Disassembler preference?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Disassembler preference?

silverdr-2
It's been probably over a decade since I last time used a 6502 disassembler for something bigger so would like to ask you for your favourites in this area. No, it's not a flamebait ;-) Just would like to know what the options are and if something more intelligent (similarly to e. g. KickAssembler for assembling) has popped-up in the recent years.

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Groepaz
On Thursday 29 June 2017, 19:35:16 [hidden email] wrote:
> It's been probably over a decade since I last time used a 6502 disassembler
> for something bigger so would like to ask you for your favourites in this
> area. No, it's not a flamebait ;-) Just would like to know what the options
> are and if something more intelligent (similarly to e. g. KickAssembler for
> assembling) has popped-up in the recent years.

i have been using IDA for 20 years now - and i dont think there is any other
that even comes remotely close. YMMV :)

--

http://www.hitmen-console.org    http://magicdisk.untergrund.net
http://www.pokefinder.org        http://ar.pokefinder.org

Die Furcht vor der freimütigen Antwort kann auch robuste Charaktere befallen.
<Jeanette Schmid>



       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

silverdr-2

> On 2017-06-29, at 19:44, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> On Thursday 29 June 2017, 19:35:16 [hidden email] wrote:
>> It's been probably over a decade since I last time used a 6502 disassembler
>> for something bigger so would like to ask you for your favourites in this
>> area. No, it's not a flamebait ;-) Just would like to know what the options
>> are and if something more intelligent (similarly to e. g. KickAssembler for
>> assembling) has popped-up in the recent years.
>
> i have been using IDA for 20 years now - and i dont think there is any other
> that even comes remotely close. YMMV :)

This one?

https://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/order.shtml

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Groepaz
On Thursday 29 June 2017, 19:58:54 [hidden email] wrote:

> > On 2017-06-29, at 19:44, [hidden email] wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 29 June 2017, 19:35:16 [hidden email] wrote:
> >> It's been probably over a decade since I last time used a 6502
> >> disassembler
> >> for something bigger so would like to ask you for your favourites in this
> >> area. No, it's not a flamebait ;-) Just would like to know what the
> >> options
> >> are and if something more intelligent (similarly to e. g. KickAssembler
> >> for
> >> assembling) has popped-up in the recent years.
> >
> > i have been using IDA for 20 years now - and i dont think there is any
> > other that even comes remotely close. YMMV :)
>
> This one?
>
> https://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/order.shtml

yup

--

http://www.hitmen-console.org    http://magicdisk.untergrund.net
http://www.pokefinder.org        http://ar.pokefinder.org

Every programmer knows the answer: $2b or (not $2b) is $ff.



       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Spiro Trikaliotis
In reply to this post by silverdr-2
Hello,

* On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:58:54PM +0200 [hidden email] wrote:

>
> > On 2017-06-29, at 19:44, [hidden email] wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 29 June 2017, 19:35:16 [hidden email] wrote:
> >> It's been probably over a decade since I last time used a 6502 disassembler
> >> for something bigger so would like to ask you for your favourites in this
> >> area. No, it's not a flamebait ;-) Just would like to know what the options
> >> are and if something more intelligent (similarly to e. g. KickAssembler for
> >> assembling) has popped-up in the recent years.
> >
> > i have been using IDA for 20 years now - and i dont think there is any other
> > that even comes remotely close. YMMV :)
>
> This one?
>
> https://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/order.shtml

Note that there is a Freeware (FW) version for DOS available which
includes the 6502 disassembler. I believe the last one is IDA FW 4.x, as
I do not believe the 5.x series (and later) contained the 6502 module in
the FW version anymore.

You can find IDA FW 4.1 by searching for the file idafre41.zip on the
web. I also used idafw37.zip (v3.7) some times.

The latest FW version is available here:
https://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/support/download_freeware.shtml


Having said all this: While IDA is a very powerfull tool, sometimes it
is better to use the disassembler which is given with the assembler you
are using yourself. That is, if do not want to look into the code, but
also to create an assembleable version (for your own modifications), you
might be better off using the disassembler which comes with your
assembler.

That's why I often use da65 from the cc65 package.

Regards,
Spiro.

--
Spiro R. Trikaliotis
http://www.trikaliotis.net/

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

silverdr-2
In reply to this post by Groepaz

> On 2017-06-29, at 20:02, [hidden email] wrote:
>
>>> i have been using IDA for 20 years now - and i dont think there is any
>>> other that even comes remotely close. YMMV :)
>>
>> This one?
>>
>> https://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/order.shtml
>
> yup

Screenshot-wise looks impressive, indeed. Just might not feel like shedding a grand or even half for once in a decade hobby work without being able to test the tool first. There is "evaluation version" but doesn't allow me to test anything I'd actually use it for. Useless approach to evaluation IMHO.

