* {wheat, barley, rye, oats, and spelt}

but is the kind (termed) a "sweet roll" *

* {lit; bread in pockets - a category which includes cakes, pies, and "mezonos bread" - and is not considered as bread.}

If one eats from it less than the measure of a normal meal (see Law 3), there is no need to wash hands (before eating) or bless "Who brings forth..." over it, rather "the creator of different kinds of food" and after (eating) "on the sustenance".
However, if one eat from it the measure of a normal meal it is considered as regular bread. One must wash hands (before eating) bless "Who brings forth..." over it, and afterwards say grace.

* {The Shulchon Oruch HoRav 168:10 and the Mishnah B'rurah 168:94 maintain that meat pies, cheese pies, or vegetable pies that are eaten as the basis of a meal are not considered to be "sweet rolls". }

Others say that it is dough that was kneaded with oil, or mixed with honey, or milk, or eggs, or other fruit juices. even if it also had water mixed in, as long as (the water) is less (than the other juices). We accept the leniencies* of both these opinions** and keep both these types as "sweet rolls".

* {In his Piskei Siddur, Rav Shneur Zalman of Liadi states that a G-d-fearing person should eat "sweet rolls" only in the midst of a meal in which he has eaten bread.}

** {The Shulchon Oruch HoRav 168:12 and the Mishnah B'rurah 168:35 also quote a third opinion, which defines this type of food as crackers.}

* { The concept of eating to the point of satisfaction is significant regarding this law and many of the others mentioned in this chapter. When a person eats to the point of satisfaction, the obligation to say grace takes on the severity of a Torah command. Thus, the ruling "one must adopt stringencies in cases regarding doubt concerning a Torah command" applies. In contrast, if one has not eaten to the point of satisfaction, the obligation to say grace is only Rabbinic in origin. Hence, leniency may be exercised in cases of doubt.}

If one eats a "sweet roll", with other foods, (one asks) would also others who ate this as a meal be satisfied ? If he ate without other foods a small amount and was satisfied, and others if they ate this would not be satisfied unless they ate it together with other foods and (then were) satisfied. the laws of bread (on what he ate) still apply.*

* { There are many opinions among the Sages concerning the exact amount implies by the "the measure of a normal meal." The Piskei Siddur of Rav Shneur Zalman of Liadi and the Mishnah B'ruroh 168:24 maintain that one should not eat more than a quantity equal to four k'beitzim of "sweet rolls", except in the midst of a meal in which he has eaten bread.}

* {The Mishnoh B'rurah 168:56 explains that more stringent rules apply to bread which is fried. If it still has the appearance of bread, "who brings forth bread" and grace must be said even though the pieces are less than a k'zayis in size. Rav Shneur Zalman of Liadi (Piskei Siddur) renders a similar decision. Furthermore, he urges a person who is precise in his observance not to eat even small pieces of bread that have been cooked and still have the appearance of bread except while eating a meal in which he has eaten bread.}

If one did not cook but rather, poured over them a boiling sauce, there is a doubt about the blessing. It is questionable if pouring hot water is like cooking in this regard, or not. One should not eat such (bread) only during the meal (after normal bread).
If they were not cooked but only soaked in liquids or in soup or the like, (then):
If they are less than a k'zayis, (the law) depends if they still look like (bread) or not. If they still look like bread, the rules apply to them of normal bread. If they do not look like bread, the rules of bread do not apply. Even if one ate to the point of satisfaction, one only says "the creator of different kinds of food" and afterwards "on the sustenance".
If the appearance of the liquid changed because of the pieces (of bread in it), it is certain that they have lost the appearance of bread. Similarly, if soaked in red wine it no longer has the appearance of bread.

* { The Shulchon Oruch, Orach Chayim 168:13 states that if the texture of the dough is thick, a G-d fearing person should partake of such foods only within a meal where bread was eaten. See also Shulchon Oruch HoRav 168:15 and Mishnoh B'rurah 168:76,77.}

Also grits (in yiddish - groyfun) which are made from the five species of grain and were cooked, one also says over them "the creator of different kinds of food" and afterwards "on the sustenance". even if one ate to the point of satisfaction. If one ate these with soup also (other) foods made from dough that one eats in soup or in milk, that have been cooked in (the soup), one need not bless over the soup or milk, for it is secondary and insignificant because of them.
However, if one cooked only a small amount of noodles or grits and one's main intention was for the sauce or milk, the latter is not considered insignificant, and one (only) says on them "that everything...". Even though one eats also the noodles or grain, the sauce or milk is not included because they are the main item.
Nevertheless, the best to do is to first say "that everything..." over the sauce or the milk alone drink some of it, and then say over the noodles or the grain.* "the creator of different kinds of food" because they are also not included even though one's attention was not (to eat) them, since it comes from grain, it is important and is not covered (by the blessing) so as to lose its own blessing as long as it adds taste to the pot (of food). (See also Ch. 54:6.)

* {Others suggest saying "that everything..." first on another food, with the intention of also including the soup or milk. }

* {The Misgeres Hashulchon (15) writes that if the two types of food are stuck together, one need say blessings over only the grain. It appears from the Mishnoh B'rurah 212:1 that even if the two types of food are cooked as separate entities, it is only necessary to say "the creator of different kinds of food" and "on the sustenance".}

However if they are crushed and mixed together - e.g., food that is made from mixing flour, eggs, and cheese and then frying or cooking this (mixture) - even though the flour is the minority, nevertheless, since it comes from the five species of grain, it is considered important. One blesses on it "the creator of different kinds of food" and afterwards "on the sustenance".
The above applies only when the flour is added in order to add taste. However, if only a little flour is taken to make the food stick together, as is common when one makes some foods, the flour is considered insignificant, similarly, when pastry is made from almonds, sugar and eggs, and a little flour is added to make the mixture stick together the flour is included in the blessing said only over the main (food).
Similarly, sauce that is cooked then thickened with some flour that has been roasted and fried in butter, one says over the sauce only "that everything...". However, if one selects the fried pieces of flour and eats them alone, one needs to say on them "the creator of different kinds of food". If one ate a k'zayis of them, one should say after them "on the sustenance".