Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 01 Aug 1999 22:11:07 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: Boot code rewritten for GAS |
| |
Chris Noe wrote: > Well today I went digging around, picked up the latest binutils from > cygnus CVS and discovered that it has fixed every bug uncovered by my > patch. The 16-bit i386 back-end from 2.9.1 was notoriously bad and from > the (quick) looks of it 2.9.5 is a hell of a lot more sane.
IMHO gas 16-bit use will be inconvenient for a while... my RH 6.0 box uses gas 2.9.1, so older systems will be even worse.
> Then again, I'm not against using say NASM for the boot code. I actually > somewhat prefer it's simplicity of syntax, full documentation and the fact > that it's pretty actively maintained right now. But I'd hate to bring in > another outside prerequisite to compiling the kernel.
nasm is nice, for all the reasons you mention above. The only overriding concern is that as86 works, and assemblers for 16-bit x86 targets don't need to be updated very often :)
Jeff
-- One of the most overlooked advantages to computers is... If they do foul up, there's no law against whacking them around a little. -- Joe Martin
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |