Re: Boot code rewritten for GAS

Horst von Brand (vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl)
Sun, 01 Aug 1999 22:19:25 -0400

hpa@transmeta.com (H. Peter Anvin) said:
> Followup to: <199908011534.LAA07582@jupiter.cs.uml.edu>
> By author: "Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel

[...]

> > Another reason: People who can write 16-bit x86 assembly are likely to
> > be ex-DOS hackers with MASM and TASM experience. To them, gas syntax
> > may be hard to use.

> Indeed. NASM would be a better choice than either gas or as86.

AT&T syntax is used in the rest of the kernel, and using plain gas means
one tool less needed to build a kernel. Why would NASM be better then?

-- 
Horst von Brand                             vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl
Casilla 9G, Viņa del Mar, Chile                               +56 32 672616


-
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/