Re: gEDA-user: solder/component -- top/bottom ?
On 09/18/2011 07:56 PM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote: DJ's clarification aside, I would vote for top/bottom, with each of those symbolically being placed in the list. That is, for an 8-layer default: Top, Layer 2, Layer 3, ..., Layer 7, Bottom +1 JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: coding style
On 09/18/2011 10:04 PM, Andrew Poelstra wrote: Well, C itself doesn't seem to be used too much outside of 10 year old code. Nowadays the language du jour seems to be Python, and C is only used for library-type projects that want many language bindings. IMHO everything should be Lisp.;) :-) JG -- Ecosensory ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: solder/component -- top/bottom ?
On 09/18/2011 08:16 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: You're +1'ing something we already have, Whoops. On 09/18/2011 08:16 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: So... go get the release and test it OK. There's another unfinished/overdue project on my to do list... I will attempt to swap sleep/insomnia for executing parts of that project during the nights upcoming this fall... JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: solder/component -- top/bottom ?
On 09/18/2011 09:01 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: This patch replaces component and solder in the leftmost item of the status line of the GTK HID with top and bottom. Thanks for work to improve the GUI Kai-Martin. JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: cygwin geda tools
On Sep 13, 2011, at 9:00 AM, Dan Roganti wrote: I noticed that the Mac is also supported, but it's practically a given since it's basically uinx underneath. The difference between Windows and Mac here is that Charles Lepple has routinely packaged new releases for Fink on MacOSX, while the various Windows installers have been one-shot deals. Nobody has stepped forward to do this as a routine job for each new release of gEDA on Windows. We shouldn't disparage the user as we do with other platforms - although we do try to bring them over in many cases. I don't think there's any tendency to disparage Windows users here. There is a tendency to be annoyed with demands that the gEDA project create Windows binaries. The gEDA project basically creates source code. For other systems, there are communities of package maintainers (real heroes!) who do the work of ferreting out incompatibilities and creating the binaries. That kind of community effort has not taken hold in the Windows world. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: cygwin geda tools
On Sep 13, 2011, at 9:53 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: Nobody has stepped forward to do this as a routine job for each new release of gEDA on Windows. Yes, I have. Peter and I have been working on the details, but I've been doing automated builds of geda for windows for a while now. I just haven't advertised them much because we're still testing and debugging them. And PCB has had windows releases in the past with some regularity anyway, the big problem is that the release relied on a now-obsolete cygwin feature, so we have to cross-build them now. OK, so you and Peter intend to take on the additional burden of routinely packaging for Windows? Above and beyond the call of duty for a developer, I think. I don't think there's any tendency to disparage Windows users here. The geda web site explicitly says that windows users are not supported. And there's plenty of history on the mailing list saying that the regulars would rather not have windows users involved. I think you misread the mailing list. We regulars would rather not torque the project around to be Windows-centric. But I have no objection to bringing Windows users on board: Peter can tell you that I've privately thanked him for his (lower key) efforts here in the past. Some of my customers use Windows: it's handy for them to be able to display and edit the schematics themselves. We've done a poor job of making potential windows users welcome and it will take quite a bit of work to reverse that. We've done exactly as much to make Windows users welcome as we've done for Mac users. The difference is that the Mac community (in the persons of Charles Lepple and whoever packages for MacPorts) has stepped up here while the Windows community has not. There is a tendency to be annoyed with demands that the gEDA project create Windows binaries. There is a tendency to be annoyed with demands for *anything*, but we do recognize the need for windows support and we *are* working on it. I don't see that as a developer responsibility, but I'm all for it, especially if you guys can sustain it. The problem with past Windows binaries is that they've been one-shot deals. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: cygwin geda tools
On Sep 13, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Colin D Bennett wrote: How much Unix tools does gEDA really need to run? Just the Scheme interpreter? Optional tools need a variety of support, e.g. Perl for refdes_renum, Python for tragesym. To participate in gedasymbols.org, you need CVS, and some of the scripts there use AWK. Some design flows use Make. gEDA can export netlist data to many tools, but of course you'd need the tool in question to actually use this capability. gEDA is *not* a self-contained system. Hurray for that! John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: plugins (was: How can you help...)
My suggestion is to first create an outline. The first n sections should be in tutorial form, using a small example, and focusing on the main steps, beginning with installation of the tool(s), problem statement (going from schematic to board layout to what needs to shipped to a board house). This section should contain a number of subsections (1-2 pages in length for each subsection) that is a susccinct description of the the task. Related, but not main stream topics can be forward referenced to another section later in the document. For example, making a design from the built in libaraies would be in the first major section, with a forward pointer to a detailed section about how to make your own objects in libaries, and yet another subsection could deal with library management (concepts and approaches, perhaps with one example illustrated - for example, managing libraries on a personal workstation). So, the doc would have two sections: Section 1 - Main tutorial Each subsection in the tutorial would be listed in the outline, so one could read through the outline and see the steps involved in producing a board. Section 2 - Expanded topics referenced in the tutorial Each subsection in this section would address a specific topic referenced in Section 1. Each subsection should be self contained, ie. how to create a symbols, how to manage symbol libraries, etc. Lots of screen shots should be in both sections as appropriate I would be happy to review the outline and the development, and provide feedback. -John On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak [1]k...@familieknaak.de wrote: Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote: Somehow missed this thread and replied on the other one... Count me in for documentation. Please let me know what I can do. I still have to decide, where to start. An overview? A getting started? A HOWTO? A table of contents to be filled? Some of the documentation I have written previously is here: gEDA-Tutorials.pdf on [2]https://sites.google.com/site/abhijit86k/linux/geda Nice. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Email: [3]k...@familieknaak.de [4]http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x6C0B9F53 Moderation of geda-user seems to be lifted somewhat, lately. I am still unhappy with it. Why? Because it is completely nontransparent. ___ geda-user mailing list [5]geda-user@moria.seul.org [6]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:k...@familieknaak.de 2. https://sites.google.com/site/abhijit86k/linux/geda 3. mailto:k...@familieknaak.de 4. http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x6C0B9F53 5. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 6. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: reasons for wikibook (was: plugins)
On Sep 12, 2011, at 8:43 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: developers. They're your greatest source of information on how the tools work. At the reference manual level, perhaps (although when I documented the gnetlist scheme primitives I didn't get much developer help). But at the level of toolkit use, I don't think so. The developers appear to to be focused on a small subset of gEDA's broad application space. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: plugins (was: How can you help...)
