[rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?
Andrew Cagney
ac131313@redhat.com
Fri Sep 27 10:55:00 GMT 2002
>> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:40:37 -0400
>> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
>>
>
>> >> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 18:33:51 -0400
>> >> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
>> >>
>> >> I got annoyed at all the GDB's in the formatted manual being really
>> >> large so tried changing them to @sc{gdb}. It fixed that problem but I'm
>> >> not sure that I like the final result :-) (You'll need to build
>> >> gdb.pdf, gdb ps or gdb.dvi).
>> >>
>> >> Is there a style guide thing on this one? Eli?
>
>> >
>> >
>> > There are no strict rules on this one, AFAIK. If the results of
>> > @sc{gdb} look nice to people, let's do it; if not, let's not.
>> >
>> > Personally, I like the results of @sc in such cases.
>
>>
>> So, decision time. Trunk and 5.3 branch?
>
>
> Fine with me. As long as the manual can be produced in all the
> supported formats without error messages, this change cannot possibly
> screw up the upcoming release 5.3.
Good point. I've committed it to just the trunk.
Andrew
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list