From: Peter Åstrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the requirement for binutils
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 23:31:32 +0200 (CEST)
> It's just that I think it's better if we don't have to force people to
> install & learn yet another application/tool.
I agree, but the user must upgrade/install binutils at the moment,
anyway. And, the end-user doesn't need to learn how to use his
assembler.
What I thought of is to distribute GRUB with binutils and to use the
local binutils to compile GRUB, but binutils is too big to distribute
with GRUB together, while the size of nasm is reasonable for the
purpose.
Another possibility: if we can ``translate'' assembly to machine
code automatically like this, that's enough:
$ cat foo.source
jmp after_BPB
$ translate foo.source -o foo.S
$ cat foo.S
.byte 0xeb; RELB(after_BPB)
I don't know if there is any tool that can do this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OKUJI Yoshinori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ^o-o^
http://duff.kuicr.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~okuji (in English) m /