On Sep 12, 2011, at 8:05 AM, John Hudak wrote: So, the doc would have two sections: There's nothing whatever preventing you from creating gEDA documentation and publishing it on your own site (or gedasymbols.org: even us black sheep are accepted there). That's what Stuart Brorson did when he created his great tutorial, even though he was an insider. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Speaker SPICE modeling with gschem and ng-spice/gnucap
On Sep 12, 2011, at 3:09 PM, Hannu Vuolasaho wrote: I have been playing with one guitar amplifier project for a while and so far the amplifier design has been more or less copy and paste and simulate and guess from graphs. However I bumped in net this blog post http://nordicnerd.blogspot.com/2011/08/active-speakers-spice-with-actual-audio.html Is it possible to do same thing? Input wav to simulator and get speaker's output and hear it? I know it's not perfect but it could be very helpful. Has someone done this before and provide some hints, examples or links? Shouldn't be too hard. ngspice seems to have no limit to the length of a PWL spec. Put the audio in some simple form (like raw binary samples), write a tiny program to convert to PWL. Generate output with .PRINT, write another tiny program to convert to binary samples. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/10/2011 11:33 PM, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote: i find that the documentation for creating hierarchical designs (schematics encapsulated inside a gschem symbol) is rather scattered so I'm going to start off with that first. If anyone has already written this please let me know! I have some notes here: http://www.gedasymbols.org/user/john_griessen/ the pcb-hier-cells Generator is a script changed a little form John Luciani's pcb-matrix http://luciani.org/geda/util/matrix/index.html I'll help you with that write up and editing also. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On Sep 10, 2011, at 10:33 PM, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote: But having lots of searchable (over the internet) docs is much better. For example, I imagine a beginner will run a [google] search for gEDA beginners guide or gSchem Tutorial There are many gEDA flows. Any particular tutorial is going to be wrong for most of them. gEDA is a flexible toolkit: that's its strength. Therefore, the fundamental need is *not* tutorials, but concise reference documentation. In my opinion, we only have one decent tutorial: Stuart Brorson's fine explication of his SPICE flow (http://www.brorson.com/gEDA/SPICE/t1.html). It's good, in part, because it's explicitly about a specific flow. whereas an advanced user will be searching for say PCB complete reference or the keywords pertaining to a particular issue. That only helps if you know the concepts and the keywords. How are you going to look up attribute promotion if you don't already know what it is? That's why voluminous documentation is a disaster: you can waste hours fishing for an unfamiliar concept. One of the things that attracted me to gEDA nine years ago was its concise documentation (at that time). I hate time-wasting complexity. The original concise documentation is still there, but it's lost in the fog. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
Very good point! and if I may add: ALL contained in ONE place, sufficiently reviewed to make it 100% correct with the current version of the tool(s) it is intended to be use with (and stated in the document itself). From my experience, ONE person is accepted as the book boss and is responsible for organizing/coordinating the development/revisions of ALL user documentation. I also believe the book boss should have a user perspective, rather than a developer perspective for the user documentation. If developer documentation is to be (re)organized as well, the same oversight model should be used, and I think a developer should have coordination duties. Just my 0.02 (your favorite currency here...USD, pounds, Euros, etc...) -J On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Stefan Salewski [1]m...@ssalewski.de wrote: On Sat, 2011-09-10 at 10:19 +0530, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote: On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 22:20, Dan Roganti [2]ragoo...@gmail.com wrote: I wouldn't say wipeout, from looking at the current state of documentation, there's been a huge amount of work done there. I would suggest just making some additions and editing some parts to bring some attention to all of the important features. +1. There's lots of good documentation, but there are things missing and lots of details need to be added. I think it would be a very good idea to have some collection of documents (or at least link to these). I'm willing to help with the documentation since I do use gEDA regularly (and i'm not much help with the programming). ~Abhijit What we really should consider: A lot of documentation can be bad. Consider the toys from the big company with the damaged fruit: A reason for the success of the toys is that documentations seems to be not needed. A lot of documentation can make people think that it is very complicated. For gEDA/PCB we have collected a lot of documentation over the years -- some is obsolete/outdated/redundant now or covers details, which most people are not interested in -- at least not when starting with gEDA/PCB. Send to geda-user: Sat Sep 10 13:34:27 CEST 2011 ___ geda-user mailing list [3]geda-user@moria.seul.org [4]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:m...@ssalewski.de 2. mailto:ragoo...@gmail.com 3. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 4. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: EZBOARD -- use gEDA without knowing it
On 09/10/2011 10:35 AM, Jared Casper wrote: A reason for the success of the toys is that documentations seems to be not needed. I agree with the idea, but the thing is, the Apple software that doesn't need documentation doesn't do a whole lot. Yes, and the hobby CAD users want it to be that easy and they get it with limitations from places like PCBExpress. I would not hurt to have an EZBOARD mode where most features are hidden and you can make a mixed through hole and surface mount arduino compatible shield board with a small range of standard components as EZBOARD as falling off a truck. If all the docs for that had the different EZBOARD mode name, there would be no fear of the other features by the low aiming users. It would not hurt either if that name was picked out carefully and registered instead of depending on its inherent unpronouncability, (gEDA, gschem), to keep others from claiming the name. John ezboard might even be available... EzBoard has now switched all its boards to Yuku. On September 8, 2011 Yuku was acquired by CrowdGather, Inc.[5] The acquisition included all legacy ezboard domains. [6] [edit] ezboard history ezboard is a web application, created in 1996[7] by Vanchau Nguyen. One of the earliest user-customisable online message board providers, it quickly grew. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Wire-only Symbols - Netlist problems
On Sep 10, 2011, at 8:19 AM, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote: The problem is solved with the latest gnetlist (1.7.1). Thanks so much! I will be documenting the library of bond graph elements (symbols and definitions). Just wanted to know if anyone uses bond graphs for simulation? No, but I might now that you've made this possible with gEDA. How about publishing this on gedasymbols.org? This is a fine example of what makes gEDA a superior toolkit: it's a powerful foundation for innovative approaches to design automation, rather than merely being an electronic substitute for a drafting board. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/10/2011 06:20 PM, Jared Casper wrote: gEDA is as far away from Fritzing as Word is from NotePad. Jared But they both have many of the same low level primitive commands and actions. I think you could base two apps on the same code and many of the users would never know, since some are so little into craft and so into speed, they would never read about the crafty details. JG PS Fritzing is not all bad... I think it aims to be the arduino-compatible development tool for hardware. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Electromagnetic bike
On Sep 9, 2011, at 5:29 AM, Peter Clifton wrote: If you're after significant resistance, I would go for a copper disk, about 5mm or thicker, with strong magnets - either an electromagnet on an iron core - placed quite close (within a few millimetres) of the spinning disk, OR - some neodymium hard-disk magnets (for example). You could use an aluminim disk (much cheaper, and easier to obtain I'd imagine) - but I would up the thickness. The torque will fall off at low speed, when the magnetic diffusion depth exceeds the thickness of the disk. The diffusion depth is given by: sqrt(dm*t) where dm is the magnetic diffusion coefficient, about 130 cm^2/s for Cu, 230 cm^2/s for Al. The time parameter, t, is essentially the time a point on the disk remains in the vicinity of the magnet. This is, of course, just dimensional analysis: a detailed model of the field configuration is needed if you need to be more quantitative. The same physics leads to the concept of skin depth. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/08/2011 04:14 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: My solution: A titleblock symbol that is really just that. A box, which contains the title, date, version and author, to be printed on the bottom of a page. Because these are global attributes, they can be edited wholesale with the attribute editing dialog. But the symbol includes no frame. I draw the frame after the fact to fit the schematic. The ability to expand on demand is handy, if the circuit needs some more components. http://www.gedasymbols.org/user/kai_martin_knaak/symbols/titleblock/title-block.sym I like that idea. I'd like that to be the default for new people also. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/08/2011 04:32 PM, Peter Clifton wrote: Notice there are plenty of single-key bindings there already, for example, the group at the bottom. Hope that helps, Yes, thanks. Maybe I'll create a tutorial based on a keybinding layout that works smoothly with PCB and see if it is popular. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: accel keys
On 09/08/2011 06:58 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: There are a few more that could potentially be matched: gschempcb * start drawing a net [n] start drawing a track [F2] * edit some text [ex] edit some text [n] . . . load layout (no accel) * new [fn] new layout [ctrl-n] * quit [alt-q] quit [ctrl-q] With a few exceptions I'd prefer the PCB accels. I like this. This is a really good start on some UI improvements. I'll try to find time to help. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/08/2011 07:01 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: The number of people using it one way or the other would be voted for with tutorials written and promoted. ... and create quite some confusion during the process. Does not look like a good idea to me. OK, then how about we write it up in your wiki book and get it officially linked to gpleda.org and gedasymbols.org? JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: accel keys
On Sep 9, 2011, at 6:01 PM, John Griessen wrote: On 09/08/2011 06:58 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: There are a few more that could potentially be matched: gschempcb * start drawing a net [n] start drawing a track [F2] * edit some text [ex] edit some text [n] . . . load layout (no accel) * new [fn] new layout [ctrl-n] * quit [alt-q] quit [ctrl-q] With a few exceptions I'd prefer the PCB accels. I like this. This is a really good start on some UI improvements. I'll try to find time to help. I think it's better to stick with Roman letters, rather than the Fn. On some keyboards (Macs, netbooks, ...) the Fn keys require an unusual shift key to be pressed. That would be particularly inconvenient for functions like start drawing a net, that initiate graphical operations. n is very nice in that case: I find myself wishing other graphics programs were so easy. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/08/2011 03:24 AM, Attila Kinali wrote: The good part of kicad was, that producing a PCB is easily possible even if you know nothing about the tool. But getting to more advanced features was hard to impossible within the time i tried it. Now comes the catch: When i was a teenager, i did an electronics project in high school. Not having access to the internet and not knowing anything about OSS (i dont think gEDA existed back then), i got a copy of Orcad for DOS (it was ancient even back then). But, within a day i was able to enter my first test schematics and produce something that looked like a PCB . . . Now the question is, why isn't there any OSS EDA tool out there that combines the availability of complex features with ease of use like Orcad did 20 years ago? If there were one, i'd be happy to throw money at it, to help it being developed. Attila Kinali PS: for my OH project, i decided to stick with comercial tools. If anyone has some time for planning user interface changes, I have a few low level ideas of what is stopping development toward complex features with ease of use. 1. The double keystrokes in gschem need to become single strokes to match with every other UI anywhwere, so de facto standard key commands can be adopted for cut, paste, etc. 2. The scales of symbols and borders in existing libraries needs to be workable for A size or letter size paper out of the box. And the beginner mode should have a create new drawing button that encapsulates this. 3. A tool manager could be the place for some of this new function. A tool manager that integrates the separate tools and serves to reinforce a pcb development work flow as a memory aid and speed tool for infrequent users. 4. PCB needs an alternate mode to start in where sequences of common tasks are started by a single button, rather than, 1. get in the right tool mode, 2. click mouse. For beginners, it needs to include: create traces all with the mouse, place parts all with the mouse, move parts with mouse and a modifier key, drag traces. Use of cut and paste buffers needs to be invisible by default and otional with a workaround that does not require knowing they exist. After these low level stoppers, we should find textbooks to study on GUI design, compare those to Orcad twenty years ago, and copy what is not patented. John Griessen -- Ecosensory ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/08/2011 10:03 AM, Attila Kinali wrote: Yes, i know that the workflow is tool dependent, but there are many tools out there that follow a more or less similar workflow and i think gEDA should match that as well. If there is a good reason to deviate from that common workflow, it should be marked s One way to do an integrated GUI is to do it flow specific, but with settings you can change the flow. When you change the flow, the GUI looks different and has reminders for the chosen flow and nothing else. And a banner at top says, gschem-to-pcb, or gschem-to-PADS, or icarus-verilog-gnucap-simulation-gschem-pcb or, GNSPICE-simulation-gschem-gnetlist-to-chip-layout ... These GUIs could have names to launch the tool manager with the settings set, and some users would use the first one and never open a manual. And John Doty might never write the last one, since he doesn't like a GUI for EDA work. icarus-verilog-gnucap-simulation-gschem-pcb is going to need some low level work first, but you get the idea... Now if I just had a budget. John -- Ecosensory ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
ditto...although I only used it for one digital board. On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Dan Roganti [1]ragoo...@gmail.com wrote: On 09/08/2011 03:24 AM, Attila Kinali wrote: The good part of kicad was, that producing a PCB is easily possible even if you know nothing about the tool. But getting to more advanced features was hard to impossible within the time i tried it. Now comes the catch: When i was a teenager, i did an electronics project in high school. Not having access to the internet and not knowing anything about OSS (i dont think gEDA existed back then), i got a copy of Orcad for DOS (it was ancient even back then). But, within a day i was able to enter my first test schematics and produce something that looked like a PCB yes, OrCad was a very powerful eda tool and to a certain extent quite intuitive. I used this for many years back then. . . . Now the question is, why isn't there any OSS EDA tool out there that combines the availability of complex features with ease of use like Orcad did 20 years ago? I truly believe that you have to take the strict viewpoint of the hardware designers who will be the majority of users -- and not sit back as a programmer --- when it comes to laying out a reasonable User Interface for an EDA Tool. The OrCad tool was a prime example of this. If there were one, i'd be happy to throw money at it, to help it being developed. Attila Kinali I also agree. I would be willing to do the same. I noticed somewhere on the geda website that some arrangement has been made already with Linuxfund.org to help toward this cause. I only see a mention of the PCB tool - and no mention of gSchem or others. I wonder if someone can clarify this here. I think this is one more reason to compile a concise list of features contained in this tool suite as an overview to help new or returning users to see the importance of this project. =Dan ___ geda-user mailing list [2]geda-user@moria.seul.org [3]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:ragoo...@gmail.com 2. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 3. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/08/2011 11:05 AM, Mark Rages wrote: The double keystrokes in gschem are excellent UI. Not as quick to grasp at first, but very very good in practice. . . . I think gschem has a pretty good interface. I only wish PCB used the same shortcuts instead of the random keys it has now. Moving gschem to single strokes would allow better matching of it with PCB, and all the rest, without stopping any good keyboard-via-non-dominant-hand plus mouse-via-dominant-hand computer driving. [jg]I know -- I've done chip layout for pay -- about 28 months worth. On 09/08/2011 11:32 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: Any schematic will fit on any size page, gschem always scales to fit. [jg]I know there is no scale in gschem -- but there is a mismatch of size apparent to a new user because the default page border is out of whack with the symbols. On 09/08/2011 11:32 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: I see no need for a third GUI when there are no other buttons needed. [jg]The function is merely suggested as a learning and reminder device for new and infrequently returning users. On 09/08/2011 11:32 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: Use of cut and paste buffers needs to be invisible by default and otional with a workaround that does not require knowing they exist. I almost never use cut and paste in PCB, and when I do (usually for moving the whole board around), I use the standard Ctrl-X, Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V keystrokes. [jg]Great! This one's already done. It's been a couple months since I've done a layout. I forgot. On 09/08/2011 11:44 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: Let's commission a multi-million dollar study of thousands of projects to see what the best size is. Or just pick a new one;-) [jg]It's mostly about getting some of these beginner things into the defaults. On 09/08/2011 11:50 AM, Dan Roganti wrote: I certainly don't have a problem with the current state of software development with gEDA. I just think it's all in the matter of how you promote it. Since I returned to this, I go straight to the docs, tutorials and examples on your website and such. There's are still some things in the docs which could use some elaboration for new users, beside returning users like myself - [jg]I think DJs docs are fabulous too. John Griessen -- Ecosensory ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/08/2011 11:28 AM, asom...@gmail.com wrote: I find the two-letter commands to be very fast to use. They're one of the main reasons why I prefer gschem to the expensive proprietary program I used at my last job. But maybe that's just because I'm a vi user.;) I think the double strokes could be kept as a settings option, but that would make writing docs hard with two ways to do things. We will always have that problem to a degree, because key bindings are user configurable. How do you teach it when you've changed all the keys to suit yourself? Changing all the keys is common for the speed-layer-outers among us, but I'd still like to see more commonality with mainstream for gschem. Single stroke key commands leaves you with maybe 40 unshifted commands you can do... Seems like enough to me. I bet that after implementing a user configurability like PCB has, and someone, (me), creating a set of commands that single stroke maps to the same action sequences as the double stroke commands, and writing some tutorials, (me), the numbers of future users and tutorials would go to the single stroke and double would be a few people. The number of people using it one way or the other would be voted for with tutorials written and promoted. gschem is not as key binding configurable as PCB as far as I can tell. Adding that would be a fine goal. We should be able to program a gschem single key binding action sequence without a recompile that: selects an object and enables drag on mouse click, continues after mouse up in same mode where next mouse click selects and drags to move. To get out of that mode you would go to the menus or click a button. John -- Ecosensory ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: why some skip KiCAD and gEDA
On 09/08/2011 01:01 PM, Karl Hammar wrote: Don't ever assume that a non native engligh speaker will understand thoose words or view them as anything else than some random characters lumped together. Another reason gschem would benefit from no-recompile-required key binding configurability with action sequences. Besides keys, they can go to menu picks or buttons with user language usage hints. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Electromagnetic bike
