and value coercion, the target continues
  the latest continue or step action.
  
! @node The `F' request packet
  @subsection The @code{F} request packet
  @cindex file-i/o request packet
  @cindex @code{F} request packet
--- 20497,20503 ----
  After having done the needed type and value coercion, the target continues
  the latest continue or step action.
  
! @node The F request packet
  @subsection The @code{F} request packet
  @cindex file-i/o request packet
  @cindex @code{F} request packet
***************
*** 20524,20530 ****
  from its predecessor by a comma.  All values are transmitted in ASCII
  string representation, pointer/length pairs separated by a slash.
  
! @node The `F' reply packet
  @subsection The @code{F} reply packet
  @cindex file-i/o reply packet
  @cindex @code{F} reply packet
--- 20524,20530 ----
  from its predecessor by a comma.  All values are transmitted in ASCII
  string representation, pointer/length pairs separated by a slash.
  
! @node The F reply packet
  @subsection The @code{F} reply packet
  @cindex file-i/o reply packet
  @cindex @code{F} reply packet

Re: RFA: fix node name (revised patch)

[Jim Blandy]

Here's a revision of the patch that fixes the menu in the parent node,
too.  (Oops.)

I was trying to figure out why this hasn't bothered anyone yet --- the
node name with the single quotes has been in there for months --- and
I realized that it is because I'm using an older version of
texinfo.tex (circa 1999).  So, Eli, if your response to this patch is
"You should update your texinfo.tex", then that's perfectly fine with
me.

2003-10-24  Jim Blandy  <jimb@redhat.com>

	* gdb.texinfo (The F request packet, The F reply packet): Renamed
	from "The `F' request packet" and "The `F' reply packet", to make
	texi2dvi happy.
	(File-I/O remote protocol extension): Update menu entries, too.

Index: gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo,v
retrieving revision 1.183
diff -c -r1.183 gdb.texinfo
*** gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo	23 Oct 2003 00:11:59 -0000	1.183
--- gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo	25 Oct 2003 03:56:08 -0000
***************
*** 20370,20377 ****
  @menu
  * File-I/O Overview::
  * Protocol basics::
! * The `F' request packet::
! * The `F' reply packet::
  * Memory transfer::
  * The Ctrl-C message::
  * Console I/O::
--- 20370,20377 ----
  @menu
  * File-I/O Overview::
  * Protocol basics::
! * The F request packet::
! * The F reply packet::
  * Memory transfer::
  * The Ctrl-C message::
  * Console I/O::
***************
*** 20498,20504 ****
  After having done the needed type and value coercion, the target continues
  the latest continue or step action.
  
! @node The `F' request packet
  @subsection The @code{F} request packet
  @cindex file-i/o request packet
  @cindex @code{F} request packet
--- 20498,20504 ----
  After having done the needed type and value coercion, the target continues
  the latest continue or step action.
  
! @node The F request packet
  @subsection The @code{F} request packet
  @cindex file-i/o request packet
  @cindex @code{F} request packet
***************
*** 20525,20531 ****
  from its predecessor by a comma.  All values are transmitted in ASCII
  string representation, pointer/length pairs separated by a slash.
  
! @node The `F' reply packet
  @subsection The @code{F} reply packet
  @cindex file-i/o reply packet
  @cindex @code{F} reply packet
--- 20525,20531 ----
  from its predecessor by a comma.  All values are transmitted in ASCII
  string representation, pointer/length pairs separated by a slash.
  
! @node The F reply packet
  @subsection The @code{F} reply packet
  @cindex file-i/o reply packet
  @cindex @code{F} reply packet

Re: RFA: fix node name (revised patch)

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
> Date: 24 Oct 2003 22:59:39 -0500
> 
> Here's a revision of the patch that fixes the menu in the parent node,
> too.  (Oops.)

Thanks.  This is approved.

> I was trying to figure out why this hasn't bothered anyone yet --- the
> node name with the single quotes has been in there for months --- and
> I realized that it is because I'm using an older version of
> texinfo.tex (circa 1999).  So, Eli, if your response to this patch is
> "You should update your texinfo.tex", then that's perfectly fine with
> me.

No, my response is that your patch is correct, for the resons I
explained in my other mail in this thread.

Re: RFA: fix node name (revised patch)

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
> Date: 24 Oct 2003 22:59:39 -0500
> 
> I was trying to figure out why this hasn't bothered anyone yet --- the
> node name with the single quotes has been in there for months --- and
> I realized that it is because I'm using an older version of
> texinfo.tex (circa 1999).

The real question that we should ask ourselves wrt this is: how come
your older texinfo.tex was being used instead of the one that comes
with GDB (which, I hope, is new enough).

Can you look into this, please?

Re: RFA: fix node name (revised patch)

[Jim Blandy]

"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@elta.co.il> writes:

> > From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
> > Date: 24 Oct 2003 22:59:39 -0500
> > 
> > I was trying to figure out why this hasn't bothered anyone yet --- the
> > node name with the single quotes has been in there for months --- and
> > I realized that it is because I'm using an older version of
> > texinfo.tex (circa 1999).
> 
> The real question that we should ask ourselves wrt this is: how come
> your older texinfo.tex was being used instead of the one that comes
> with GDB (which, I hope, is new enough).
> 
> Can you look into this, please?

The reason I'm getting an old texinfo.tex is that I'm building in a
source tree produced by checking out a module from Red Hat's internal
CVS repository that excludes texinfo --- the module contains only
cross-compilation tools, assuming that the user has an appropriate
native toolchain installed on his system already.  Specifically, it
does not contain its own texinfo directory.  So the build gets the
texinfo.tex installed as part of Red Hat 8.0, which says:

\def\texinfoversion{1999-09-25.10}

So there is no underlying problem in GDB's documentation build
process; it is an anomaly introduced by our internal processes.

Re: RFA: fix node name (revised patch)

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
> Date: 28 Oct 2003 16:59:57 -0500
> 
> So there is no underlying problem in GDB's documentation build
> process; it is an anomaly introduced by our internal processes.

Thanks for looking into this.

Re: RFA: fix node name

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
> Date: 24 Oct 2003 21:41:14 -0500
> 
> 2003-10-24  Jim Blandy  <jimb@redhat.com>
> 
> 	* gdb.texinfo (The F request packet, The F reply packet): Renamed
> 	from "The `F' request packet" and "The `F' reply packet", to make
> 	texi2dvi happy.

Approved.

In general, it's a bad idea to use _any_ markup in node names.