Thank you for the description.  Based on that, the TS-7200 could probably
easily be classified as a complete system; though a very modular one.  It
does have a small enclosure and power-supply board of its own though it is
often just sold as the board (a lot of customers build their own
enclosures/power supplies).  It also has PC/104 (ISA) slots to add
peripherals including video.  We do ship and sell a PC/104 VGA video board
with PS/2 mouse and keyboard connectors though this doesn't quite work
with the TS-7200 netbsd port yet however since the VGA board has a x86
BIOS extension thats required to properly initialize them.  We are
currently building a LCD/VGA daughter card with touch screen controller
that we will be supporting on the ARM boards.  I *have* to make this card
work with Linux on the ARM since thats currently what all our customers
are using, but I'd like to also make it work with NetBSD.  For this card,
a USB keyboard would be assumed.

The "disk" for this board is the compact flash socket.  Compact flash
cards look just like an IDE device and I have seen some up to 4GB large. 
You really need at least a 256MB one for NetBSD, and if you want, there
are CF to 40pin IDE adapters available if you want to attach a real hard
drive (though you're only gonna get the PIO speeds)  You can buy the cards
with boards/enclosures from us and we can currently preload a Linux OS on
them, though its usually more economical to purchase from somebody like
CostCo, where a 512MB card is currently going for around $46.

I have some pictures up of the board w/enclosure at
http://www.embeddedARM.com/~joff/

//Jesse Off

> Iyonix, Shark, Netwinder and Cats are all pretty much complete systems
> (PC's if you wish, except for the different CPU).  They have video,
> keyboard, mouse, disk and in most cases PCI/ISA slots as standard.  They
> are also generally supplied in boxes with power supplies and all the other
> necessary baggage for you to plug them in and use them.
>
> I don't know anything about the board you've done a port for, but if it
> fits the above criteria, then I'd suggest it warrants a 'port' of its own.
>  If not, then it probably belongs as a sub-port of evbarm.
>
> R.