UNIX assemblers and SCO

[Michael Grenier]

>From article <13163 at steinmetz.ge.com>, by davidsen at steinmetz.ge.com (William E. Davidsen Jr):
> In article <647 at cimcor.mn.org> mike at cimcor.mn.org (Michael Grenier) writes:
> | .............................. I have a BIG fear that the rumored
> | MASM like assembler SCO uses will not handle the UNIX assembler's
> | opcodes and directives and will therefore not assemble the output
> | of the pascal compiler.
> 
> 
>   Let's take a hypothetical case (to avoid violating our license). If we
> had Xenix/386 v2.3.1 and Microport v/386, and pulled the executables off
> the Microport and put them on the Xenix system, with a little
> hypothetical diddling the assembler would work just fine.
> 


I can see that taking the Microport (or other UNIX ) as(1) command
over to SCO UNIX V/386 will allow me to run the COFF assembler. But how
about the next step - Does the SCO UNIX come with the COFF libraries,
linker, etc. to handle building the final executable. Moreover, even
if they are supplied, do they conform (.i.e do the libraries have the
same entry points) as standard UNIX on the 80386? Since the pascal
compiler uses the C library for all the built in functions (like
using malloc when the program calls NEW(ptr)) the calls must be
compatible.

How well does SCO's sdb work on COFF binaries.  A recent review in UNIX
World mentioned problems with it if the binary didn't have the full
symbolic information in it (not that this is a big issue). 

I can't really bundle the UNIX assembler with the Pascal compiler without
paying AT&T some big bucks. I could generate the COFF binaries
directly especially with the help of a wonderful book by
Nutshell Associates but seeing the assembly output would be nice.

Thanks for the information though.

     -Mike Grenier
     mike at cimcor.mn.org
     uunet!rosevax!cimcor!mike