This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix deftypefn in fopen_unlocked.c
> Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 19:52:01 +0000 (UTC)
> From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
> cc: aj@suse.de, ian@airs.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,
> gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>
> > I verified the former before I submitted the patches. As for the
> > latter, unless someone is going to preview the DVI output and make
> > sure it looks okay in print, "make info" can be regarded as a
> > good-enough test for "make dvi" as well.
>
> On the contrary, many times patches have broken "make dvi" but passed
> "make info".
I didn't say it was a perfect test, just a good-enough one.
> See the last such breakage in libiberty
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg02853.html> for an example.
I didn't change any places that could cause similar problems in this
specific manual.
> "make info" and "make dvi" detect different subsets of invalid Texinfo;
In general, yes; but in the case of libiberty, not really.
P.S. If you have such stringent standards for accepting docs patches,
how come what I found needed so many fixes? I found those problems by
simply looking at the index; any reasonable QA should have discovered
that long ago.