From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailserv2.iuinc.com (IDENT:qmailr@mailserv2.iuinc.com [206.245.164.55]) by puffin.external.hp.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA05170 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2000 08:57:57 -0700 Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 15:58:18 +0100 From: Philipp Rumpf To: Sam Creasey Cc: parisc-linux@thepuffingroup.com Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Assembly Language Changes Message-ID: <20000314155818.Q5281@abacus.local> References: <20000312152353.E5281@abacus.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: ; from sammy@sammy.net on Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 09:54:43AM -0500 List-ID: > > over the last few days or so, I have been trying to get glibc to build and > > work for a Linux/PA-RISC target. I came to believe it would be simpler to > > change certain aspects of the assembly language used than to keep working > > around them: > > At least in the ELF toolchain (which, I think we did change the kernel > over to, didn't we?) I've already begun freely banging the assembler > syntax into a more gas-like format... nod. I've got binutils, gcc, glibc, linux moved to the new assembly language here, just waiting for everyone to have a chance to comment before committing. > > The disadvantage, obviously, is that we would need to keep separate > > binaries around to compile HP/UX assembly source; also, the assembly > > files used by the kernel would need to be converted (and probably get > > readable to more people in the process). > > Hmph... I'm not sure how many people working on the port hold a deep > value in the ability to recompile HP/UX apps (or, in this case, > reassemble). Just run the damn HP assembler if you feel a deep need to > run HP programs under the linux kernel (imho). it's a 10-line perl script to convert, so I tend to agree with dropping the HP syntax completely. Philipp