On Sep 8, 2011, at 7:16 PM, Rob Butts wrote: Does anyone know the theory behind the design of an electromagnetic bicycle. I thought it was bringing in magnetic fields close to a spinning metal disc but I'm not sure so I'm asking here. Do you mean an eddy current brake? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_current_brake John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: CERN goes for KiCAD
You might want to consider import/export capability for the most widely used commercial product (not sure what that is at the moment). You may want to consider the following as well: 1) An updated tutorial that is accurate (IIRC, last edit is 2007, a bit long in the tooth, not to mention full of errors) 2. Description and verification of a BoM method that works 3. Fix tragsym, and better document how to use it 4. Make sure the tools that your tools require/use do infact interoperate - For example, I recently tried to use Calc (open office equivalent of Excel) and could not find a way to save as text file (tab delimited) option that is required by tragsym 5. Might want to provide a comprehensive and accurate description/document for schematic symbol creation and strongly suggest using that approach. I tried three approaches and the only one that had the shortest learning curve and works was a utube tutorial I found (it was the best I found and not even referenced anywhere in the gscheme website). I understand the 'freedom' to chose one of N ways to do development, or even write your own and hang it out there, but it really needs to work. So, someone followed up one of my posts (I admit it was a bit of a rant) that nothing would make me happywell, actually tools that work according to their usage documentation, and tools that seamlessly interoperate would make me happy. My experience with what I tried clearly does not do this. Once I finally got to generating a PCB I lost my desire to keep forging ahead. The whole deal with m4 libraries versus the others kept nagging at medid I make the 'right' choice? Is this going to somehow screw me in the end? Anyway, I switched to using KiCAD and it was like going from driving a FIAT stick to driving a 911 stick... Why am I saying all this? If someone at CERN who was not to familiar with gEDA picked it up to try and evaluate it, and did the same with KiCAD, and experienced the same problems I did, they would not be impressed, despite the dogma that is perpetuated about not being forced into one design paradigmThe other reason is if someone doesn't provide feedback the developers are going to thing everything is just wonderful. I am trying to provide useful feedback based on my experience. I still 'watch' what is happening here, eventhough I have begun using other tools, mainly because I think the concept is stronger and that it would get better in time. -John On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 8:45 PM, Peter Clifton [1]pc...@cam.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 20:37 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: sad. Which part? The part where CERN found an open source app they liked, or the part where they're going to contribute to OSS? Sounds like a few spare cycles working on KiCad file-format import / export for our tools might be a wise move if we want them to reconsider after they have tried KiCAD. -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: [2]+44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: [3]+44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me) ___ geda-user mailing list [4]geda-user@moria.seul.org [5]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:pc...@cam.ac.uk 2. tel:%2B44%20%280%297729%20980173 3. tel:%2B44%20%280%291223%20748328 4. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 5. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: CERN goes for KiCAD
Um, with all due respectI don't consider myself 'simple minded'I am a professional EE, been working in this industry for a 28+ years, and have a few technical advanced degrees.I have both worked in and managed groups of EEs doing state of the art EE research and design. So, while I am not a hard core EDA user, I have used commercial tools from time to time, ranging from schematic capture to all out intricate board spins. I looked at opensource EDA tools perhaps 10- yrs ago, and decided Eagle was a better option. I decided to look again...my first impression about geda: I liked the philosophy (loosely integrated, extensible, multioptioned tool approach). I looked further...a lot of the last revised dates on documents and some tool drops were YEARS - giving the distinct impression of a dead/dormant effort. I polled a few NG that cater to practicing EEs...gEDA feedback was non-existant. Since I needed to get up to speed fairly quickly, I decided to RTFM and try it. While I fully acknowledge the difficulty of producing good documentation, without conveying the mechanics to potential users, you will loose them, guaranteed. (as an aside, that comment smacks of high power, overly clever sw developers who relish that fact they can program anything but can't keep focused on the real requirements). The more I read, the more I figured I had to 'write my own' scripts to do things (after all, if things don't work what else is there to do?). Um, I did not expect that I'd have to do that much additional work to get what I needed. As my attempts to do simple things resulted in trying yet another tool/approach, the frustrations built, productivity went to zero. Another impression, look at the websites of the two tools. One is definitely more polished than the other. That casts a big impression on potential users. If I have to hunt through 6 different websites and then burrow down 4-5 levels to find out the 'better' tutorial or find out how to do a BoM, that is one sure way to put off potential new users. Hmmm, free speech and free beer...I know there is no 'free lunch'...I have contributed to some open source efforts in the past, by way of small how to's, specialized scripts to do things, etc. I even started to 'clean up' the 2006 tutorial as I went along, figuring I'd 'give back'As I progressed, It became clear that it would be a much bigger job than what I had time for. and finally: Smart people seems to have not really big problems with current gEDA state. If you believe that, you are seriously deluding yourselves. I came across posts from two university instructors who gave up using the tools (I would not consider them 'simple minded'). In a nutshell, user frustration got the best of them. I gave one of my summer students the job of trying to use gschem+pcbhe plain gave up b/c of inefficient use of his time. So, while this is a small sample, it may be wise to consider these issues as the project moves forward. OK, well sorry about the critical posts - it is not personal. If I violated protocol, I apologize. Some insightful ppl made some very good observations about the CERN situation...perhaps those observations may lead to changes for the good. On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Stefan Salewski [1]m...@ssalewski.de wrote: Hello John, I am really happy (and a bit of surprised) that critical postings are still allowed for this list. On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 22:07 -0400, John Hudak wrote: You might want to consider import/export capability for the most widely used commercial product (not sure what that is at the moment). Import/Export is fine for all free/open available formats. Unfortunately many important formats are not free, so we would have to do reverse engineering or use confidential leaked documentation. Some of us refuse to do that, including me. An example is the specctre format. You may want to consider the following as well: 1) An updated tutorial that is accurate Yes, to make simple minded people happy we need all that. Smart people seems to have not really big problems with current gEDA state. The problem with simple minded people (like me :-) ) is, that they are consumers (stupid and greedy), with no intention and skills to really contribute. And they do not understand or care about the difference between free speech and free beer. Many of your points are easily to fix even for people with no programming skills, ie. writing new, really fine documentation. But it is hard, boring work, so I do understand that the developers prefer coding. DJ has done it very well with his [2]http://www.delorie.com/pcb/docs/gs/gs.html -- unfortunately some beginners miss
Re: gEDA-user: CERN goes for KiCAD
On 09/07/2011 09:48 AM, Peter Clifton wrote: I had wondered if part of the reasoning might be that KiCad feels a lot more local to them. (KiCad being a French originated project - CERN being on the French / Swiss border.) That is one thing. Also they stated their wants as integrated printed circuit board layout and valued not having anything else except maybe simulation hooks. I bet gEDA seems too complicated. The main thing was probably they asked me to be their gEDA rep. because I was a list member of upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org and I said too busy, I'll ask the core developers. I don't remember anyone getting excited or involved, so they figured not enough cooperation/interest. JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: devices with different slots? How?
On Sep 6, 2011, at 5:20 AM, Josef Wolf wrote: Hello, I am trying to create devices with different slots. For example, I'd like to have a 7400 consist of four NAND slots and one POWER slot (pins 7+14). You can find that one in the Digital section at http://www.gedasymbols.org/user/kai_martin_knaak/ Similarly, I'd like to split (for example) a 68332 into its modules (POWER, CLOCK, TPU, QSPI, whatever). In the past, we have used such modularization with other CAE tools with great success, since it helps to keep the schematics simple and understandable. Yep. Do it all the time with gEDA. Instead of having one huge block with several hundred pins for the microcontroller, you'd have a separate symbol for each module with a relatively moderate pin count for every module. In some cases, I represent the device with a component that's just a box (no pins!), draw a bus to it as graphical indication of what's going on, and then use the script at http://www.gedasymbols.org/user/john_doty/tools/pins2gsch.html to define the connection details in a table, since a tangle of lines is not very illuminating. I put a pretty version of the table into the documentation with http://www.gedasymbols.org/user/john_doty/tools/pins2tex.html From the description on http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:gschem_symbol_creation I can't figure how to use different symbols for different slots. Slots are for when the modules are identical, and you want gEDA to assign the pins for you based on the slot number. That's not what you want here. What am I missing? Symbols with the same refdes represent parts of the same physical component. So all you need to do is make the refdes attribute the same on all of your modules. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: CERN goes for KiCAD
On 09/06/2011 05:20 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: We had a meeting at CERN on Friday and decided we would start contributing to the Kicad project in view of taking it to a level of quality and features suitable for our PCB design activities. They had said that at the start, really. No surprise. John -- Ecosensory ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Fwd: Re: [OH Updates] How can you help solve the proprietary tool problem?
