good riddance BIOS, when can be trash you finally? rant
 

I have endured BIOSes for a looong time and now they are finally getting on my nerves..

see here... just another example of a few hours wasted for nothing....

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...7/#post3558656

Bioses are old, outdated, totally dinosauric and suck big time. Sorry I cannot say it any other way. Anybody that feels with me, please respond.

It is not enough that the industry is recloning and reanimating a zombi corpse that died 10 years ago, no, they proudly still install it on any mobo that you can buy.
I mean, heck, does anybody notice? it is the 21st century for Gods sake!!! We have the your 2009 and still this POS old garbage is hindering boot times and limit computers in a miriad of ways.

BIOSes hold back computer in a very nasty way, ever found that your BIOS does not like your new HD? Or your controller or your boot device? Well, tough luck, the OEM does not release a new BIOS version since 2 years, so you can dump it on the trash, although the hardware would be still fine.

I already had to do incredible dumb workarounds (like booting off a 10 gigabyte HD) because the BIOS was too stupid to recognize the 250 Gbyte HD and boot from it. Linux of course had not trouble handling the disk, so as soon as I had the kernel loaded, and left this old decrepit POS Bios I was fine..

really...

I am sick and tired of it...

ever noticed how Macs don't need BIOSes? Ever had an Amiga? Seen how there was no BIOS and no need for it? Hold down your both mouse buttons and you can select your boot device.. and now...ladies and gentlement...

THAT WAS 1987!!!!!!!! and you know what? It had a graphical user interface that you could use your mouse with. To shift up and down device priority.

Get real, more than 20 years later, there is still no mouse support, still no GUI, all text, nothing else.
Does anybody from the OEMs listen? How expensive is an eeprom? That stuff costs nothing anymore.

I mean this is a huge joke and I am sure there will be people now defending it and yes, it is you that make sure we are not moving one inch into the future. It is your complacency that blocks and makes sure we stay exactly where we are.. in 1991, on IBM PC compatible.

Darn, I am so annoyed...

this was now 5 years of annoyance going off, 5 years of grappling and having to deal with this oldest and crappiest piece of every computer.

about 10 years of waiting hours, days and months of legacy mode BIOS checking some hardware, at glacial pace. Server are especially aweful, since you got RAID controllers.. Ever seen how fast an IMac boots up? Guess why...

Markus

True BIOSs are dinosaurs but I have used some with a mouse & could point N click the options.

The Amiga had an equivalent of a BIOS. It was called the Kickstart ROM. The Mac has an equivalent (though more modern approach) called EFI. Different names, but they all do pretty much the same job, dealing with initialising hardware.

Ever see BeOS or QNX Neutrino boot up on a PC, or even good old DOS? They're all pretty damn quick! Despite running on BIOS controlled hardware.

Back in the day, my BBC micro or VIC=20 took less time to turn on than it takes to say 'beep', but the hardware is significantly more complex these days.

I too long for the days of the Amiga and believe that computers and especially the OSes that run on them have just become too damn big and complicated for their own good, but this is a bigger problem than just the BIOS.

And if you think servers with lots of raid disks take a long time, think yourself lucky you've never had to startup a mainframe from a fully powered down state!

Moved: This thread is more suitable in <General> and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.

As this thread illustrates, technology moves on - especially for the big iron.
PoR and IPL is pretty good on latest kit.

Dude, get yourself a motherboard that is supported by Coreboot. Then flash it with the Coreboot flash app thing that works under Linux and it boots in no-time.

This should get you started: http://www.coreboot.org/

Edit: PS: Google, AMD and the FSF are all over it so don't worry about the future ;)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't EFI supposed to be the successor to BIOS? Intel macs use EFI since Intel is responsible for EFI, as opposed to PPC macs which still uses OpenBoot.

I had thought by now you would have seen SOME PC boards that would offer EFI, but I guess maybe that some Intel boards only?

Sorry but I don't share in this. With ease of use comes dumbing down and that means tweaks fly out the window. I enjoy going into a BIOS and changing various setting to get my system to do what I want. I don't need some guy in a suit and tie thinking his one size fits all.

Happy BIOS user here!

Just because there is a 'wizard' option for novice, I am sure that there is also an 'advanced' window available. It would be stupid for the programmers not to add an advanced feature for those with more experience in computers and who want to customize their own setup.

