3 ms·
> assembly source code with plain and simple C code you can compile with a small and alternative C compiler Which part of that big clause is the part that fai
by Dylan16807 2mo ago
> assembly source code with plain and simple C code you can compile with a small and alternative C compiler
Which part of that big clause is the part that failed? Because I thought you could still compile Linux with TCC.
- sylware 2mo agoAs far as I know, that was for x86(32bits) linux, that decades ago. With those assembly source files (which do not abuse any pre-processor) and plain and simple C, I could build a modern x86_64 linux kernel with cproc/qbe (which gets 70% of gcc speed in my CPU intensive benchmarks... for a few % of gcc code and in plain and simple C, not brain damaged c++). But I kind of don't mind since the future is assembly coding on non-IP-locked standard like RISC-V, and the main issue for that future is the abuse of pre-processors (ffmpeg was bitten by it) or code generators which would not be written in assembly themselves (or with a simple high level language with an assembly written interpreter, asmpython?).
- Dylan16807 2mo agoI had checked that the project was touched more recently but apparently the kernel version wasn't updated at all. So yes, decades ago, oh well.
- sylware 2mo agoIndeed, Linus T. is not superman, he cannot preserve linux of all the danger around.