Subject: evbsh3 -> evbsh3{el,bl}
To: None <>
From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <>
List: port-sh3
Date: 01/03/2001 23:42:58
	from the following comment, i believe we should split evbsh3
	into evbsh3el and evbsh3eb (MACHINE_ARCH will be separate too).

	there are couple of questions:
	- is sys/arch/evbsh3/evbsh3/shb.c really dependent to evbsh3?
	  should we move it to sys/arch/sh3/sh3?
	- is "sh3" a good name?  "i386" is okay then we should be okay :-)
	  "superh"?  "hitachi-sh"?
	other items are minor details, but first of all i'd like to hear
	your opinion...