From:	Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT acp3bf DOT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: From INTEL to AT&T asm dos coverter
Date:	22 Mar 2000 14:04:57 GMT
Organization:	Aachen University of Technology (RWTH)
Lines:	18
Message-ID:	<8baju9$nk8$1@nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
References:	<38D751F7 DOT 2921BCF4 AT bologna DOT enea DOT it> <001101bf93d1$be373400$23652fc2 AT univ DOT vxu DOT se>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de
X-Trace:	nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE 953733897 24200 137.226.32.75 (22 Mar 2000 14:04:57 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT rwth-aachen DOT de
NNTP-Posting-Date:	22 Mar 2000 14:04:57 GMT
User-Agent:	tin/1.4-19991113 ("No Labels") (UNIX) (Linux/2.0.0 (i586))
Originator:	broeker@
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Niklas Pettersson <npedt97 AT student DOT vxu DOT se> wrote:
> There is another way also.. It was however several years since I converted
> my source so I don't remember exactly how I did but I'm sure you can figure
> it out.
> First of all I compiled the intel-asm with some assembler. Then I
> reversed-enginered the object code with some other tool into at&t syntax. If
> a remember correctly I used the Watcom assembler. It was several hundred
> lines of code and it worked perfectly.

Well, you *could*, of course, use 'objdump -d' to disassemble the
compiled Intel-Assembly file, and then use that, and the original
assembly source, to find out what the proper AT&T source would be.

But I think the OP was looking for a more automatic solution.  NASM
would be the best bet, then, at least for standalone sources.
-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

- Raw text -