Re: remote protocol support for TARGET_OBJECT_AUXV

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at elta dot co dot il>]

> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:21:29 -0800
> From: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
> 
> > I suggest using @var{nn} (lower-case) instead of @var{NN}, since that
> > should look better in the printed manual.  Also, please explain in
> > the text what does @var{nn} stand for; I assume it's a number that
> > tells what kind of error happened, but I think the manual shouldn't
> > leave that to reader's guesses.
> 
> I copied this part of the documentation, and protocol behavior, from the
> other existing protocol requests.  As far as I can tell, they are all
> underspecified.  What gdbserver seems to do is actually write "ENN" (two
> literal 'N's).  So go figure.  I'd be happy to change my additions to
> reference a standard explanation of what error packets really look like.

If gdbserver prints a literal "ENN", then @var is wrong.

Does anybody know what's the story here, why ENN is printed and what
it should be?  Is this perhaps a bug?

> I think the manual may already be inconsistent with itself in the
> formatting style for packet text.

True.  We are trying to fix the inconsistencies as we find them, but
there's still a lot of work.