On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 09:43:45PM +0200, C. Masloch wrote: > >> (While we still get DJGPP builds, there haven't been any 8086 builds > >> since 2005's 0.98.39.) > > > > Actually, why? Are all of these programs that large - or there are some > > significant advantages in providing them as DJGPP builds? "Ordinary" x86 > > build could work just fine, IMHO > > I believe that there are some tables in more recent NASM that exceed 64 > KiB in size, so they can't be addressed without segmentation arithmetic > any longer. And the compiler that was used (OpenWatcom IIRC) presumably > didn't provide that.
This is actually rather strange; not sure about that Watcom - but I'm learning x86 assembly and I did some attempts using NASM as well, and it's definitely able to produce, say, COM files of size 84 bytes, for example. It introduces itself as "NASM 2.13.02 compiled on Nov 29 2017" - therefore 12 years after 2005. > DJGPP builds are much easier to maintain because DJGPP is a mostly > compatible gcc/GNU environment. Not sure why that compatibility is relevant? -- regards, Zbigniew _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