On Sep 2, 2011, at 9:36 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: Besides, I always thought geda/pcb's competition was Eagle, not the real high-end EDA tools. There are a *lot* of features we don't have, that are hard to come by, that the high end tools have. I came to gEDA from Viewlogic, which I used to design electronics for four space missions. I wasted a huge pile of taxpayer's money on it. I vastly prefer gEDA. Viewlogic was crummy, dirty, buggy software *loaded* with confusing features that never seemed to do quite what was needed. gEDA is, by contrast, much cleaner and simpler: it doesn't waste my time the way Viewlogic did. I don't think gEDA really has any competition: it's really for those of us who'd rather spend a few minutes solving a problem with a few lines of AWK instead of spending all day searching for a suitable feature in thousands of pages of documentation. gEDA's unique in that respect. Another unique capability is the way it plays nicely with foreign tools, at multiple levels. Hurray for gEDA! John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Strange user interface behavior with gschem-1.6.2.20110115
On Sep 4, 2011, at 2:22 PM, Josef Wolf wrote: Hello, I have a strange usability behavior with gschem 1.6.2.20110115 (the version that comes with ubuntu-11.04). I have attached a small schematic to illustrate the problem. In the attached schmatic, when I try to draw a net from U6-pin27 to the gate of Q6, a little circle appears on the nearest pin, indicating where the connection would be autocompleted to. But even if the circle appears at the gate of Q6, at the moment I click to make the connection, it jumps to the gate of Q4, effectively shortening pin1 with pin28 of U6. I have not seen such behavior before. In fact, I have not seen such an autocompletion-circle before. Is this some new functionality? Is there a way to deactivate it? Or at least configure it to behave in a sane way? To deactivate it, you can put the line: (magnetic-net-mode disabled) in your project's gschemrc or in ~/.gEDA/gschemrc. Posted to all contributors to this thread due to immoderate behavior by the moderators. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Fwd: Re: [OH Updates] Degrees of open-ness in EDA (and CAD in general)
On Sep 4, 2011, at 7:28 AM, John Griessen wrote: On 09/04/2011 08:10 AM, John Griessen wrote: I could use some help with this write up! I'll write something up and ask for reviews soon. John Original Message Subject: Re: [OH Updates] Degrees of open-ness in EDA (and CAD in general) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 18:58:40 -0400 From: phillip torrone p...@oreilly.com To: updates upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org john, can you write up what's needed for gEDA in a couple paragraphs? i'll post it up on MAKE. be specific and what folks who want to help need to do and how to contact/join the gEDA community. what is geda Schematic editor and netlister capable of working with many open and proprietary physical layout tools. Including both printed circuit and VLSI layout tools. Also simulation tools. New netlist exporters often take only a few hours of work. Generation of printed schematics, netists, and bills of materials can be automated by Unix-style scripting and Makefiles. These can thus be combined with other tools that create simulation results, programs, documentation, and other data products, making it easy to automate generation of deliverables for a complete project, not just its electrical part. The gedasymbols.org website is a great community resource for the exchange of symbols, footprints, specialized processing scripts, etc. Handles making hierarchic schematics so elements can be repeated by schematic page instances placed once. This also facilitates reuse of parts of old schematics in new designs. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: gEDA request for volunteers
Original Message Subject: Re: [OH Updates] Degrees of open-ness in EDA (and CAD in general) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 18:58:40 -0400 From: phillip torrone p...@oreilly.com To: updates upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org john, can you write up what's needed for gEDA in a couple paragraphs? i'll post it up on MAKE. be specific and what folks who want to help need to do and how to contact/join the gEDA community. 1. what is geda gEDA is a schematic editor and netlister capable of working with many open and proprietary physical layout tools including VLSI layout, simulation. Handles making hierarchic schematics so elements can be repeated by schematic page instances placed once. The netlists it makes are a flattened hierarchy where the netlist of a subcell has its parts repeated with different names. New netlist exporters often take only a few hours of work. A circuit board layout tool called PCB allows user interface customization just as high end tools for chips do, where a fast, experienced user enters keyboard shortcuts with left hand while mouse aiming with the right hand. Newbies can use all mouse commands. Command menus and keyboard shortcuts can be customized by editing local project directory config files to handle project specific or left handed or personal style wants. Footprint libraries can be local to a project directory or from a central library. To be sure your project is a good reference for easy reuse, local libraries can supercede central ones and the project directory can be set up so that compressing it and giving it to someone else results in a local project specific environment just as the first was when added into another users installation. Generation of printed schematics, netists, and bills of materials can be automated by Unix-style scripting and Makefiles. These can thus be combined with other tools that create simulation results, programs, documentation making it easy to generate deliverables for a complete project, not just its electrical part. 2. why it matters Because it is an effective tool, and truly open 3. what is needed and why More volunteers to help document gschem and PCB, and code things like a symbol/footprint cross-tool editor and translator so the whole OSHW(open source hardware) movement picks up pace. 4. how to join in See gpleda.org, ask on geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: plugins (was: How can you help...)
On 09/05/2011 09:33 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: Also, they tend to bit-rot and break when the main source moves on. That's why they are separate. There is not enough coding/testing man-or-woman-power to pull all conceivable plugins along with core changes. Seems obvious. The ones that are truly wanted will get updated. And you can develop, customize and use them without a recompile cycle. I can see a core set of plugins shipping with the source, but not all. I don't see it as a big deal though, since if a feature is really core it will be in the core, so not shipping plugins is natural. They're not core. functions. Documenting them however is a big deal. We mostly need documentation for enlisting more users. After that, we need a good beginner user interface that doesn't kill any GUI or command-line functions that are currently customizable . I think it would help a lot if the scheme or c code underlying functions showed in the log window in a way that can be cut and pasted to execute it again, or create a script that can be run with a button. IOW, for PCB, I'd like to see all the actions commands to get the same effect as the GUI mouse and keyboard commands listed in a command log window as they happen so they could be cut and pasted to redo. Having exact command logs would help proficient users document actions easily and write them up as tutorials, videos, style references. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gEDA request for volunteers
On 09/05/2011 11:55 AM, DJ Delorie wrote: See gpleda.org for information on mailing lists changed that. JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: plugins
On 09/05/2011 12:29 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: I think it would help a lot if the scheme or c code underlying functions showed in the log window in a way that can be cut and pasted to execute it again, or create a script that can be run with a button. pcb --verbose does that, but there's still some OOB stuff that doesn't pass through the action layer, like cursor position. Do you mean the resulting commands from pcb --verbose would do all the action command steps, but not show cursor positions that caused them? That would be great. If so, I need to try it. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: plugins
On 09/05/2011 01:21 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: Cursor movements have their own channel, so just re-running all the actions you see won't duplicate what actually happened. For example: Action: PointCursor() Action: Mode(Notify) Action: PointCursor() Action: PointCursor() Action: PointCursor() Action: PointCursor() Action: PointCursor() Action: PointCursor() Action: Mode(Release) Nothing here tells you where the PointCursor() point is, or that Mode(Notify) actually started a drag, or where it dragged to. Oh, so pcb --verbose still needs more before it would replay to recreate some changes to a .pcb file. Dang. I can't dig into that right now. If/when you get that you get scriptability equal to Cadence chip layout. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: Fwd: Re: [OH Updates] Degrees of open-ness in EDA (and CAD in general)
I could use some help with this write up! I'll write something up and ask for reviews soon. John Original Message Subject: Re: [OH Updates] Degrees of open-ness in EDA (and CAD in general) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 18:58:40 -0400 From: phillip torrone p...@oreilly.com To: updates upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org john, can you write up what's needed for gEDA in a couple paragraphs? i'll post it up on MAKE. be specific and what folks who want to help need to do and how to contact/join the gEDA community. what is egeda why it matters what is needed and why how to join in feel free to send it to the list here and i'll grab it from here assuming no one has an additions to it. cheers, pt On Sep 3, 2011, at 6:54 PM, John Griessen wrote: On 09/03/2011 03:50 PM, Pierce Nichols wrote: Taking those over to KiCAD or geda by hand would be a big time hit... time that I could be using to do any number of other things. Developing translators between these truly open formats is important, and needs promotion and enlisting of many volunteers. The time available from the core project volunteers is small. They don't volunteer to be of service to the universe, but rather to get things done that they want. So, enlisting more volunteers is the most important thing to do. On 09/03/2011 04:42 PM, Andrew Back wrote: It is intractable by volunteers, yes. The corp versions are incomplete though, so theirs are not fully usable either. This sounds to me like something a proprietary UNIX vendor might have said to Stallman or Torvalds many years ago. I speak as an active gEDA volunteer of testing, documenting and little bit of coding. You don't seem to realize what a tiny amount of effort has created FOSS tools. It's a limited resource. Promoting to get more volunteers is what is needed, and they need to be cooperative sorts, not my way or the highway types. Are you a coder? Are you offering time for the gEDA pcb project or gschem and gnetlist? John Griessen ___ updates mailing list upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org http://lists.openhardwaresummit.org/listinfo.cgi/updates-openhardwaresummit.org ___ updates mailing list upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org http://lists.openhardwaresummit.org/listinfo.cgi/updates-openhardwaresummit.org -- Ecosensory 1218 W 39th St. Austin TX 78756 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Fwd: Re: [OH Updates] Degrees of open-ness in EDA (and CAD in general)
On 09/04/2011 08:10 AM, John Griessen wrote: I could use some help with this write up! I'll write something up and ask for reviews soon. John Original Message Subject: Re: [OH Updates] Degrees of open-ness in EDA (and CAD in general) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 18:58:40 -0400 From: phillip torrone p...@oreilly.com To: updates upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org john, can you write up what's needed for gEDA in a couple paragraphs? i'll post it up on MAKE. be specific and what folks who want to help need to do and how to contact/join the gEDA community. what is geda Schematic editor and netlister capable of working with many open and proprietary physical layout tools. Handles making hierarchic schematics so elements can be repeated by schematic page instances placed once. The netlists it makes are a flattened hierarchy where the netlist of a subcell has its parts repeated with different names. Gnetlist can output to chip design or printed circuit work flows. A circuit board layout tool called PCB allows user interface customization just as high end tools for chips do, where a fast, experienced user enters keyboard shortcuts with left hand while mouse aiming with the right hand. Newbies can use all mouse commands. Command menus and keyboard shortcuts can be customized by editing local project directory config files to handle project specific or left handed or personal style wants. Footprint libraries can be local to a project directory or from a central library. To be sure your project is a good reference for easy reuse, local libraries can supercede central ones and the project directory can be set up so that compressing it and giving it to someone else results in a local project specific environment just as the first was when added into another users installation. why it matters Because it is an effective tool, and truly open what is needed and why More volunteers to help document gschem and PCB, and code things like a symbol/footprint cross-tool editor and translator so the whole OSHW(open source hardware) movement picks up pace. how to join in See gpleda.org, ask on geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: Fwd: Re: [OH Updates] How can you help solve the proprietary tool problem?
