[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] Funny Bash Script ...

From: Grzegorz Kulewski
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Funny Bash Script ...
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 09:23:00 +0100 (CET)

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
there is a funny bash script available at


using this on object files (like the kqemu-mod-i386.o)
produces interesting output, which will compile nicely
with gcc to something very similar of the original ..

it's a quick and dirty hack, so naturally far away from
being perfect (for example it doesn't rebuild non .text
sections yet) and of course I would not suggest to use
it on before mentioned object file ...


Ok, so you just (re)invented dissassembler that produces compilable output. There are of course better ones (that for example are trying to make C code out of its output).

Using it may be illegal in some countries. Maybe in some not. But this is clearly against the author who gave it to you for free but with no source.

I can bet that any programmer who knows assembler a little can disassemble that file (come on its only 36 kilo!) by hand using anything and put the result into C code. I know about better challenges. For example try to disassemble (and understand) normal PC BIOS. It is really something challenging. And some people did this in the past (you think how companies other than IBM got the BIOS production technology?). BIOS is a mix of awfull hacks (some with historical explanation). Desassembling it is a real pain. How can I compare it to that clean 36666 bytes output of gcc - even not linked part of Linux module.

The only thing that I do not understand is why such tool can be useful at all??? Forgive me, but I really do not. What you can get is more-or-less (rather less) correct version of oryginal. It can produce strange bugs or not work at all. But this way you do not change its licence or make it any more open source. Open source does not mean "you can compile it" but "you can get the _real_ source of it and the _author_ does want to give it to you"!

Can you clarify your intentions?

Grzegorz Kulewski

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]