Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:08:00 +0200 | From | Herbert Poetzl <> | Subject | Re: nasm over gas? |
| |
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 02:25:01PM +0200, Fruhwirth Clemens wrote: > On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 01:25:24PM +0100, John Bradford wrote: > > The point is, if somebody does find a bug they will want to > > re-assemble with Gas after they've fixed it. > > If you referring to my precompiled masm binaries, yes, if one wants to > change the source, getting masm is not nice. > > But if the source is writting in nasm, nasm (LGPL) can be installed > easily.. > > However, the kernel folks seem to dislike to depend on an additional tool. > Actually that's the answer to my original question. Now I just have to > ponder if I favour the preferences of the kernel over the prefs of user space > programs. There are lots of user space crypto implementations, which are > potential candidates.. and for theses apps an additional dependency on nasm > is no problem.
what it the problem with gas anyway? why not convert the masterpiece to GNU Assembler? there even exists some script to aid in masm to gas conversion ...
http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/faq/converting/asm2s-sed.html
best, Herbert
> Regards, Clemens
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |