tracepoint.c memory range requests

[Jim Blandy]

On 11/18/05, Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com> wrote:
> Actually, there may be such a stub -- there's been at least
> one guy posting questions about target tracepoint implementation
> this year.
>
> Is the purpose just to make the packet smaller?

Yeah.

> The intent was for that number to be the value negative one,
> so changing it to "M-1,<start>,<len>" wouldn't be entirely
> unreasonable.  The comments in gdb refer to it as "-1",
> (when they don't mistakenly refer to it as "0").

Okay.  I'll make the code behave that way, and document it that way.