This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Re: Questions about upstreaming a new port [MRISC32]


On December 16, 2018 at 12:47 AM GMT+01:00, Joel Sherrill <joel@rtems.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 15, 2018, 4:57 PM m <<m@bitsnbites.eu> wrote:
> 
> 
> > Hello all!
> > 
> > As part of my hobby CPU project (called MRISC32) I have made an initial
> > port of binutils for the CPU.
> > 
> > Currently I'm fine with keeping the port as a patch series in a personal
> > Git repository (that I keep rebasing on top of the latest version of
> > binutils). However...
> > 
> > What are the requirements for getting a port upstreamed? (I can
> > understand that a CPU architecture may be out of scope for mainline
> > binutils if it's not a "popular CPU", but I'm still interested in
> > knowing what you think)
> > 
> One fundamental requirement is to have a copyright assignment on file with
> the FSF.
> Ok, got it. I'm also interested in what your requirements are for considering including a new CPU architecture into binutils.


> 
> 
> > 
> > More information about the CPU project can be found on GitHub [1], and
> > the binutils port is also maintained in a Git repository on GitHub [2].
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > 
> > Marcus Geelnard
> > 
> > 
> > [1] <https://github.com/mbitsnbites/mrisc32>
> > 
> > [2] <https://github.com/mbitsnbites/binutils-mrisc32>
> > 
> > 
> >


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]