Bill Sommerfeld wrote:

> A cross-architecture machine-independant way to express cpu features
> should provide an abstraction of a feature set, not a simple
> one-dimensional level.

For my original intended use (shared library selection), a feature
set doesn't scale.  If you've got 5 features, you don't want to have
32 difference libraries to choose from.  My initial thinking was that
feature set info should be a MD thing and in a machdep.<something>
sysctl.

Simon.
--
Simon Burge                            <simonb@wasabisystems.com>
NetBSD Sales, Support and Service:  http://www.wasabisystems.com/