georgeb at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon May 28 21:14:59 PDT 2007
Robert Connolly wrote:
> On Thursday May 24 2007 10:19:31 pm George Boudreau wrote:
>> Now I remember why I gave up assembler for 'C'. But I have a stripped
>> down version of your dd that compiles with
>> gcc -c dd.s
>> ld -o dd dd.o
>> strip dd give 884 bytes.
> Cool, thanks. Btw, does nasm generally make smaller programs? The nasm
> version, with the extra options, is only about 7 bytes larger.
When I built dd.asm with the following
nasm -o dd.o -f aout dd.asm -l dd.lst
ld -o dd dd.o
the final size was 976 so I see a 92 byte difference. How did you build
The attachment is a commented version with a different build method.
m4 dd.m4 > tmp.s
gcc -c tmp.s
ld -o dd tmp.o
output is the same 884b
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3942 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the hlfs-dev