> First of all, who cares if it started there.
>
> Problem with architecture is that we may want to have: port: sparc;
> architecture: sun4c/sun4m/sun4d. On the other hand, probably
> architecture on the SPARC could be named something else.
I'd be quite happy with "architecture" being a multiple-part field. This
is an issue for the ARM as well. So you could have "arch: sparc/sun4m" or
"arch: arm/arm4". Conceivably the m68k people might want to distinguish
Amigas from Ataris or something, and the Alpha guys might want
LCA/CIA/whatever. It's only really the Intel case where the hardware is
so heterogeneous that "i386" is all you need to describe the system.
phil