Carlos, Thanks for the detailed reply. As a general rule I ignore the pintype errors since I will need to violate them at times. Since my original post I've observed that smaller files work better than large ones. In any case, we'll grab the update to g_netlist.c from cvs and try again.
Thanks again for your help. Joe T -----Original Message----- >From: Carlos Nieves Ónega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Feb 15, 2006 1:44 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: gEDA-user: gnetlist errors > >Hi Joe, > >El mar, 14-02-2006 a las 14:33 -0800, joeft escribió: >[snip] >> I've numbered the two sections of my slotted part with the same reference >> designator (per the gsch2pcb tutorial). I would expect (at worst) that >> I might get a duplicate reference designator error, but not that it would >> fail to finish. If I number them differently (e.g. U1A, U1B ...) I don't >> believe that PCB will think they're the same part. > >I think this is related to your previous error number 3... thus I hope >it is fixed in the last release. > >[snip] >> >Thanks for the reply. Based on previous discussions, I have considered >> >updated to the next release, but we're in the middle of a large project >> >and am not sure we can take on the risk of changing tool sets just now. >> >Installing the release I'm using (20050805), took more effort than >> >expected. Having the last error fixed is a benefit I'll have to weigh. > >If you want to get your last error fixed, and you can recompile the >code, you only have to patch gnetlist/src/g_netlist.c as shown in CVS >(version 1.39 to 1.40). It is a simple patch that won't hurt you. > >> >Having the symbols updated won't help me much. I'm using custom symbols >> >for the most part. This is not my preference, but this whole design was >> >ported from another tool (schematic pages and all symbols) and for the >> >most part, the existing gEDA symbols "don't fit". Eventually, I'd like >> >to re-work everything to take advantage of updated gEDA symbol libraries. > >The changes made to the symbols are mainly because of missing or wrong >pintype and pinlabel attributes. The pintype attribute is an important >one for the drc2 backend, because it checks if an output pin is >connected to another output pin, for example. >If you don't update the symbols, you just will get warnings like >"unknown connected to unknown", which means that a pin with pintype >"unknown" is connected to another pin with pintype "unknown". You can >ignore them if you want. > >The drc2 backend is highly configurable, so you can skip the pintype >test if you want. See the documentation inside gnet-drc2.scm file (look >for dont-check-pintypes-of-nets). > >Regards, > >Carlos >
