> As far as moving the tree to be dm320/mr-500, I don't particularly care, but
> personally I think it's easier to keep the targets completely independent
> till they reach a mature state (which I think very few of our targets are
> in) and then maybe the code can be re-factored to reduce some of the
> duplicate stuff between similar targets.  Right now we're the only DM320
> target, so I don't think it's critical to do right now and just dealing with
> all the cruft between the different arm targets annoys me.  crt0 is a good
> example as well as system-target...  I just think it would be easier if the
> low level stuff was completely independent for now - it also reduces the
> risk of breaking other targets while we're developing.
>