From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Feb 27 13:16:38 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA04443 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 27 Feb 1996 13:16:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from bacall.lodgenet.com (mail@[205.138.147.242]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA04434 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 1996 13:16:34 -0800 (PST) Received: (from mail@localhost) by bacall.lodgenet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA03634 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 1996 15:10:46 -0600 Received: from tserv.lodgenet.com(204.124.120.10) by bacall via smap (V1.3) id sma003632; Tue Feb 27 15:10:40 1996 Received: from jake.lodgenet.com (jake.lodgenet.com [204.124.120.30]) by tserv.lodgenet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id OAA26332; Tue, 27 Feb 1996 14:50:38 -0600 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jake.lodgenet.com (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA05508; Tue, 27 Feb 1996 15:03:04 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199602272103.PAA05508@jake.lodgenet.com> X-Authentication-Warning: jake.lodgenet.com: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.2 7/18/95 To: Sean Eric Fagan cc: erich@lodgenet.com, narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee, babkin@hq.icb.chel.su, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: as(1) patch & dis In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 27 Feb 1996 12:18:55 PST." <199602272018.MAA15332@kithrup.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 15:03:04 -0600 From: "Eric L. Hernes" Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >Most of the code that you need has already been written, it's part > >of gdb. I've wanted to rip the disassembly stuff > >out of gdb and make it stand alone > > There is no need to do that; you can just use the binutils package, and > objdump can disassemble ("objdump -d "). cool, I'll have to look into it. thanks > > >Actually, SCO's dis(CP) from 3.2v4.2 runs as well under ibcs2 as on > >real SCO. Most of the development system does, except for masm, and > >some other programs that need (use) a vm86 call. > >anyone know why SCO's syslog implementation needs vm86? > > How... bizarre. Are you sure it's not sysi86? no, now that you mention it, I'm not sure. In fact now that I look at the man page, I'd bet money that its doing an `RTODC' to get the time off the hardware clock. Add that to the list of about 45 different and incompatible ways to get time. ;-) > > Sean. eric. -- erich@lodgenet.com erich@rrnet.com