You may be correct, but my theory is that it is not broke why fix it?

I don't see anything wrong with BIOSes, except that they are not open source. That may change soon however ... hopefully.

You know, I will seriously look into that. SO far I have heard about it, but found that it hardly supports any motherboard, but things might have changed.

It might be the solution for my problems. In the same way that I started to just buy HP printers and scanners, since I know for sure that they will work with Linux and will not be a headache driver wise.

Markus

That is certainly does. It is simple. Too simple, for our modern times. Ever had the BIOS fail epic on something you wanted it to do? Recognize some new hardware, that it should not initialize, but just leave alone, because the OS will initialize it? No, everything needs to go through the BIOS and since it is very limited and as said before, OEMs don't release new BIOSes very soon after the board is out, so thanks to that, any Mobo will pretty soon be old obsolete iron.

It is simple, but way too limiting.

Markus

That is true. And LA also has a perfectly working transportation system, it works flawlessly. No need for serious public transportation, there are no traffic jams and more and more impossibility to get anywhere in a short time (sarcasm off) ;-)

I guess what is a problem is a very relative thing: somebodies big problem is somebody "totally ok".

It might change, but not in a loooooong time. Ever seen how the OEMs work? They shun and avoid Linux whereever they can, sometimes I wonder if they think open source is some contagious disease. You know, it would be so open to use Linux as a BIOS, sooooo easy! They would not even have to do it themselves. The community would help. But heck, these decision makes must be old men and women, conservative and stuck on the old old old thing of recooking and recooking BIOS. Change as little as possible, over more than 20 years.

If we would all think like this, we would now have powerful cars, very modern, with a STEAM plant and looking like a locomotive, because if it ain't broken, don't fix it and just improve on the original design, slightly, as little as possible, because that costs money and ingeniuity.

To me it seems that the industry lost the guy that had the inventive spark and is now just cooking up the old stuff. Much like when Jobs left Apple, no new Macs came out.. but wait, Performas were there. Looking, exactly like.... PCs I am sure that was not because he liked them so much, but because he really did not know how to create something new.

A BIOS would require a diagnostic section, where Hardware diagnostics can be run, and maybe a place where you can install an OS (if you get the board new), directly from the internet with Netboot and to satisfy everybody, a browser (yes, all BIOSes need s TCP/IP stack and a basic browser, ever noticed how you cannot connect to the internet for BIOS upgrades within the BIOS? They just can make it with that old garbage so far) and so an internetshop where so inclined people can shell out the cash for their Windows license and then start downloading and automatically installing their Windows Vista or 7 or whatever.
Or as I know MS, first have a trial, then get the open hand for the license fee or lights out ;-) *grin*

Markus

See: http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Syste...IOS-9171.shtml

And: http://www.coreboot.org/Welcome_to_coreboot

Actually coreboot = LinuxBIOS:

Unfortunately, they don't support many boards or chipsets, mostly server boards.

I understand some of the fuss about BIOS being a old technology. Why do we need any change in this? You can plug in memory and almost always it is gonna be auto detected, plug in any drive and same thing. Remember the days when you plugged in a drive and had to set all drive parameters (or anything for that matter)?

I like the open source movement, but at the same time hardware most likely will never be open source. Settings are put in place to work with the hardware that it is running on. I don't understand why we would want to give this up? Unless you are running a older machine the BIOS is very capable!

The road analogy does not work here! What we have works very well and does what it is intended to do. It may be somewhat old tech, but it does indeed work. One could argue that memory is old tech, or even the way the FSB measures the speed of some devices, or even argue that a PSU is older tech that is this big thing in a case that takes un-needed space etc....

Most always it works very well! I have 14 machines and have never had a BIOS issue with any of them (besides the occasion of a dead CMOS battery).

I just feel that if it is to complex for you (anyone) just stay out of it! Very few reasons to even worry about it these days as most stuff just works! Leave the inner setting to the inner geek!

And because most stuff supposedly "just works" we can forget about the other stuff that "just doesn't work", right ?

I would very much like it if BIOSes were open source, for many many reasons. Unfortunately, this will not happen for a while, and it will not happen for everyone.

BIOS is software just like any other software, and it has the same faults as any other proprietary software. And that's why it should be open source.

What don't work? I would like some examples!

