On 03/02/2014 15:30, Jonathan Schleifer wrote: > Hi! > > I noticed that we depend on yasm for a few files and that it seems to be that > those were compiled with nasm > in the past (the rule is still called AssembleNasm). > Is this historical and it's just that nobody bothered to convert them yet > or would there be any objections in converting them to GNU as? That would remove > the dependency on yasm and porting them to GNU as does not mean that we have to use AT&T syntax, > if that's the reason why nasm/yasm was used. Probably simpler syntax, but I don't remember exactly. I recall starting to translate one of those files to gas syntax long ago, I'll try to dig that. François.