Does the category low end bother you? Original Message Subject: Re: [OH Updates] How can you help solve the proprietary tool problem? Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 09:12:20 +1000 From: Dave Jones d...@eevblog.com CC: upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org I'm planning a review of the low end PCB tools (Eagle, gEDA, KiCAD) from a new user perspective (I've used Altium for 20+ years, and worked there for 4 years, so have barely touched Eagle, and not the others at all). I expect those to be very long videos, and still only briefly cover the basics. I can't imagine Make having room for a decent magazine review? My PCB Design Tutorial in Silicon Chip was spread over 3 parts. http://www.alternatezone.com/electronics/pcbdesign.htm I think any article in Make would likely just be a short OpEd like piece? David L. Jones www.eevblog.com The Electronics Engineering Video Blo ___ updates mailing list upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org http://lists.openhardwaresummit.org/listinfo.cgi/updates-openhardwaresummit.org ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: How to find which specific part of a PCB is shorted?
On 08/31/2011 04:57 PM, Thomas Oldbury wrote: The 3.3V bus is used all over the board. How can I locate specifically which part is shorted? Divide and conquer...delete some trace segments or reroute 2 pieces where one long one is and see what changes... It must be something I placed recently, but I do not have an undo buffer as I closed the program down before I noticed this. I've used the highlighting to find problems. You know there is a wrong connection to 3.3V bus, so highlight that trace and see what all is connected to it. The intersection of the non-power traces that are highlighted and the power bus is where the problem is. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gedasymbols.org down?
On Aug 29, 2011, at 8:56 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: Seems like I can't ping to gedasymbols.org since last night. Is the server located in an area affected by the Irene storm? Yes. New Hampshire. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: good explanations of open source licenses and copyright applied to open hardware
Just read these and very clarifying. http://perens.com/works/testimony/PerensJMRI.pdf http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3775446/Bruce-Perens-A-Big-Change-for-Open-Source.htm ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gedasymbols.org down?
On 08/30/2011 04:14 PM, Russell Dill wrote: I imagine I'm not the only one running a git mirror of gedasymbols.org. If you rely on gedasymbols.org in any way, It'd be wise to do the same. Oh, it's getting handled by DJ doing a secondary DNS server setup eventually. Then the web server mirror I host will be found in an outage. At present it serves half the requests when the main server is active. You just never see that as you use gedasymbols.org John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gedasymbols.org down?
On 08/29/2011 06:23 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: It's back, but there's supposed to be a backup server on the west coast... There is, but there's no backup DNS server, so I'm not sure you can ping it when the main server goes down. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: gschem vs. PCB diode pin numbering
On Aug 27, 2011, at 8:12 PM, Dan McMahill wrote: This problem goes beyond diodes and transistors. For example, the old 10H series of ECL parts came both in DIP packages as well as PLCC packages. Some of the parts though, would be in a 16 pin DIP or a 20 pin PLCC and so the pin numbers didn't agree between the two packages. Yep. I recently got bit by this with the LT1078 opamp (different pinouts in DIP8 and SO8). John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: slotting question
On Aug 26, 2011, at 12:28 AM, Dave McGuire wrote: On 08/23/2011 11:20 PM, John Doty wrote: This seems like a pretty serious issue; can anyone shed a little light on it? Absolutely mysterious. I've never seen behavior like this and I cannot reproduce it using your procedure. Very odd. See the click-by-click procedure in my other response. If you're so inclined, please give that a try and let me know what you see. I wind up with a schematic containing two inverter symbols. Perhaps you should post your test.sch. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Foss-pcb Proposed plan from CERN
On Aug 25, 2011, at 6:33 PM, Dietmar Schmunkamp wrote: - From my point of view the major thing is to have one design source (even with a multitude of attributes e.g. net_group = g1, net_length(g1) = xxx mm, tolerance(g1) = 1 mm, ...etc) and drive simulation and board layout from this single source. That also requires feedback of electrical properties of the board wires back into the design source (and by this into the simulation model). I think the back-annotation approach is complex, messy, and has lots of problems. For my ASIC design work, the layout contractor generates the final simulation netlists using the layout software (Calibre). I then compare simulations of that netlist with simulations of the (enormously simpler) netlist derived directly from the gEDA schematics. An actual schematic derived from the layout would be incomprehensible: all hierarchy is flattened and parasitic components vastly outnumber the intended ones. I think the same considerations apply to boards: it would be good for the layout tools to be capable of generating simulation netlists. It doesn't make sense to me to to run the layout data back through schematic capture tools to get to simulation. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Foss-pcb Proposed plan from CERN
ummm, I think citing and expounding on the philosophical differences of one approach (integrated) versus another (multiple tool kits) is a nice amorphous description and somewhat akin to mental masturbation. The philosophy of gEDA has already been established. What is more important is that the tool suite *flawlessly* supports a small subset of generally accepted design-fabrication paradigms, eg workflow from schematic to completed populated board, and a subset of potential offshoot efforts such as circuit simulation, head modeling,symbol creation and package creation and management, etc. My premise is that if you put 100 design engineers in a room who have done circuit design to board fab and ask them to produce a scenario of their work flow, at least 40% of them would have a common scenario. So the important questions to ask and answer are: Do you know what the top 2 (or 3) scenarios are? Do you know what the top 2 (or 3) parallel offshoot activities are? How well can those scenarios by fulfilled by the tool chain approach?(Conceptually) How well can those scenarios by fulfilled by the tool chain approach, in reality (e.g do the tools work flawlessly and do they scale?) If someone buys into a certain philosophy and the tool implementation causes them pain, they will search for less painless approaches and adapting ones development scenario is much easier than trying to understand and patching someone bogus code. Another point is don't stick ones head in the sand and start slinging code so that the additions 'do something'Consider 'the other religion' and the possibility that one might want to import a schematic developed in kicad, Altrum, orcad or whatever because PCB is the sexiest thing on earth. One also needs to consider outflow of a design from gEDA to whatever. Make a road map, have a plan, follow the plan and have at it. J On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:03 PM, John Doty [1]j...@noqsi.com wrote: On Aug 24, 2011, at 8:33 AM, Jared Casper wrote: I chuckled at what this community would think of the comment, in response to There are users who prefer separate dedicated applications to an integrated design environment., BTW. How many of these users have ever designed a PCB with more than 4 layers and, say, 300 components? From my own experience, above the certain level of PCB complexity the intuitiveness and efficiency of the GUI become a paramount. I think that's exactly backwards. The intuitiveness and efficiency of the GUI make for comfort, but not productivity. In a big design, the key is to break it down into modules, and then use the automation to put the modules together. This is especially true when you recognize that a big design encompasses not just EDA, but documentation, software, and possibly other things. The toolkit approach allows you to combine these things in a maximally automated flow. I've seen the difference starkly in software. I personally don't care what tools a programmer uses as long as they get the job done: this should be a matter of individual preference. Except, it is my experience that programmers who prefer toolkits are much more productive than programmers who prefer IDE. They plan better, they factor better, and they exploit the power of the computer better. One serious problem is that IDE encourages very inefficient debugging practices: it's much better to trap bugs with assertions, logs, and analysis than to fish for bugs interactively. Yes, it takes more thought and planning to use a toolkit. For simple jobs, a nice intuitive GUI is fine (I'm typing this to the Mac Mail app). But planning is more important for big jobs, and a toolkit rewards planning better. Spending time to adapt your processes to the job is a big time saver for big jobs. A flexible, extensible, toolkit is especially superior for jobs that have characteristics that fall outside the limits of the application designers' imaginations. Try exporting KiCad designs to a computer algebra system for symbolic analysis (but the Mathematica back end for gnetlist only took me an afternoon to write). The important thing to recognize is that there is room for, and a need for, both toolkits and integrated tools. AWK and spreadsheets are both effective at processing tabular data in their own ways, but a merged tool with the characteristics of both would be incomprehensible. I think the same is true in EDA. It is my opinion that gEDA's developers and users should embrace its strengths as a powerful, flexible toolkit. Keep the tools separate. Keep the interfaces clean and simple. Maximize the rewards that those who can do a little scripting can earn. Let KiCad cover the integrated app space
Re: gEDA-user: Foss-pcb Proposed plan from CERN