50mhz machine aside, what does not work? Really? I have had no problems in years with any BIOS. Back in the day, yes they were horrible! Today I have not ran into any issue.

Why do people go on and on about open source this and that? This is crazy! Don't buy NVidia the drivers are closed source! Stop complaining about ATI drivers, at least they open sourced them!

I agree that open source is a force to be reckoned with, but why does EVERYTHING have to be open source? I have a choice when it comes to the hardware I buy! I support open source in the hardware I buy (Own all ATI products). Now we want to crop up and tell hardware companies that they should use open source tech? I have the choice at the end of the day on how I want to buy, it should remain this way!

Some people don't like they way stuff works? Get coding! Otherwise buy motherboards that work with open source products. I am perfectly content with what I have! I know a lot of computer people that feel the same way.

Sorry to say that what does not work is just far and between! Most stuff does work (in my eyes all works)!

Well, I've had problems with a number of boards, and with a laptop for sure. And, of course, any requests to fix things fell upon uncaring, deaf ears. I probably could have fixed it myself if I had the source code even with my mediocre coding abilities.

I personally think that in general FLOSS is far superior to any proprietary attempt. The software can evolve much more quickly, will have a larger developer base that can find bugs (not only 1337 haxxors who can disassemble and reassemble it at will), and will be free from possible backdoors and kill switches and rootkits that might be hidden in there.

But, whatever, I can see already from your reply that there's not much use in arguing with you, so don't take this as an argument with you ... it's just purely informational.

See your point, your correct. It would be nice to be able to stop root kits and potential virus issues from BIOS level. Never thought of it that way. If something along those lines could be the case, I opt in.

Another proplem with proprietary drivers, either general hardware or BIOS, is that you really have no clue what is going on within them. They could have installed a rootkit for all you know, and sending anything and everything back to their servers for whatever purpose they wish. They also have few reasons to consider efficency. There is a benchmark someone on the net (youtube, I believe) where an old Mac and a brand new Mac are started up side-by-side. The older system boots up faster, even though the new system is probably a hundred times faster than the older system. I havn't found a reason for this that made sense yet.

I have a 90mhz machine here that will stomp my main system (dual core with fast sata drives) on bootup. It runs windows 3.1 and is really fast.

Reason for this is just the fact that programs have become more resource heavy. On a 90mhz machine there is not much room for cpu intensive tasks, MS knew this and made a really light system for its DOS products as well as windows 3.*. Wasn't until windows 95 things got bloat.

Don't know about Apple computers (never owned one) would venture to say they are the same.

But they are broken.

a good googletalk about coreboot:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X72LgcMpM9k


and a fast boot with everything in bios:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuzRsXKm_NQ

I think broken is the wrong word to use here, in light of what has been said maybe light on features would be a better term.

The BIOS is a piece of old tech and crappy hackery. It runs, stays in memmory, can read out your entire ram and has network access. Needles to say this needs to become a fast booting, transparant (open source), clean C programmed piece of tech. People also thought that Linux was a joke in the beginnin, and some probably still do, but the foundation is there now, so it's a matter of time...

Either you are a complete noob or just completely unintelligent
I can think of a very good reason why the BIOS should never touch the internet with a 328947328463254324 foot poll, Trojans and virii come to mind, what is easy for the user is not always the best way, the hard it is to do things the more likely it is that it is harder to attack

The BIOS is doing its job, let the kernel fix or detect the hardware, Maybe you want the BIOS to open the A20 Gate too while you are at it, and if you don't know what an a20 gate is then were done talking because clearly you have no idea of what and how the BIOS really works.

Actually the reason why this is is because it doesn't have an MMX chip and thus its FPU instructions are not extensions, when MMX came out 166Mhz + P1's they moved the CPU's FPU functions to the MMX chip.

Also back then they used a lot of assembly, it doesn't matter what people think ASM is much much faster at everything it does, C/C++ is much easier to work with but nothing can compare to assembler if written properly. The past is 100% proof of this.

Hi,

BIOS (Basic Input/Output System), please note the word 'BASIC'.

This system firmware is used to allow the hardware to have the means of boot strapping a kernel that will hopefully support the hardware on the system board. This firmware will contain the means to handle the IPL then hopefully passing to the SPL.

Most system manufactures will specify their needs to the BIOS creators. Sadly not all things are tested thoroughly. That's one of the best arguments about the open source community. Things are written for a project and open to the community to test and contribute. Thus things do have a better turn around.

I too agree that assembly would be the best but the reason for high level languages was 'laziness' not efficiency in coding. I can remember coding in a 256B environment in machine code. When I moved to a larger machine with 16MB and assembly, I was in heaven.

I remember having to use re-entrant code just to utilize my code base. Now programmers don't really care with all the memory available along with the processors.

Please don't mis-understand me, it's just that bloat is a disease. One that has gotten to the point of a epidemic. I look at people like 'Steve Gibson' who is a very good asm coder. He's developed loads of apps and they were all written in assembly. Assembly is a viable language with today's newer hardware but you had better have a great toolbox or access to one. :)

My point is that early BIOS was written in assembly by tight and great coders. Newer BIOS is actually synthesized with high level language from previous versions. It's rare to have a new completely re-written BIOS from scratch. Most evolves from or builds on a previous version. Sure when the new mega bit wide system is here then things will really change. :) maybe :jawa:

I gladly give back the rude insult and am amazed at your own lack of intellience and lack of skill in networking. All or nothing, is that what you propose? Are you among the people that thing win 3.11 is so clever, because it is often isolated from the internet or any network for the matter?

What about updates? Patches? The bios is extremely static, there are no updates a short time after the mobo is out and it will never see any anymore. There are no ways to update the BIOS automatically over the net and neither will there ever be thanks to people like you.
Some of them offer automatic updating when you shove in a USB stick with the bios on it, but direct download? Wow, that seems impossible. Is it really so complicated? Everything else is already there and patching is best done frequently. There is no other way to close exploits.
I am not advocating a BIOS with all bells and whistles, just the basic stuff that it does not have.

But I know that nothing will change, it will stay pathetic and old and insufficent, the oldest crappyest part of any PC and the reason why it looks like a dinosaur.

Coreboot looks so promising, too bad the industry usually does not touch anything that makes that much sense with a 27384734 foot pole. They just don't get it. There are actually people that want to solve this problem, non-profit, for them, yet they don't care. I guess it is the old "oh gosh, these open source hippies are going to steal our precious hardware specs"

I will see that I get one of the supported boards and see some real sweet magic in action.

And see the future, as it will be in 10 years, when finally, this old garbage cannot be cooked and recooked up anymore.

Markus

I am absolutely a fan of ASM, but as of my own experience, code can be much more readable if you maintain it in a higher language, for you and others and bugs can be avoided. There are many ways that you can structure code logically, as might be much harder in ASM. Especially large complex projects will safe time in a higher language, because although it will run faster in ASM, debugging it and maintaining the code give you much more work in ASM. Source code mobility is another point, try porting direct ASM from one CPU to another. I wonder if Gibsons programs run on PPCs.

The bios of course is tiny and has always been like this (that is why it does so little and has little automatic control and flexibility). We can easily afford the BIOS a little bigger and in a higher language than ASM, since it would still work faster, stabler and more functional. CoreBoot for example uses 2 CPUs when available to test the RAM, a thing that makes so much sense, but that no other BIOS currently does.

Higher languages often are an excuse for bloat, yes. Efficient coding does not get old, in any language, high or low level.

But would you admit that it requires more skill to pull off bug free structured code in ASM than in a high language? I think so. So forcing less talented programmers to have to code in ASM will actually worse code quality in many cases.

Then there is of course again the question if a programmer that can only code in a cushion high level IDE environment shoud be coding at all and is not just annoying the rest of the worlds with his buggy code. Especially some corporate proprietary software comes to mind, which is obfuscated from prying (and would be laughing on the floor) eyes. In the OpenSource world, nobody would much use their codebase due to poor quality.

Markus

I think that's funny and very very amusing, you tell me I have a lack of understanding of how networks work, yet you propose to allow automatic updates, and flashing of the bios from the web? You are either kidding me or have no experience in IT security fields, because that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard of... yes lets allow the attack not only to comprise the whole system, but lets make it easy for him to keep his code around after you have wiped out all the media devices in your computer... you cant be serious!

The less you give to the attacker the less he has to work with, by allowing auto updates and flashed via web.. why don't you just invite the crackers in to your home and allow them to collect all the information they want and do what they want to your computer? because if there are auto updates to the bios (which is not protected by anything and has direct access to the hardware at all times) what is the difference?

