Re: [PATCH] implements MI "-file-list-exec-sections" (updated)

[Andrew Cagney <cagney at gnu dot org>]

> > > > > -@code{"&" @var{c-string}}
> > > > > +@code{"&" @var{c-string} @var{nl}}
> > > > >
> > > > >  @item @var{nl} @expansion{}
> > > > >  @code{CR | CR-LF}
> >
> > > This part all looks correct, can you just post it separatly with a
> > > ChangeLog.
>
> OK

...

> > > > > -static void core_files_info (struct target_ops *);
> > > > > +static void core_files_info (struct target_ops *, struct ui_out *);
> >
> > > Again, just this part (through out) is all ok, can you please post it.
>
> I'm not sure what exactly you mean here.
> Do you mean that the change to the *_info(...) _interface_ is all ok?

Yes.  By separating it out we make it mechanical and hence can slip it in.

> Or the interface plus implementation (main work being in exec_info(), the
> others (core, go32, hpux, child, monitor, etc..) considered as follow-ups)?
> Or the changes to mi/cmd-file.cc and mi/mi-cmds.cc?
> Or all 3? (which I hope)

> > > > >},
> > > > > +{start-address="0x0804970c",end-address="0x08049710",section-name=".bss"
> > > > >}]}] +(@value{GDBP})
> > > > > +@end smallexample
> >
> > > I like it.  But lets get the other changes in first.
>
> Are you really only talking about the doc-changes here? If that's true and
> (thus) you are agreeing to my main (ie. gdb/mi source code) changes, why
> would we want to wait here?

I've just looked at the doc.  Next is to look at the updated and 
separate implementation.

Andrew