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

silverdr-2
In reply to this post by Spiro Trikaliotis

> On 2017-06-29, at 20:42, Spiro Trikaliotis <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> https://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/order.shtml
>
> Note that there is a Freeware (FW) version for DOS available which
> includes the 6502 disassembler. I believe the last one is IDA FW 4.x, as
> I do not believe the 5.x series (and later) contained the 6502 module in
> the FW version anymore.
>
> You can find IDA FW 4.1 by searching for the file idafre41.zip on the
> web. I also used idafw37.zip (v3.7) some times.
>
> The latest FW version is available here:
> https://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/support/download_freeware.shtml

All those seem to be DOS or whatever .EXE files. For me this means running it in a virtual machine, which I'd prefer to avoid.

> Having said all this: While IDA is a very powerfull tool, sometimes it
> is better to use the disassembler which is given with the assembler you
> are using yourself. That is, if do not want to look into the code, but
> also to create an assembleable version (for your own modifications), you
> might be better off using the disassembler which comes with your
> assembler.

The keyword here is "also" - that's exactly what I need it for.

>
> That's why I often use da65 from the cc65 package.

I used to use it too. And still use it for smaller things but I remember what kind of PITA it was to create the "infofiles" when something bigger needed to be disassembled.

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Groepaz
On Thursday 29 June 2017, 21:17:50 [hidden email] wrote:
> > You can find IDA FW 4.1 by searching for the file idafre41.zip on the
> > web. I also used idafw37.zip (v3.7) some times.
> >
> > The latest FW version is available here:
> > https://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/support/download_freeware.shtml
>
> All those seem to be DOS or whatever .EXE files. For me this means running
> it in a virtual machine, which I'd prefer to avoid.

there is a linux version as well (even OSX iirc) - but none of the free ones
has that, right. i wouldnt recommend the free ones either, they are too
limited and outdated, imho.

> > Having said all this: While IDA is a very powerfull tool, sometimes it
> > is better to use the disassembler which is given with the assembler you
> > are using yourself. That is, if do not want to look into the code, but
> > also to create an assembleable version (for your own modifications), you
> > might be better off using the disassembler which comes with your
> > assembler.
>
> The keyword here is "also" - that's exactly what I need it for.

i did that too - its pretty easy to make IDA output code that can be assembled
with your favourite assembler (either with a simple script or by adding a
custom output format to the cpu module - for that you need the PRO one with
SDK though)

> > That's why I often use da65 from the cc65 package.
>
> I used to use it too. And still use it for smaller things but I remember
> what kind of PITA it was to create the "infofiles" when something bigger
> needed to be disassembled.

have a look at nostalgias "regenerator" - it has many of IDAs features and
produces code that can be assembled with 64tass (iirc). (you might need WINE
to run on linux)

--

http://www.hitmen-console.org    http://magicdisk.untergrund.net
http://www.pokefinder.org        http://ar.pokefinder.org

I am pretty sure that whenever you make the statement "I am right and the
entire industry is wrong." you are, in fact, the one who is wrong. Unless your
name happens to be Steve Wozniak, and it happens to be 1976.



       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Ruud
In reply to this post by silverdr-2
Hallo Patryk,


> ... so would like to ask you for your favourites in this area.

My own AD, Auto Disassembler, off course :)

- written in Free Pascal, compiles under Linux as well.
- sources are free
- disassembles Z80 and 6800 a well
- using a directive file you can give variabels and subroutines the
correct name right from the start

It starts disassembling from a give address, reset, NMI or IRQ. It
is not an emulator so it cannot handle indirect jumps. OTOH you can
tell it in the DIR file where to find tables so it can use those as
starting point.

A bit more info you can find at:

     http://www.baltissen.org/newhtm/auto_dis.htm

Of course the output is targetted on my own assembler. But IMHO it
shouldn't be a big problem to tell AD to outpu another format.

My favourite 8088 assembler is NASM. But its disassembler sucks. So
I wrote one myself, based upon AD. It only supports the 8088 and
(partly ?) the 80286. I mainly use it to disassemble old XT BIOSes
and smaller hardware related programs and SYS files.


--
   
Kind regards / Met vriendelijke groet, Ruud Baltissen
www.Baltissen.org







       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

silverdr-2
In reply to this post by Groepaz

> On 2017-06-29, at 21:29, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> i did that too - its pretty easy to make IDA output code that can be assembled
> with your favourite assembler (either with a simple script or by adding a
> custom output format to the cpu module - for that you need the PRO one with
> SDK though)

I understand. And I don't argue it's value. I guess it is well worth the price they're asking but without being able to evaluate it (sorry - the evaluation version is a poor joke) there is no way for me to pay the non-trivial sum.