You might have misunderstood me: With automatic I mean: User can update BIOS with one command or keystroke. Not as in: system does it automatically, without user consent or interaction.
Right now, BIOS upgrades are so incredible work intensive to do and dumb that automatic already means what I propose. Automatic as in "save a bunch of time".

And no, the OS is not the place to do this, the BIOS must be independent updatable from the OS. What if your mobo does not recognize your HD and cannot boot the OS?

The google talk about Coreboot are a real relieve: they show that coreboot (aka Linux BIOS) does everything better than normal BIOSes and there is no valid reason why it should not be used:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X72LgcMpM9k

He mentions something that really is dumb and has bugged me time and time again: boot from a flash mass storage device or usb stick. Try that with a 3 or 4 year old Laptop and it will not work.
But there is no reason why it should not work.

The google talk is a very interesting watch, for all doubters out there.

Markus

Hi,
Boy, you have a lot to learn. Writing or even extending something will cause undue errors if not thoroughly tested. Bloating a BIOS won't increase nor provide efficiency if it's written in a higher language. The code base will still be in machine code. Until the populace accepts the change in the way machines are initialized we will have a BIOS based IPL. Some will call it something different but still a boot of some sort will occur via a pathway from a IPL to SPL.

ASM is a step above machine code therefore in a sense a means to write code in a easier understood fashion (a higher level). ASM can be coded along with comments to aid the author or others to understand the code. One must learn the semantics along with the syntax to write in any language, be it ASM, C or whatever. If you write in 'C' you had better comment so you can get back into the code days later to understand the code not just to provide someone else with the means to understand.

As to the efficiency of a coder, remember the verse 'garbage in, garbage out' if that coder doesn't think out or reason well the needs of the program then the verse stands. Someone who just sits down at a terminal and starts pounding code will be pounding their head at some point in time.

Any language has it's own problems as for efficiency. By writing in one and translating to another then some problems can be induced or even introduced. The big problem with BIOS is the restrictions or limitations of the size of the window of the map. I for one would not want a BIOS that would get on the net to update at the leisure or conditions of the machine without intervention. One has the choice to select the hardware along with the firmware. That's why there are so many different brands but notice the number of BIOS providers to the hardware industry. $$

It seems you have a lot to learn as well... Proprietary BIOSes are not tested thoroughly and are continuesly extended. Open source/bazaar is the ultimate testing field.


What the fsck are you talking about? Coreboot boots much faster and is much cleaner. Efficiency? Check.

Just a few lines of assembly...

Yeah, right... Ever heared what documentation is invented for? But it's not like you have the source code with comments from the BIOS's out there, or do you? So what's your point anyway?

You either manually go to the ASUS website or let your BIOS do it, who cares? Either way a cracker has to crack the ASUS server anyway...

Hi,
Grow up. The BIOS for any machine is benched as best as they can with known hardware. And yes there are simulators. Open source is great but it will not replace all the present BIOS for systems. Sure you can use the IPL to your wisely invented SPL that is the GNU/YourBIOS but that is going to be tested initially. But it to will have problems that must be corrected to allow evolution. So now we use a current BIOS that yes is proprietary but who cares since after the kernel is loaded to avail your system to function.

Look I don't think you understand how the IPL works with a SPL. I don't care it's still a BIOS yet in another form by being open source. 'Coreboot' is still a 'BIOS' that relies on the IPL to SPL pathway.

Obviously you don't understand how the BIOS or the system functions with the code. The CPU understands MACHINE CODE, you easily understand what I'm writing now (that's text) which is represented binary so the machine can read it too. Your high level language is for your understanding which must be translated to machine code so the CPU can perform the code.

How much code have you written without comments? If that code was laid days or even years ago it had better be commented which is a form of documentation. Documentation for any program is for the end user to understand how to utilize the program not how the program functions intrinsically.

I care for how my BIOS is updated. You obviously don't care about how secure your systems are if you would allow someone else to take care of such an important part of your system. Manufactures have made every means to allow a user to update their BIOS in a safe manner. Yet some still fail the system. Laziness will bite you!

