Re: Guidelines for choosing MACHINE & MACHINE_ARCH?

[Matt Thomas <matt%3am-software.com@localhost>]

> On Jun 24, 2015, at 10:27 AM, Jeff Rizzo <riz%tastylime.net@localhost> wrote:
> 
> On 6/24/15 7:13 AM, matthew green wrote:
>> David Holland writes:
>>> 
>>> I think keeping evb* for boards makes sense, though.
>> i dunno.
>> 
>> i don't see what it adds.  in particular, "evb" means evaluation
>> board, and there are heaps of things in evb* that are *not*
>> evaluation boards, but stuff that might have once been once.
>> 
>> i wish we'd just collapse as much as possible back to plain old
>> MACHINE=MACHINE_ARCH=whatever.  i just don't see any value or
>> validity in "evb".  is ERLITE an evaluation board?  what about
>> the RPI or CUBIE* systems?  they come pretty complete AFAICT,
>> designed as end-user systems, not what we used to consider as
>> being "evalation boards".
>> 
>> 
> 
> I agree that evb* is confusing and increasingly meaningless and would like to see us transition away from it.

I contend that moving to sys/arch/<cpu> is incorrect which there are multiple MACHINE values for that CPU.  sys/tem/mips (haha!) or sys/platform/mips (yuk) or sys/arch/<cpu>sys or something better.