Re: [parisc-linux] Assembly Language Changes

[Philipp Rumpf <prumpf@inwestnet.de>]

> > 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