SNASM68k never gonna give you up !

Pascal · Post by **Pascal** » Mon Nov 11, 2013 12:13 am

hello all,

Recently, i wanted to compile my old md projects but all of them use the good old SNASM68K. Problem , my computer is running on win 64. After getting bored to use dosbox, i hacked a shell only dosbox dedicated to snasm68k only. Code is dirty and nasty as hell but it does what i wanted...

known issue: help is not working.

and it might be useful to others so find the binary and sources here
http://www.pascalorama.com/brol/snasm68kdb.zip

enjoy

TmEE co.(TM) · Post by **TmEE co.(TM)** » Mon Nov 11, 2013 5:42 am

Saved this one, I know one day it'll be needed !

Oerg866 · Post by **Oerg866** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:31 pm

What's wrong with using the newer 32-bit version (asm68k), exactly?

r57shell · Post by **r57shell** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:51 pm

I want to ask same.
asm68k is very cheap!

I always use asm68k only.
Other assemblers sux

Also, check my ASM68k_Tool put asm68k.exe into dir.
It's useful for hacking.

Mask of Destiny · Post by **Mask of Destiny** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 8:22 pm

There's also vasm which is open source and portable. It's not 100% compatible with asm68k, but the Motorola syntax module gets you most of the way there (biggest difference is lack of support for named macro parameters. That is present in the "standard" module, but that one is more like gas). It also supports ELF output which is convenient for linking with C code.

Pascal · Post by **Pascal** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:57 am

i tried asm68k a looooooooong time ago and i don't remember why i kept snasm68k

if it's fully compatible with snasm68k , i should try to compile my projects with.

a good point of my approach , is that you can compile it for macosx and linux