On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 21:33:41 +0300
Mitt Green <mitt_green_AT_riseup.net> wrote:
> Mattias Andrée wrote:
>
> > The SYSLINUX bootmanager (stage 1) is written in
> > NASM (assembly with sane syntax)
>
> No wondering, Peter Anvin works at Intel :)
I think NASM and SYSLINUX predates that.
> I am actually exloring assembly, but using AT&T syntax,
> which I personally prefer.
As you might have guessed, I was implicitly stating
that AT&T syntax is insanity.
>
> UPD: if I understand something, this is not
> Intel/NASM syntax. Browse the source:
> http://repo.or.cz/syslinux.git/tree
> Sigils are present before constants and registers.
> Check this one, for example:
> http://repo.or.cz/syslinux.git/blob/HEAD:/mbr/mbr.S
No it does not look like NASM, perhaps it was and
older version that used it, perhaps only other
parts of SYSLINUX, NASM is still used in SYSLINUX.
It was a very long time since I looked that it.
In any case both SYSLINUX and LILO only supports
x86. I don't know if that is only the bootmanager
or the bootloader too, we need good ones that
support more architectures. Too bad I only have
x86 (well, lucky too I guess). Basically, all
bootmanager are good, you do not have enough
from to make them bloated, and their mission
is limited, so for a good bootmanager you could
just pick any. So one should try to write a
portable bootloader that is suckless.
>
> > Bug reports should be posted here. So yes, you should
> > post compiling errors here.
>
> Alright. Thanks.
>
> Cheers,
> Mitt
>
Received on Thu Apr 07 2016 - 20:53:54 CEST