sgml entities for CPU architectures?

[Ben Kaduk]

On 9/22/07, Dmitry Morozovsky <marck at rinet.ru> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007, Ben Kaduk wrote:
>
> BK> > >> I'm updating my patch to the FAQ (docs/115000) for danger@'s
> BK> > >> (somewhat) new daily snapshot
> BK> > >> builds, which are specific to x86 and amd64.  Should I just use literals for
> BK> > >> these architectures, or are the entity-ified somewhere that I haven't found yet?
[snip]
> I can see in share/sgml/freebsd.ent:
>
> <!-- Entities for various architectures.  These are to be used
>      only for denoting a variant of FreeBSD for a particular
>      architecture (e.g. &os;/&arch.i386;).  Other entities should
>      be used when referring generically to an architecture,
>      particularly because entities such as &i386; properly
>      denote trademarks and registered trademarks. -->
> <!ENTITY arch.alpha "alpha">
> <!ENTITY arch.amd64 "amd64">
> <!ENTITY arch.arm "arm">
> <!ENTITY arch.i386 "i386">
> <!ENTITY arch.ia64 "ia64">
> <!ENTITY arch.pc98 "pc98">
> <!ENTITY arch.powerpc "powerpc">
> <!ENTITY arch.sparc64 "sparc64">
> <!ENTITY arch.sun4v "sun4v">
>
> This is from rev 1.93 of freebsd.ent:
>
>   date: 2007/08/11 19:17:41;  author: bmah;  state: Exp;  lines: +15 -0
>   Add &arch.*; entities for the various architectures.  These
>   should only be used when referring to a version of FreeBSD on
>   a specific architecture, e.g. &os;/&arch.i386;.  Use other,
>   already existing entities (such as &i386;) when talking generically
>   about an architecture, in order to attribute trademarks correctly.
>
>

Thanks, Dmitry.  These seem reasonable to describe danger@'s daily
builds of FreeBSD-i386 and FreeBSD-amd64.

I'm just surprised that I didn't see them before; I thought I looked
in share/sgml/

-Ben Kaduk