Re: bootsect.S changes

Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@pobox.com)
Mon, 18 Oct 1999 08:23:57 -0400


"Richard B. Johnson" wrote:
> [SNIPPED]
> > > opcodes, were fine' -- that was the sole plan at the moment: to have a 2.4
> > > kernel that doesn't need as86/ld86 to build.

> I can't imagine why. That's like deciding to rewrite the kernel so it
> doesn't require GCC to build. AS86 was just a TOOL! We try to use the
> appropriate tool for various purposes when the need arises. The
> appropriate tool to assemble Intel mnemonics is one that understands
> Intel. GAS does not. GAS doesn't even know the way Intel assembly
> should be written, i.e., destination operand first.

IMHO, nasm would have been a much better choice

Jeff

-- 
Custom driver development	|    Never worry about theory as long
Open source programming		|    as the machinery does what it's
				|    supposed to do.  -- R. A. Heinlein

- 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/