This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA]: File-I/O patch, Documentation
- From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
- To: ac131313 at redhat dot com
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com, vinschen at redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 21:16:34 +0200
- Subject: Re: [RFA]: File-I/O patch, Documentation
- References: <20021121100443.U24928@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E5D4C4C.1040502@redhat.com> <20030227083701.GE20955@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E5E9A1A.9000708@redhat.com> <20030228083308.GG24097@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E5F807D.9080506@redhat.com> <20030228154730.GK20955@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E617364.9060700@redhat.com> <20030303121249.GM1193@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E64F632.4070005@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
> Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 13:53:38 -0500
> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
>
> Changing the line:
>
> @subsection The @code{F} request packet
>
> (and a second very similar in a similar way) to:
>
> @subsection The `F' request packet
>
> fixed the problem. This has me totally puzzled since other @subsection
> lines use @..{} and work fine.
>
> Eli?
Sounds like a bug in pdftex (I don't use it much, so don't have any
clues, sorry): @-commands should work in section names.
Do texi2dvi and TeX grok the original Texinfo? If they do, this is
worth reporting as a bug to bug-texinfo mailing list (but make sure
you have the latest pdftex first).