Plus you preach Coreboot and in the same state it's OK to let another take care of your BIOS. :rolleyes:

It's easy to flash your BIOS the way it is, it doesn't matter if it's open or not, you are still going to have to boot into 16bit realmode to do it anyways, if not I'm never installing coreboot (32bit protected mode will miss some hardware, that's why the a20 gate is not opened by the bios, because it needs it to init the hardware and for 8086 compatibility mode.)

Insert Flash drive or floppy disk, format, copy BIOS update, flash.exe and flash.bat on to the media then reboot with media in the drive/usb slot... after it reboots and you have a prompt type "flash.bat" and your done... reset the CMOS data and power the system back on. It's not hard, maybe I am getting old but I think all the newbs want everything too fast, they want everything done within a blink of an eye yet do not want to understand how or why it works... you want it to be known as the magic box that could

Benchmarked? Rofl.

Because?

There is no SPL. Instead of dropping to a OS kernel after doing a lot of unnecessary work, it just does so earlier on. And it does work on supported hardware, so your point? Not ready for primetime? Ok we allready knew that, next...

Initial Program Load -> Second Program Load... in other words Coreboot (IPL) drops a payload (SPL) and a kernel boots. Whoohoo! Boy that was hard...

Seriously, what did you expect? Coreboot is meant to be an Open Source BIOS with all the crap no OS needs removed.

You meant object code? Oh so you think you're so fscking smart by explaining that everything in the end needs to be compiled in object code? Oooooooohhhhh rrreeeeaaaaallllly? You're sooooo smaaaaaarrttttt! Happy now?

Indeed; I have a motherboard with two BIOS's. Too bad, eh?

Yeah whatever... Bla bla bla... There is a Coreboot flash utility now that flashes your BIOS from withing Linux.

Yes, just as the free software community took care of my OS.

Hehe, i see you have a little ignorance as well, okay, so now that you have ALL machines running coreboot tell me, how does one use 16bit real mode now? (some embedded systems rely on 16bit calls), I also notice coreboot requires a huge flash chip... ahh the beauty of assembler :) Embedded systems are suppose to be SMALL! Not that i wouldn't support an open BIOS, but it should be an option like most opensource software, they day is rammed down my throat is the day I make my own BIOS and overwrite any nonsense, I don't have to run anything if i don't wish!

I say keep the BIOS the way it is, if people want to flash an openBIOS its in there hands, this way you can't cry there is no support and people like me, who like there system just the way it is can have it the way we want it.

Hi,

Vincent, your an idiot! Nobody was talking about a benchmark comparison. Apparently you've never written a valid piece of code. If you don't understand the term benched when speaking about code.

I'm not going to waste my time any longer with this since you really don't understand how the system functions nor why or when the machine is fist powered how things are initialized. Let alone know anything about machine code which is object code that is produced from the compilation of the higher level language; be it ASM, C or whatever. Or God forbid hand coded. Understand this, the CPU does not utilize anything but machine code which is the binary representation of the code.

I'm through with this as you know nothing about the subject but continuing your inane banter. The link is so you can understand clearly my use of the language. That is if you really can read for understanding.

BTW, your code snippet is worthless.

Rofl again. Maybe you should say that to Bjarne Stroustrup's face for not including the term benchmarking in his C++ book...

Yeah I totally didn't read the Coreboot wiki...

What is there to know about object code? Dude, stop being such an idiot. Everybody knows you need to compile whatever it is that is coded in order for it to run so I'll ask you again: WHAT IS YOUR FSCKING POINT?!

Ok kthnxbye ttyn, whatever...

Yeah I know nothing about hardware. I don't know how to code in C++. I don't know how to compile with G++. I don't know the instruction set for Intel Larabee and I never read through the OpenSparc documentation... rofl...

Ow wow that makes you so smart, please keep informing me pleaaaassse! -_-'

No it's actually the best, because a) it shows you to stop pretending that nobody but you has ever programmed and b) it is telling you to stop being such a know-it-all when you're clearly not. You are probably the guy who everyone hated at school because in spite of that you thought you were such a smartass, you actually weren't.

You can stop being a retard! You don't compile ASM you assemble it, you are not translating ASM to something the computer can read, you are using the CPU's instructions directly! When you assemble the ASM code you are converting it to machine code, ASM is machine code only human readable so there is no compiling of any sort, ASM is a direct mnemonic to machine language!!!! there are no optimizations or ticks the assembler does for you!!!