>>> That's why I often use da65 from the cc65 package.
>>
>> I used to use it too. And still use it for smaller things but I remember
>> what kind of PITA it was to create the "infofiles" when something bigger
>> needed to be disassembled.
>
> have a look at nostalgias "regenerator" - it has many of IDAs features and
> produces code that can be assembled with 64tass (iirc). (you might need WINE
> to run on linux)

I spent some time but didn't have much success running it with wine/mono so I eventually gave up and installed all the ".NET" stuff in my virtual Windows machine. Although it still feels highly "unpolished" to me, it seems in fact to be going in the direction I'd be envisioning myself. Might be good once they move to something cross-platform. Mono at least.

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

silverdr-2
In reply to this post by Ruud

> On 2017-06-30, at 07:24, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Hallo Patryk,
>
>> ... so would like to ask you for your favourites in this area.
>
> My own AD, Auto Disassembler, off course :)

Yeah - want to have it done right? Do it yourself! :-)

> - written in Free Pascal, compiles under Linux as well.
> - sources are free
> - disassembles Z80 and 6800 a well
> - using a directive file you can give variabels and subroutines the
> correct name right from the start

Let's have a look. Can I get the sources to try to compile them here?

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Konrad B
https://retro.moe/2015/11/18/disassembling-6502-code-with-radare-part-i/

Radare = modern day, open source "IDA".

Regards,
Konrad

2017-06-30 12:36 GMT+02:00  <[hidden email]>:

>
>> On 2017-06-30, at 07:24, [hidden email] wrote:
>>
>> Hallo Patryk,
>>
>>> ... so would like to ask you for your favourites in this area.
>>
>> My own AD, Auto Disassembler, off course :)
>
> Yeah - want to have it done right? Do it yourself! :-)
>
>> - written in Free Pascal, compiles under Linux as well.
>> - sources are free
>> - disassembles Z80 and 6800 a well
>> - using a directive file you can give variabels and subroutines the
>> correct name right from the start
>
> Let's have a look. Can I get the sources to try to compile them here?
>
> --
> SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/
>
>
>        Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

silverdr-2

> On 2017-06-30, at 12:55, Konrad B <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> https://retro.moe/2015/11/18/disassembling-6502-code-with-radare-part-i/
>
> Radare = modern day, open source "IDA".

That's interesting! I am not sure if I'll have enough patience to teach myself to use it efficiently but admittedly it looks very interesting. Being open-sourced clearly adds value too.

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Steve Gray
In reply to this post by silverdr-2
I was going to agree with Ruud... I also prefer "my" disassembler ;-)

It's part of CBM-Transfer. It's an interactive symbolic disassembler with code tracing and pre-defined platforms. It supports opcodes for most 6502 variations. You can import regenerator files as well.  Source is available and I am actively working on it.

Steve



From: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 6:37 AM
Subject: Re: Disassembler preference?


> On 2017-06-30, at 07:24, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> Hallo Patryk,
>
>> ... so would like to ask you for your favourites in this area.
>
> My own AD, Auto Disassembler, off course :)

Yeah - want to have it done right? Do it yourself! :-)

> - written in Free Pascal, compiles under Linux as well.
> - sources are free
> - disassembles Z80 and 6800 a well
> - using a directive file you can give variabels and subroutines the
> correct name right from the start

Let's have a look. Can I get the sources to try to compile them here?

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/



      Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Ethan Dicks
In reply to this post by silverdr-2
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 3:17 PM,  <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> That's why I often use da65 from the cc65 package.
>
> I used to use it too. And still use it for smaller things but I remember what kind of PITA it was to create the "infofiles" when something bigger needed to be disassembled.

I also use da65, and it is a bit cumbersome for larger projects, but a
2K ROM isn't too bad.

-ethan

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Nils Eilers
In reply to this post by Konrad B
> https://retro.moe/2015/11/18/disassembling-6502-code-with-radare-part-i/
>
> Radare = modern day, open source "IDA".

Thanks a lot, that looks really interesting. I'll give it a try next
time I'm in need of a disassembler.

Nils


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Disassembler preference?

Groepaz
In reply to this post by Konrad B
On Friday 30 June 2017, 12:55:03 Konrad B <[hidden email]> wrote:
> https://retro.moe/2015/11/18/disassembling-6502-code-with-radare-part-i/
>
> Radare = modern day, open source "IDA".

VEERRY different to use however, i never really got the hang of it :)

--

http://www.hitmen-console.org    http://magicdisk.untergrund.net
http://www.pokefinder.org        http://ar.pokefinder.org

Knowing what to optimize matters as much as knowing how to optimize.
Otherwise, you'll optimize the wrong thing, and end up with really fast slow
code.
<Michael Abrash>



       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Loading...