From: "John S. Fine" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: assembly newsgroup? Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 11:33:19 -0500 Lines: 33 Message-ID: <369CCACF.70B0@erols.com> References: <19990113005048 DOT 28680 DOT 00003768 AT ng22 DOT aol DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: 5Fl9+PGpwuW5EAmDQxd5XQlEGnXQ1tPdWuFkOC7BVpg= X-Complaints-To: abuse AT rcn DOT com NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Jan 1999 16:34:28 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; U) To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Mr Todd T wrote: > Can anyone point me to a newsgroup where I could ask questions about converting > inline Intel assembly to inline assembly with Djgpp? You are already in the right newsgroup. This question is also frequently asked in comp.lang.asm.x86, but gets more answers here. The usual answers are: Read section 17.2 of the DJGPP FAQ (about automated conversion). or Convert the code to a whole asm module (instead of inline) so you can use the NASM assembler (which is closer to the Intel syntax you have now). or Read the following URLs to learn about inline assembly with DJGPP: http://www.rt.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de/~georg/djgpp/djgpp_asm.html http://www.castle.net/~avly/djasm.html BUT Regardless of which method you choose, be aware that DJGPP is a 32-bit protected programming environment, in which offset addresses are not the same as physical addresses. If you are converting from 16-bit real mode, the conversion to protected mode may be more complicated than the syntax change. -- http://www.erols.com/johnfine/ http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Peaks/8600/