| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4
Comments:
<0> I was asking which OS is better than Win.
<1> Ah...
<0> imo, DOS is, but idk what you meant
<1> I'd say Linux, from a stability and end-user value standpoint.
<1> What is it that you like about DOS?
<0> Did I mention hardware access
<1> Yep.
<0> oh, and the command-line
<0> the latter not necessarily ***embly-related
<1> OH...okay. I got you now.
<1> Well, hardware access is definitely easier on DOS from what I've gathered.
<0> It seems nigh impossible on Windows, although some people in here have said otherwise
<1> Yeah.... There's a VxD API for Win drivers.
<1> I'm not even touching that yet.
<1> Windows has this notion of "rings", and most everything runs in ring 3, but drivers run in ring 0 if I remember correctly.
<0> Yeah, I've heard about those rings
<0> they seem annoying, at best
<1> And then there are services that behave like drivers, but run in ring 3.
<1> I'll stick with getting a window on the screen first though. lol
<0> lol
<0> yeah
<0> Well, I'm sorry I can't help.
<1> Oh, that's cool.
<1> I'm just exstatic that I found a channel with actual people on it.
<1> The NASM channel has about 2 people that aren't really there, and I can't get onto EFNet to save my life for the win32asm channel.
<0> Do you know why not?
<1> My ISP, Knology, is probably behind an open proxy that's been blacklisted.
<1> I love it when one chucklehead can screw it up for everyone.
<0> Did you try another port?
<0> um, hey, I need to go for a few minutes
<0> bbl
<1> K. C'ya.
<0> back
<1> Hello, Goplat.
<1> And, WB, Dacicus.
<2> hey abysmal, you get on EFNet? i had that proxy problem too, i'm on dialup so i disconnected then reconnected to get a new ip
<1> No, I sure can't. I'm "stuck" with broadband... Never thought I'd say that, lol.
<2> when you get the message, it gives you the sites that blacklisted you, you can apply to be re-scanned and removed
<1> I followed those links, but none of them offered an option to be removed...
<2> oh, ok. i tried a few EFNet servers, just remember seeing that, but they said it can take some time to work, so i just re-connected
<3> are there any big differences between the intel 2005 and the intel 2006 ia32 refs?
<4> Hey, i'm interested in learning asm. I'm currently running a 64-bit linux system...can I still use these x86 tutorials?
<3> joekm, yes.
<4> would you suggest LInux/Win32 tutorial w/nams or the perfect linux asm book?
<1> http://www.x86-64.org/documentation/***embly
<1> It's not as bad as you may think.
<4> i bet not, but the site says that its designed for people familiar with x86 syntax already
<1> Well, if you're running Linux, you already have an advantage....
<1> All you can basically do is call C functions from ***embly anyway.
<1> The interrupts are guaranteed to change each kernel revision.
<3> er, what?
<1> In Linux, calling a system interrupt (a sort of routine) is bad practice.
<1> Because they're called by number, not by name.
<1> So interrupt 20h might print a character to screen one day, and kill your program the next.
<1> It isn't portable from one kernel version to another.
<3> so, er , how does glibc or what not do it?
<1> Well, are you familiar with C and it's calling convention?
<3> yeah
<5> TheAbysmal: it's int 80h
<5> with eax set to the syscall number.
<1> Okay, so, to call glibc, push the parameters on the stack in right to left order, and then call the glibc function.
<5> then, right after the call, restore the stack.
<1> pireau: I'm sure your right. I fiddled with Linux ***embly for a day, until I reallized how unportable it is.
<1> Yep.
<5> they're all in /usr/include/asm/unistd.h
<1> You just have to declare the function as external and import the library.
<5> the standards one wont change.
<5> how do you beleive that libc gets it's numbers.
<5> I can't image one day building a kernel then when booting the shell wouldn't start because the numbers had changed...
<4> so what if I'm learning asm and I happen to be running a linux system....?
<3> pireau, ok, that makes sense. I was going er.. won't that lead to running programs suddenly not working?
<5> that's exactly where it would lead.
<5> joekm: what are you planning one doing ?