On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:46 PM, John Hudak wrote: Rudeness snipped. The philosophy of gEDA has already been established. Kind of. But part of the misconception you have is that gEDA (as currently defined) has a coherent philosophy. gEDA once referred only to gschem, gnetlist, and associated tools. pcb is an older program, which I believe only came under the gEDA tent after gschem replaced xcircuit as the tool of choice for schematic capture by pcb users. I think this is very confusing to new users: pcb and the gschem/gnetlist/gattrib/... kit play well together, but they are not integrated. They represent different design philosophies, and cannot be integrated without damage. A Jeep pulling a trailer is more flexible transportation than an integrated RV. I think that a great deal of confusion and strife would be avoided if the core developers would separate the pcb and gEDA projects. What is more important is that the tool suite *flawlessly* supports a small subset of generally accepted design-fabrication paradigms, eg workflow from schematic to completed populated board, and a subset of potential offshoot efforts such as circuit simulation, head modeling,symbol creation and package creation and management, etc. My premise is that if you put 100 design engineers in a room who have done circuit design to board fab and ask them to produce a scenario of their work flow, at least 40% of them would have a common scenario. Based on the wildly different notions people on this forum have for what the common scenarios are, I doubt it. The failure of efforts by vocal advocates of the common scenarios point of view to create a coherent symbol library for the most common scenarios is evidence, too. But I would also assert that gEDA is, by its nature, the toolkit of choice for all those uncommon scenarios. You would probably be somewhat happier with KiCad (although I doubt you'd be happy with anything). If someone buys into a certain philosophy and the tool implementation causes them pain, they will search for less painless approaches and adapting ones development scenario is much easier than trying to understand and patching someone bogus code. I think it used to be easier to learn gEDA when we *didn't* have all the tutorial stuff, just concise reference documentation. It's easier to learn to fish than to have to beg for every meal. One problem with the tutorials is that there are lots of paths you can use, and each tutorial applies to a subset. Another point is don't stick ones head in the sand and start slinging code so that the additions 'do something'Consider 'the other religion' and the possibility that one might want to import a schematic developed in kicad, Altrum, orcad or whatever because PCB is the sexiest thing on earth. Yep, that would be nice. The problem is that import is hard without support from the upstream tool. The secret of the (multiple) ways to get a design from gschem to pcb is gnetlist, which is operating behind the scenes even if you're not using it explicitly. One also needs to consider outflow of a design from gEDA to whatever. This is gEDA's greatest strength. Type gnetlist -g help and/or man gnetlist. Make a road map, have a plan, follow the plan and have at it. That's the top-down approach. It has the advantage that it gets you to a well-defined destination efficiently. But if you want to go anywhere else in the future, it's trouble. Bottom-up design is more appropriate if you want unlimited horizons. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: slotting question
On Aug 23, 2011, at 8:45 PM, Dave McGuire wrote: On 08/22/2011 07:45 AM, Kovacs Levente wrote: I open up a new schematic, place two instances of 7404-1, edit the attributes of the second one, promote the slot attribute, edit the newly-accessible one, change it to 2, save it, save the sheet, exit gschem, restart, and load the sheet. I am guessing that you edit the symbol too. You don't have to. You just have to save the sheet, not the symbol. Oh nono, I didn't do that...I was tired when I typed that. Where I said save it, save the sheet I just meant save the sheet. I do not edit the symbols alone, other than double-clicking on them and promoting/modifying the slot attribute. You should promote the slot attribute for both instances. Even though slot #1 defaults to 1? In any event, I've tried all combinations, and I still get the same behavior. This is with v1.6.2.20110115. This is repeatable here, using symbol 7404-1 from the default installed library. This seems like a pretty serious issue; can anyone shed a little light on it? Absolutely mysterious. I've never seen behavior like this and I cannot reproduce it using your procedure. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Foss-pcb Proposed plan from CERN
dont ya love moderated lists? lol on a more serious note, yes, a path from altium would be huge, but in all honesty, having tools that work and inter-operate would be much better. After playing with KiCAD for a bit, they have a very nice integrated tool suite that all works...and it has import (and export?) for packages like Eagle, and it runs on different OSs, quite nicely. No offense, but from all the stuff I've read from the gEDA base, various blog postings, and freelance how-tos, a common topic that always seems to come up is that with these tools and a knowledge of scripting languages, one can do just about anything. Well, pardon my bluntness, but, I've forgotten more scripting languages than I know, and I don't necessarily want to learn another one to make gEDA tools work for me. You are severely limiting your adoption base if you make this as a pre-requisite for user satisfaction. As developers, you may be enamored with your coding cleverness and undocumented design decisions, but from a user perspective, you lost them from download and then make. and then use these magic scripts whos only hint of functionality is in the name From what the folks at CERN seem to be asking, I think gEDA is, in many respects a long way from providing it. If one is going to make the upgrade effort worth it, one has to know their strengths and weaknesses. I could be wrong in my point of view, as I haven't pushed a board out to completeness, however the challenges I've encountered along the way have been quite surprising. -J On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak [1]k...@familieknaak.de wrote: Peter Clifton wrote: Even conversion of old legacy Altium designs could be done given access ^ Is this a serious restriction? Would it be possible for a user of a current altium license to export to this old legacy format? to known sample files and developer time (e.g. money). I was working on a funded project to reverse engineer those file-format at while back, and the only reason it has stalled so far is a lack of my time. The formats aren't so bad to understand once you've had some luck figuring out the binary compression scheme. A transition path from altium to geda would be huge! How far did you advance on this road? ---)kaimartin(--- PS: Why did none of my todays posts hit the list, yet? (While others seem to have no problem to get through within minutes) -- Kai-Martin Knaak Email: [2]k...@familieknaak.de [3]http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x6C0B9F53 increasingly unhappy with moderation of geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list [4]geda-user@moria.seul.org [5]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:k...@familieknaak.de 2. mailto:k...@familieknaak.de 3. http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x6C0B9F53 4. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 5. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Foss-pcb Proposed plan from CERN
On Aug 24, 2011, at 8:33 AM, Jared Casper wrote: I chuckled at what this community would think of the comment, in response to There are users who prefer separate dedicated applications to an integrated design environment., BTW. How many of these users have ever designed a PCB with more than 4 layers and, say, 300 components? From my own experience, above the certain level of PCB complexity the intuitiveness and efficiency of the GUI become a paramount. I think that's exactly backwards. The intuitiveness and efficiency of the GUI make for comfort, but not productivity. In a big design, the key is to break it down into modules, and then use the automation to put the modules together. This is especially true when you recognize that a big design encompasses not just EDA, but documentation, software, and possibly other things. The toolkit approach allows you to combine these things in a maximally automated flow. I've seen the difference starkly in software. I personally don't care what tools a programmer uses as long as they get the job done: this should be a matter of individual preference. Except, it is my experience that programmers who prefer toolkits are much more productive than programmers who prefer IDE. They plan better, they factor better, and they exploit the power of the computer better. One serious problem is that IDE encourages very inefficient debugging practices: it's much better to trap bugs with assertions, logs, and analysis than to fish for bugs interactively. Yes, it takes more thought and planning to use a toolkit. For simple jobs, a nice intuitive GUI is fine (I'm typing this to the Mac Mail app). But planning is more important for big jobs, and a toolkit rewards planning better. Spending time to adapt your processes to the job is a big time saver for big jobs. A flexible, extensible, toolkit is especially superior for jobs that have characteristics that fall outside the limits of the application designers' imaginations. Try exporting KiCad designs to a computer algebra system for symbolic analysis (but the Mathematica back end for gnetlist only took me an afternoon to write). The important thing to recognize is that there is room for, and a need for, both toolkits and integrated tools. AWK and spreadsheets are both effective at processing tabular data in their own ways, but a merged tool with the characteristics of both would be incomprehensible. I think the same is true in EDA. It is my opinion that gEDA's developers and users should embrace its strengths as a powerful, flexible toolkit. Keep the tools separate. Keep the interfaces clean and simple. Maximize the rewards that those who can do a little scripting can earn. Let KiCad cover the integrated app space. It would be useful to be able to import KiCad schematics, so that when users are ready for the more powerful toolkit we could offer them an upgrade path. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Foss-pcb Proposed plan from CERN
On 08/22/2011 11:29 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: The commercial package he wants to keep up with seems to be altium designer. Oh, I guess that's why I referred his request to others. I like the radical flexibility of gEDA tools without getting evangelical about it, and KiCAD is closer to Altium already, so gEDA-PCB is unlikely to get CERN's approval. On 08/23/2011 11:47 PM, John Hudak wrote: No offense, but from all the stuff I've read from the gEDA base, various blog postings, and freelance how-tos, a common topic that always seems to come up is that with these tools and a knowledge of scripting languages, one can do just about anything. Well, pardon my bluntness, but, I've forgotten more scripting languages than I know, and I don't necessarily want to learn another one to make gEDA tools work for me. This is an old concept discussed many times on this list. gEDA is not near to a windows app and is not likely to get there soon. Unless Peter C. gets hired as a top gun Altium conversion translation consultant... On 08/24/2011 04:17 AM, Stephen Ecob wrote: It could benefit the gEDA community to adopt Altium refugees - they're used to spending $4K per year Maybe Peter C. will be a hired gun after all... On 08/24/2011 09:33 AM, Jared Casper wrote: From my own experience, above the certain level of PCB complexity the intuitiveness and efficiency of the GUI become a paramount. I'd have to disagree. Chips are complex. Chips and dense boards depend on some automation and a lot of complexity handling by humans. The algorithms kicked off by simple GUI check boxes are more important than GUI flamboyance. JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Creating bill of materials?
