Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 18:58:59 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199711282358.SAA24527@delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: cmatraki AT eleceng DOT ucl DOT ac DOT uk
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <199711282236.WAA26746@lupus.eleceng.ucl.ac.uk>
	(cmatraki AT eleceng DOT ucl DOT ac DOT uk)
Subject: Re: FYI: targetting the 8086
Precedence: bulk


> I have one question: Why not use gas and ld instead of nasm and djlink?
> gas understands 16 bit code with the .code16 directive, while ld can generate
> .exe files.  

gas the way it is produces 16-bit code that only runs on the 386.  It
does not know how to limit itself to 8086 opcodes, and it says so in
its own documentation.  It also sucks as far as programming to it is
concerned - it is designed for gcc's output, not humans.  NASM is far
better.

Both gas and ld use BFD for their object file stuff.  BFD's internal
design is sufficiently different from OBJ format to warrant not using
it.  I *did* think of this when I started, and looked into it, but
porting BFD would have been harder than just writing a linker, and I
*had* OMF specs...