Description of problem:
I'm not really sure what the proper ruling is there, but I thought we
were dropping references to "AMD64", chosing "X86_64" instead, as
that's the more general term which describes both "AMD64" and "EM64T"
 At a minimum, should probably mimic the behavior that we currently
have on the live site, where packages/systems are described as
"AMD64/Intel EM64T"

Examples:

errata/RHSA-2004-467.html lists "x86_64"
network/errata/details/index.pxt?eid=2400 lists "AMD64/EM64T"
network/errata/details/package_list.pxt?eid=2400 lists "AMD64/EM64T"
network/software/packages/details.pxt?pid=266702 lists the package
   with "x86_64.rpm", but Arch is shown as "AMD64" and Available
   Archs shows "AMD64"

**** Related note!  Isn't the plural of "arch" "arches"? ****

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info: