Re: [repost] Re: RFC: support debug info in separate files

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

On 23 Dec 2002, Jim Blandy wrote:

> - The documentation has been completely rewritten, and provides much
>   more detail.  It includes all the information needed to implement

Thanks.  The doco patch is approved (assuming that the code is 
accepted).  I have a few minor change requests:

> + @cindex .debug subdirectories

Please use the normal markup in @cindex entries, in this case .debug 
should be in @file...

> + @cindex .gnu_debuglink sections

...and here .gnu_debuglink should be in @code.

> + Drepper's @file{elfutils} package, starting with version 0.53,
> + contains a version of the @code{strip} command such that the command
> + @samp{strip foo -f foo.debug} removes the debugging information from

I think it's better to put commands users type in @kbd instead of @samp.  
But I don't object to @samp if you like it better.

> + @kindex gnu_debuglink_crc32
> + @example
> + unsigned long
> + gnu_debuglink_crc32 (unsigned long crc, unsigned char *buf, size_t len)

IIRC, we decided to use @smallexample throughout.  Also, the last line 
above is too long even for @smallexample (will produce overfull hbox 
warnings from TeX), so please break it into 2 lines.

Thanks again for such a clear and concise description.