From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3564 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2007 20:51:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 3555 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Jun 2007 20:51:57 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from shell4.bayarea.net (HELO shell4.bayarea.net) (209.128.82.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 23 Jun 2007 20:51:54 +0000 Received: (qmail 20952 invoked from network); 23 Jun 2007 13:51:52 -0700 Received: from 209-128-106-254.bayarea.net (HELO ?192.168.20.7?) (209.128.106.254) by shell4.bayarea.net with SMTP; 23 Jun 2007 13:51:52 -0700 Message-ID: <467D87E6.2000908@eagercon.com> Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 20:51:00 -0000 From: Michael Eager User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070102) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: stanshebs@earthlink.net, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: What's an annex? stratum? References: <467D5FEF.7010900@eagercon.com> <467D6D1F.7090507@earthlink.net> <467D6FB8.4080909@eagercon.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-06/txt/msg00219.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 12:08:40 -0700 >> From: Michael Eager >> CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com >> >> I'm assuming that the XML target description in the docs is similarly >> incomplete and/or obsolete. > > On the contrary: it is relatively very new and its documentation is > supposed to be quite complete (at least as far as the manuals go; if > you are talking about the code, that's a different matter). So if you > find some portions of its documentation unclear or incomplete, please > point that out. The doc refers to a non-existent DTD file which is supposed to describe the XML target description annex. I assumed it was obsolete. It's not clear whether this is the same annex referenced in target.c. >> There seems to be a fair amount of cruft in the code, and >> even more in the documentation. Sigh. > > I'm sure we will welcome patches. I'd be happy to. It's not easy to create patches when it's unclear whether the doc is out of date or the source hasn't caught up yet. There are many areas where the docs are out sync with the source. -- Michael Eager eager@eagercon.com 1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-325-8077