This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] inside_entry_func() related changes
- From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- Cc: kevinb at redhat dot com, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 20:41:22 +0200
- Subject: Re: [RFA] inside_entry_func() related changes
- References: <1031122000931.ZM22440@localhost.localdomain> <20040204164734.GB8281@nevyn.them.org>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 11:47:34 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
>
> Revisiting this patch too. I've added documentation and removed the
> now-unneeded change to inside_entry_func; does anyone disagree with
> this patch? Docs OK?
The markup is okay. I have two comments about the content:
. I'd like a "@cindex process entry point" index entry near this
text.
. After reading the text, I'm not sure what is the process entry
point and how it differs from the main function (talk about
class_obscure!). I'm guessing that other readers of the manual
could also become confused. So how about explaining the term
"process entry function" and perhaps an example that shows the
effect of this setting on a backtrace?
TIA