This right here proves you no nothing about programming, a compiler can give you the output (in asm) an assembler can't because it already is in assembly! if you are going to call someone an idiot get your facts straight, also "mr. everyone knows" interpreted languages aren't compiled either! so I'll ask you again get your facts straight!!!!

Rofl again, since when did CPU's lose their NAND gates? Rofl rofl rofl...
The only thing that a CPU does is 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0...
Getting my facts straight? Rofl. I have never ever met somebody as stupid as you

PS: hand over you IT card at the logout counter

ASM is the mnemonics to binary or machine langauge you idoit! I donno who you think you are, but its not anyone important, onebuck might give up, but i won't because people like you spread misinformation and i wont let down! So you can post all you want if you dont know what a mnemonic is then you have already lost.

That said lets dance!

As i said you can't compile assembler, it is already compiled, in needs to be converted NOT translated! There is nothing lost in the conversion process because it's 1:1

mov and 011011010110111101110110

mean the EXACT same thing, so like i said get your facts straight asshole!

Wikipedia:
"A utility program called an assembler is used to translate assembly language statements into the target computer's machine code. The assembler performs a more or less isomorphic translation (a one-to-one mapping) from mnemonic statements into machine instructions and data. (This is in contrast with high-level languages, in which a single statement generally results in many machine instructions.)"

"The name "compiler" is primarily used for programs that translate source code from a high-level programming language to a lower level language (e.g., assembly language or machine code)."

EAT IT BITCH!!!!
Shove that in your pipe and smoke it! Now you hand your IT card in at the security desk and have a nice day you fucktard!

Maybe this will help you understand.

What the hell is wrong with you people? You are arguing and name calling over a CPU - go outside and get some fresh air. Equally, first and final warning to all of you: quit the name calling now. Right now. Read the rules, particularly the part that says "Challenge others' points of view and opinions, but do so respectfully and thoughtfully ... without insult and personal attack. Differing opinions is one of the things that make this site great."

First and only warning - knock off the name calling, tone it down or there will be things done to you all.

For me, personally, this is not about a CPU. It's also not 'winning' if that's what you're thinking...

Sir, yes, sir.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2c4L4CPfQY8

Too hard to just say that your point is that, upon compiling a piece of C code, the binary can always be different and assembly is always the same. As I said before; a few lines of assembly are required and Coreboot then continues to be in C. I still don't get what this adds to the discussusion AT ALL.

Thus is the same when I say: Ferrari's are most often red. Yeah so what? I dunno... So what's your point?

Yeah, awesome truth tables... can only be done in assembly. That's why there are a few lines of assembly in the Coreboot sourcecode. Wow. Didn't I allready told you that a thousand times by now?

There is nothing to eat here and you still haven't proven anything.

This is not a game where someone wins or loses, but if I'd be telling you why, I'd be banned by our beloved admins.

Way to completely miss the point, you told me assembler was compiled and now you change it to coreboot needs a few lines of assembly?

I agree it does, but that's not what we were arguing about, stop it!
We were arguing about the fact weather asm is compiled or not, which it is not! Nice try tho.

Back on topic, I think coreboot is great, but I don't think it should be pushed on everyone. I like to be able to install 16bit operating systems, like DOS, now I could create a tiny program that sits in the MBR that jumps back to 16bit real mode but why should I have to? The cpu itself is designed with compatibility mode so why would I wanna use a kernel that is only 32bit to boot my machines hardware? this makes no sense to me.

I have never changed anything: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...78#post3569678
First a few lines of assembly and then continues into C.
You were explaining me what compiling was. Ok officialy compiling means code->target code. Fine. You win. However that would be kinda inane, because every programmer who wrote a serious piece of software just throws it at a modern compiler, like gcc for example, and it is turned into binary automagically. We still just reffer to that process as compiling. Just as you probably reffer to assambly languages by the word assambler, which is actually the 'compiler'/whatever.

No it's not compiled, just 'translated into binary' -_-'
But that wasn't really the point, now was it?

Yes please :) :thumbsup:
Coreboot is clearly about also cutting away legacy stuff, and focusses on the future. MSDOS is kinda legacy. However there might be a work-around with FreeDOS: http://www.freedos.org/
Hurray for open source :)