<5> on*
<4> well I just want to learn asm to better understand the workings of computers/programming
<4> I have no specific motive in mind
<5> linux***embly.org is a good place to start.
<1> I would say DOS ***embly would be an easier learning route than Linux, too, joekm.
<5> yup
<5> i had a asm course under DOS. I had fun :)
<1> Linux is very tightly bound to the C language.
<5> you can code your wrappers for the syscalls...
<3> really
<1> And the worst software distasters in the world happen in C.
<3> I thougt linux asm wasn't horrible.
<5> bill[1]: it isn't
<3> I thougt windows ***embly was
<5> i like it, but my opinion doesn't count here.
<1> Win32 ***embly isn't that bad, but it's very verbose.
<1> Linux ***embly isn't "hard" really....
<1> It just that, you're basically writing in C anyway.
<5> unless you dont link to libc
<4> hm...C is basically the only programmign I've done before
<4> TheAbysmal: what about working with asm on a freebsd system?
<1> Yeah, but doesn't that basically doom the portability, pireau? (correct me if I'm wrong, which is probably likely)
<1> I haven't tryed BSD ***embly, joekm.
<1> What I know of BSD, though, they are complete systems.
<5> TheAbysmal: how would it ?
<5> BSD is the same as linux
<4> well...linux***emply.org is suppose to apply to bsd also, so I'm guessing ti might work the same way
<1> Linux distros are just disjoint compilations of various GNU tools.
<5> but the args to the syscalls are p***ed on the stack, not with the registers.
<4> right now I'm just working through programming from the ground up
<1> I'd go with DOS then, joekm.
<4> i mean the book...which is written for a linux system
<5> TheAbysmal: the GNU tools, on every distro, do the same things.
<1> Jeff Dunnteman (sp?) has an excellent book: ***embly Language Step by Step.
<1> BSD doesn't use GNU though.
<5> nop
<5> I was talking about the syscall interface.
<1> Oh.
<5> both BSD and GNU/Linux use the same calling convention.
<1> I only meant that Linus doesn't guarantee that the interrupts won't change.
<1> The BSD interrupts, I'm ***uming here, are more stable.
<5> that is cdecl; and under Win32 its stdcall
<4> if I'm just learning, I think linux will be fine. portability doesn't really matter to me now, so i can always just not link to libc
<5> there's only one interrupt
<1> That's the calling convention.
<5> 80h
<1> I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing, or I'm way off base.
<5> do you image having to recompile libc everytime you want to recompile your kernel ?
<1> No, of course not.
<5> TheAbysmal: i talked about the calling conventions on win32 and GNU/Linux & BSD. and the syscall itnerface.
<5> TheAbysmal: then, why would the ABI change ?
<1> No, it doesn't.... see, that's where we're getting crossed.
<5> why ?
<1> The ABI doesn't change, the calling convetions don't change (except for Win)...
<1> But, the ISRs get renumbered on Linux.
<1> Occasionally, anyway.
<5> that brings us to the recompiling libc with the kernel question.
<1> I'm not following...
<1> But, I'm all ears.
<1> I get the feeling I have bad information.
<5> what don't you understand ?
<1> Are you saying the that libc is tied to the ISRs?
<5> yes...
<5> libc, provides a C interface to the syscall itnerface.
<5> if the syscall interrupt number changes. libc follows
<5> if teh syscall numbers change, libc follows.
<5> the*
<1> I gotcha.
<1> I DID have bad info, and I just took it for granted.
<1> From a reliable source, too.
<5> who ?
<1> The same author I mentioned previously.
<1> Jeff Duntemann.
<1> He's really sharp on the subject, too.
<5> ah ! i don't know him.
<5> he probably knows more than me.
<5> judging by his picture, he has at least 100 times my experience.
<1> Well, what you just said clicked in my head as a "why didn't I think of that."
Return to
#asm
or
Go to some related
logs:
#math
#linux
xarragon
loop-aes suspend2
kbuildsycoca is unable to register with dcop
#lisp
tvrage mirc
cyfuss
#debian
debian net-install dmraid
|
|