From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-23195-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 19969 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2005 13:49:29 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 19938 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Nov 2005 13:49:26 -0000
Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:49:26 +0000
Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54)
	id 1Ebei5-0005cc-4I; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 08:49:25 -0500
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:49:00 -0000
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Formatting of packet descriptions in GDB manual
Message-ID: <20051114134924.GB21373@nevyn.them.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
References: <8f2776cb0511111624h4d646cd9i1f86824c5edc613f@mail.gmail.com> <ubr0q2vl9.fsf@gnu.org> <8f2776cb0511120047y50b3a273pe17ddd5c53342be1@mail.gmail.com> <u4q6h32bk.fsf@gnu.org> <20051113171247.GA1945@nevyn.them.org> <ur79ki4h7.fsf@gnu.org> <20051114022955.GA10567@nevyn.them.org> <uoe4nj1ih.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <uoe4nj1ih.fsf@gnu.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i
X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00265.txt.bz2

On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 06:29:10AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 21:29:55 -0500
> > From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> > Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>
> > 
> > > This is a misunderstanding: by ``typeset separately'' I meant `z 3'
> > > (as opposed to `z3'), not `z'`3'.
> > 
> > Yes, I understand.  But then you still can't search for the text of the
> > packet.
> 
> Assuming you expect the text of the packet to contain "z3", yes.  If
> this assumption holds for many GDB users, then we shouldn't separate
> the characters.  That's exactly the kind of information I didn't feel
> to possess in order to make a good decision.

OK.  In that case, yes, that's what I'd assume; I'd even call it a z3
packet in conversation.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC