241 lines
9.3 KiB
Text
241 lines
9.3 KiB
Text
========= Binutils Maintainers =========
|
||
|
||
This is the list of individuals responsible for maintenance and update
|
||
of the GNU Binary Utilities project. This includes the linker (ld),
|
||
the assembler (gas), the profiler (gprof), a whole suite of other
|
||
programs (binutils) and the libraries that they use (bfd and
|
||
opcodes). This project shares a common set of header files with the
|
||
GCC and GDB projects (include), so maintainership of those files is
|
||
shared amoungst the projects.
|
||
|
||
The home page for binutils is:
|
||
|
||
http://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/binutils.html
|
||
|
||
and patches should be sent to:
|
||
|
||
bug-binutils@gnu.org or binutils@sources.redhat.com
|
||
|
||
with "[Patch]" as part of the subject line. Note - patches to the
|
||
top level config.guess and config.sub scripts should be sent to:
|
||
|
||
config-patches@gnu.org
|
||
|
||
and not to the binutils lists. Patches to the other top level
|
||
configure files (configure, configure.in, config-ml.in) should
|
||
be sent to the binutils lists, and copied to the gcc and gdb
|
||
lists as well (gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org and
|
||
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com).
|
||
|
||
--------- Blanket Write Privs ---------
|
||
|
||
The following people have permission to check patches into the
|
||
repository without obtaining approval first:
|
||
|
||
Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> (head maintainer)
|
||
Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
|
||
Ian Taylor <ian@wasabisystems.com>
|
||
Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
|
||
Jim Wilson <wilson@specifixinc.com>
|
||
DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
|
||
Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
|
||
Michael Meissner <gnu@the-meissners.org>
|
||
|
||
--------- Maintainers ---------
|
||
|
||
Maintainers are individuals who are responsible for, and have
|
||
permission to check in changes in, certain subsets of the code. Note
|
||
that maintainers still need approval to check in changes outside of
|
||
the immediate domain that they maintain.
|
||
|
||
If there is no maintainer for a given domain then the responsibility
|
||
falls to the head maintainer (above). If there are several
|
||
maintainers for a given domain then responsibility falls to the first
|
||
maintainer. The first maintainer is free to devolve that
|
||
responsibility among the other maintainers.
|
||
|
||
ALPHA Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
|
||
ARM Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
|
||
ARM Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
|
||
ARM (Symbian) Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
|
||
ARM (Symbian) Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
|
||
AVR Denis Chertykov <denisc@overta.ru>
|
||
AVR Marek Michalkiewicz <marekm@amelek.gda.pl>
|
||
BUILD SYSTEM Ben Elliston <bje@gnu.org>
|
||
BUILD SYSTEM Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
|
||
CRIS Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com>
|
||
CRX Tomer Levi <Tomer.Levi@nsc.com>
|
||
DWARF2 Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
|
||
FR30 Dave Brolley <brolley@redhat.com>
|
||
FRV Dave Brolley <brolley@redhat.com>
|
||
FRV Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
|
||
HPPA Dave Anglin <dave.anglin@nrc.ca>
|
||
HPPA elf32 Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
|
||
HPPA elf64 Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> [Basic maintainance only]
|
||
IA-64 Jim Wilson <wilson@specifixinc.com>
|
||
IQ2000 Stan Cox <scox@redhat.com>
|
||
i860 Jason Eckhardt <jle@rice.edu>
|
||
ix86 Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
|
||
ix86 PE Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
|
||
ix86 COFF DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
|
||
ix86 H.J.Lu <hjl@gnu.org>
|
||
ix86 INTEL MODE Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com>
|
||
M68HC11 M68HC12 Stephane Carrez <stcarrez@nerim.fr>
|
||
M68k Ben Elliston <bje@gnu.org>
|
||
MAXQ Inderpreet Singh <inderpreetb@noida.hcltech.com>
|
||
MIPS Eric Christopher <echristo@redhat.com>
|
||
MIPS Thiemo Seufer <seufer@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>
|
||
MMIX Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com>
|
||
MN10300 Eric Christopher <echristo@redhat.com>
|
||
MN10300 Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
|
||
PPC Geoff Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>
|
||
PPC vector ext Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com>
|
||
s390, s390x Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
|
||
SH J<>rn Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com>
|
||
SH Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
|
||
SH Kaz Kojima <kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp>
|
||
SPARC Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
|
||
TESTSUITES Ben Elliston <bje@gnu.org>
|
||
TIC4X Svein Seldal <svein.seldal@solidas.com>
|
||
TIC54X Timothy Wall <twall@alum.mit.edu>
|
||
VAX Jason R Thorpe <thorpej@netbsd.org>
|
||
x86_64 Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
|
||
x86_64 Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
|
||
Xtensa Bob Wilson <bob.wilson@acm.org>
|
||
z8k Christian Groessler <chris@groessler.org>
|
||
|
||
|
||
--------- CGEN Maintainers -------------
|
||
|
||
CGEN is a tool for building, amongst other things, assemblers,
|
||
disassemblers and simulators from a single description of a CPU.
|
||
It creates files in several of the binutils directories, but it
|
||
is mentioned here since there is a single group that maintains
|
||
CGEN and the files that it creates.
|
||
|
||
If you have CGEN related problems you can send email to;
|
||
|
||
cgen@sources.redhat.com
|
||
|
||
The current CGEN maintainers are:
|
||
|
||
Doug Evans, Ben Elliston, Frank Eigler
|
||
|
||
--------- Write After Approval ---------
|
||
|
||
Individuals with "write after approval" have the ability to check in
|
||
changes, but they must get approval for each change from someone in
|
||
one of the above lists (blanket write or maintainers).
|
||
|
||
[It's a huge list, folks. You know who you are. If you have the
|
||
*ability* to do binutils checkins, you're in this group. Just
|
||
remember to get approval before checking anything in.]
|
||
|
||
------------- Obvious Fixes -------------
|
||
|
||
Fixes for obvious mistakes do not need approval, and can be checked in
|
||
right away, but the patch should still be sent to the binutils list.
|
||
The definition of obvious is a bit hazy, and if you are not sure, then
|
||
you should seek approval first. Obvious fixes include fixes for
|
||
spelling mistakes, blatantly incorrect code (where the correct code is
|
||
also blatantly obvious), and so on. Obvious fixes should always be
|
||
small, the larger they are, the more likely it is that they contain
|
||
some un-obvious side effect or consequence.
|
||
|
||
--------- Branch Checkins ---------
|
||
|
||
If a patch is approved for check in to the mainline sources, it can
|
||
also be checked into the current release branch. Normally however
|
||
only bug fixes should be applied to the branch. New features, new
|
||
ports, etc, should be restricted to the mainline. (Otherwise the
|
||
burden of maintaining the branch in sync with the mainline becomes too
|
||
great). If you are uncertain as to whether a patch is appropriate for
|
||
the branch, ask the branch maintainer. This is:
|
||
|
||
Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
|
||
|
||
-------- Testsuites ---------------
|
||
|
||
In general patches to any of the binutils testsuites should be
|
||
considered generic and sent to the binutils mailing list for
|
||
approval. Patches to target specific tests are the responsibility the
|
||
relevent port maintainer(s), and can be approved/checked in by them.
|
||
Other testsuite patches need the approval of a blanket-write-priveleges
|
||
person.
|
||
|
||
-------- Configure patches ----------
|
||
|
||
Patches to the top level configure files (config.sub & config.guess)
|
||
are not the domain of the binutils project and they cannot be approved
|
||
by the binutils group. Instead they should be submitted to the config
|
||
maintainer at:
|
||
|
||
config-patches@gnu.org
|
||
|
||
--------- Creating Branches ---------
|
||
|
||
Anyone with at least write-after-approval access may create a branch
|
||
to use for their own development purposes. In keeping with FSF
|
||
policies, all patches applied to such a branch must come from people
|
||
with appropriate copyright assignments on file. All legal
|
||
requirements that would apply to any other contribution apply equally
|
||
to contributions on a branch.
|
||
|
||
Before creating the branch, you should select a name for the branch of
|
||
the form:
|
||
|
||
binutils-<org>-<name>
|
||
|
||
where "org" is the initials of your organization, or your own initials
|
||
if you are acting as an individual. For example, for a branch created
|
||
by The GNUDist Company, "tgc" would be an appropriate choice for
|
||
"org". It's up to each organization to select an appropriate choice
|
||
for "name"; some organizations may use more structure than others, so
|
||
"name" may contain additional hyphens.
|
||
|
||
Suppose that The GNUDist Company was creating a branch to develop a
|
||
port of Binutils to the FullMonty processor. Then, an appropriate
|
||
choice of branch name would be:
|
||
|
||
binutils-tgc-fm
|
||
|
||
A data stamp is not required as part of the name field, but some
|
||
organizations like to have one. If you do include the date, you
|
||
should follow these rules:
|
||
|
||
1. The date should be the date that the branch was created.
|
||
|
||
2. The date should be numerical and in the form YYYYMMDD.
|
||
|
||
For example:
|
||
|
||
binutils-tgc-fm_20050101
|
||
|
||
would be appropriate if the branch was created on January 1st, 2005.
|
||
|
||
Having selected the branch name, create the branch as follows:
|
||
|
||
1. Check out binutils, so that you have a CVS checkout corresponding
|
||
to the initial state of your branch.
|
||
|
||
2. Create a tag:
|
||
|
||
cvs tag binutils-<org>-<name>-branchpoint
|
||
|
||
That tag will allow you, and others, to easily determine what's
|
||
changed on the branch relative to the initial state.
|
||
|
||
3. Create the branch:
|
||
|
||
cvs rtag -b -r binutils-<org>-<name>-branchpoint \
|
||
binutils-<org>-<name>-branch
|
||
|
||
4. Document the branch:
|
||
|
||
Add a description of the branch to binutils/BRANCHES, and check
|
||
that file in. All branch descriptions should be added to the
|
||
HEAD revision of the file; it doesn't help to modify
|
||
binutils/BRANCHES on a branch!
|
||
|
||
Please do not commit any patches to a branch you did not create
|
||
without the explicit permission of the person who created the branch.
|