Message-Id: <m0wIAOP-000Fm3C@hn.planet.gen.nz>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 97 21:55 NZST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: pierre AT tycho DOT com
From: Lorier <lorier AT ihug DOT co DOT nz>
Subject: Re: Usage of directory entries
Cc: opendos-developer AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

>>> Again, that's not the size what matters. And I cannot use DJGPP for the
>>> same reason as stated above.
>> Hmm... We definately need a standard set of compilers :)
>
>And from what I've heard, the OpenDOS sources needs a gazillion compilers
>to build... Yes, definitely, we'd need some standard free compilers! I
>don't know of good 16-bit C compilers for free (in the GPL sense), but for
>assembler we could use NASM like Mark is already doing. One of the first
>thing that should be done when the OpenDOS sources are done would be to
>convert all the assembler sources we can find to NASM. Whew! Most of the
>DOS internals are in asm, so I guess there is a lot of code to translate!

What are they currently?  And how different is NASM? the difference of AT&T
-> Intel? or is it just formatting? :)