Hi Ben,

On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Ben Harris wrote:
> An awkward aspect of both of these from my point of view is that they
> force me to split my code in half, since we presumably wouldn't want all
> of arm26 in the cpu (or arch/arm) directory.  This seems a somewhat
> artificial split.  It also means I need to rename my port
> (NetBSD/archimedes?), but that's hardly valid grounds for objection.

yeah... in the case of arm26 it sure is a bit artificial... hmmm... well
maybe then just a /ports/archimedes ? with no arm26 branch?

> Incidentally, I think if we went for sys/cpu/*, it should all be bundled
> away under sys/cpu/arm, so as to save clutter in sys/cpu.

I agree ... then the ARM/Intel XScale can me under sys/cpu/arm/xscale or
so... or sys/cpu/xscale ... i dunno

I dont see that much difference really in the Xscale support; sure it
needs a Xscale aware bootloader and kernel support, but i dont think its
gonna be shocking different ....  and it can be optimised later anyway.

Cheers,
Reinoud