|Looking for disassembler, decompiler, discompiler or whatever. firstname.lastname@example.org (2001-09-03)|
|Re: Looking for disassembler, decompiler, discompiler or whatever. email@example.com (MickaŽl Pointier) (2001-09-11)|
|Re: Looking for disassembler, decompiler, discompiler or whatever. firstname.lastname@example.org (2001-09-11)|
|Re: Looking for disassembler, decompiler, discompiler or whatever. email@example.com (david lindauer) (2001-09-11)|
|Re: Looking for disassembler, decompiler, discompiler or whatever. firstname.lastname@example.org (Tzvetan Mikov) (2001-09-16)|
|Re: Looking for disassembler, decompiler, discompiler or whatever. email@example.com (2001-09-16)|
|From:||"Tzvetan Mikov" <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||16 Sep 2001 00:28:47 -0400|
|Organization:||@Work Internet powered by @Home Network|
|Posted-Date:||16 Sep 2001 00:28:47 EDT|
"MickaŽl Pointier" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org...
> > Platform: Linux/PowerPC
> > My question is: is there any tool that, given exe, will give an
> > assembly which looks like the one generated by "gcc -S *.c"? Or, in
> > the example, given a.out, will generate hello0.s?
> So far, all the reverse-engeeniering/disassembler tools I've used were
> very, very bad tools. Some of them eventually manage to give you an
> assembly source code that can be reassembled without error, but that's
> not the case for all of them.
> This tool was a real hacker-dream, but I never find anything close
> to this in the unix/windows world :'(
Not that this bears any relevance to compilers, but:
There is a tool called "Sourcer" from a company called "V
Communications". It is the best disassemler I have ever seen, ages
ahead of anything else, including IDA. It supports all kinds of x86
CPU's, all kinds of file formats (including Win32 PE), it documents
the OS calls and when necessary emulates the code in order to
disassemble it properly.
It is not realistic to expect a tool that magically produces correct
source, but Sourcer get as close to that as possible, IMHO.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.