Re: Boot code rewritten for GAS

H. Peter Anvin (
Tue, 03 Aug 1999 09:30:09 -0700

Christer Weinigel wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> 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.
> >
> >Indeed. NASM would be a better choice than either gas or as86.
> The big problem I have with NASM is the license, if it hasn't been
> updated lately there is still a problem with it being shipped with a
> distribution such as RedHat:
> Charging a fee for the Software is prohibited, although a fee
> may be charged for the act of transferring a copy, and you can
> offer warranty protection and charge a fee for that.

It was changed in 0.98.

> Other than that, for me the as86/ld86 combo works and the code is
> almost never changed, adding a dependency on a new tool (i.e. NASM or
> a newer binutils) seems like a lot of trouble for almost no gain.

Actually, the code is changed fairly regularly.


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