Re: Boot code rewritten for GAS

Albert D. Cahalan (
Sun, 1 Aug 1999 11:34:22 -0400 (EDT)

Chris Noe writes:
> On Sat, 31 Jul 1999, Horst von Brand wrote:

>> Good luck! I'd also like as86 et al to go. But there might be older
>> binutils in use somewhere?
> As far as binutils go, I believe we should change the changelog to state
> the minimum at which fixes another 16bit codegen bug. Although
> lower versions will work, I personally wouldn't feel too comfy with them.
> (XXX: Tonight as I took another good look at the patch I realized that
> there is *still* one gas bug exposed by some code in video.S which I had
> mis-reported as fixed. Will set straight asap -- and probably end up
> wanting the next binutils release (with the bugfix) as the minimum :)

I'd say you guessed why this keeps getting ignored. (I have binutils right now.) You could submit the patch again in a few years.

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.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at