Anonymous user
Talk:Multiboot1 Bare Bones: Difference between revisions
→64 bits: new section
(main -> kmain) |
(→64 bits: new section) |
||
Line 7:
I was the one who originally decided to use main() as function name. I changed my mind, because of the possibility of brain-dead compiler option choices resulting in a main()-related linker error, which might be less confusing if the function in the code is called kmain() instead. [[User:Solar|Solar]] 07:01, 27 February 2008 (CST)
== 64 bits ==
Hello from a new user.
I tried to assemble stuff from this article, but it was no go:
loader.s:21: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `push'
loader.s:22: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `push'
While browsing, I encountered indications it might be my architecture (64bit AMD). I know that cross-compiler would do the job (for 32 bit), but couldn't the code instead be written in such way, so that it is cross-architecture instead? That way, I'd have the solution for both architectures (no need for replacement code to this), and possibly wouldn't need to build a cross compiler at this point (very, very early).
Also, it would be very good if someone could explain, line by line, what's happening here.
<br>In any case, looks like a small, but a very important rewrite is in order.
<br>So, in short:
*Is it architecture specific?
*Any ideas about a workaround?
*Can someone explain the (new!) code?
--[[User:Paxcoder|Paxcoder]] 21:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
| |||