On Aug 19, 2011, at 7:27 AM, Joshua wrote: -- It's useful for touch up of a few attributes, but not for the broad changes you want. The spreadsheet approach really doesn't scale well anyway. If you have 300 bypass capacitors in a project, it's much more efficient to have a heavy project-specific bypass capacitor symbol with all of the necessary attributes inside it. Then, to change your bypass capacitor selection, you need only edit that one symbol rather than 300 instances -- Not true with gattrib_csv. All 300 instances are grouped together on one line if all their properties are the same. One edit and an import and then all 300 have been updated. gattrib_csv scales very nicely to large projects. What if the components are in 38 separate schematic files, as in one recent project of mine? The project-specific component approach makes managing this pretty easy. You can even switch project component libraries to change components from prototype to production without changing schematics. All properties the same is not a reliable indicator that the components have similar roles. Sometimes I have strong pressures to keep the parts list short, so I'll choose general-purpose components and use them in multiple roles. Other times, I'm optimizing more. With project evolution and design reuse, these scenarios can become very entangled. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: Foss-pcb Proposed plan from CERN
I'm swamped. CERN might come up with tip money for developers. Anyone have the time to be in a committee? John Griessen Original Message Subject: [Fwd: Proposed plan] Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 01:24:46 +0200 From: Javier Serrano javier.serr...@cern.ch To: John Griessen j...@industromatic.com Hi John, Would you like to join this discussion? Cheers, Javier Forwarded Message From: Javier Serrano javier.serr...@cern.ch To: foss-...@ohwr.org Subject: Proposed plan Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 01:00:14 +0200 Dear all, As most of you know, the purpose of this mailing list is to propose a roadmap to bring FOSS PCB design tools to a level of quality and features comparable with other non-open options. I think it would make sense to split this effort in three phases: 1. Make a list of features for the ultimate PCB design tool. 2. Discuss current FOSS projects and (hopefully) pick one which can evolve into what we define in phase 1. 3. Generate work package descriptions to have the project selected in phase 2 cover all items of phase 1. I would keep track of the results of discussion in http://www.ohwr.org/projects/ohr-meta/wiki/Foss-pcb If all this takes place in the coming month or so, then the work package list can be published and advertised in a number of fora (the OH workshop in October, FSCONS...) so that potential contributors can pick one WP and start working. If you have any suggestions or remarks concerning this plan, let's discuss them here. Otherwise, I propose we move straight away into phase 1. I am looking forward to many interesting discussions with all of you. Cheers! Javier -- Ecosensory 1218 W 39th St. Austin TX 78756 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Has anyone in this group seriously used KiCAD?
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Colin D Bennett [1]co...@gibibit.com wrote: On Fri, 19 Aug 2011 11:55:31 -0400 John Hudak [2]jjhu...@gmail.com wrote: Pros/cons? and please, no philosphy about integrated vs independent tools...I am interested in aspects such as what things work? what doesn't? user experiences such as strengths and weakness (again actual/functional and not philosophy) I've not seriously used it, but I was just today frustrated when I tried to download and open the Maple Mini KiCad project ([1]) and my KiCad version (from Ubuntu 11.04 repositories) says the layout and schematic files are unrecognized types. More specifically, trying to open the .brd file says Unknown file type and trying to open the schematic says file.sch is NOT an EESchema file! See screenshot at [2]. A version incompatibility? Maybe, but you would hope KiCad would at least tell the user that the file is the wrong version, rather than such cryptic errors. User error? Maybe, but how hard can it be to open a board file or schematic file? Oh another note, I like how gEDA puts its symbols and footprints in separate files -- it is great for version control and for browsing/searching with standard file management tools or directly on a GitHub repository view, etc. Regards, Colin References -- [1] Maple Mini schematics and layout [3]https://github.com/leaflabs/maplemini. [2] Screen shots of attempting to open Maple Mini schematic with KiCad. [4]http://gibibit.com/upload/2011-08-19_KiCad_MapleMini_error.png ___ geda-user mailing list [5]geda-user@moria.seul.org [6]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user Oh another note, I like how gEDA puts its symbols and footprints in separate files -- it is great for version control and for browsing/searching with standard file management tools or directly on a GitHub repository view, etc. So does KiCAD, separate files for symbols and footprints. -J References 1. mailto:co...@gibibit.com 2. mailto:jjhu...@gmail.com 3. https://github.com/leaflabs/maplemini 4. http://gibibit.com/upload/2011-08-19_KiCad_MapleMini_error.png 5. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 6. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Creating bill of materials?
On Aug 18, 2011, at 4:05 PM, John Hudak wrote: So, this causes me to ask the question: Why hasen't gattrib been removed from:[3]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:gaf as well as any other instances? Perhaps because some of us use it. While the concept is good, the implementation is worthless, and apparently has been 'around' with the same sort of problems since 2006. It's useful for touch up of a few attributes, but not for the broad changes you want. The spreadsheet approach really doesn't scale well anyway. If you have 300 bypass capacitors in a project, it's much more efficient to have a heavy project-specific bypass capacitor symbol with all of the necessary attributes inside it. Then, to change your bypass capacitor selection, you need only edit that one symbol rather than 300 instances. Unfortunately, gattrib is an orphan: its developer is no longer active on the gEDA project. So, although it remains useful within its limits, nobody is fixing its bugs. Do you wish to volunteer? As a person who is trying to give the gEDA approach a try, frustrations mount daily in trying to make progress. There is no gEDA approach. There are many gEDA approaches. gEDA is a toolkit, not an integrated tool. If you expect it to lead you down some specific usage pathway you will be disappointed. Part of the game is adapting it to the flow your job needs. Its power is that you *can* adapt it to *your* needs: you aren't stuck with an approach that doesn't fit those needs. This brings up another issue that I am curious aboutthe one of component symbol libraries. My expectation (hope, guess?) was with an effort that is open source, users would contribute their symbols to the library, User-contributed symbols are available at gedasymbols.org. and the symbol library would be huge. I didn't find that reality. I assumed this because users would 'giveback' to the community. Clearly some have done this. I plan on doing this (if I continue down this path). So why hasen't the component mfgs been inclined to develop and contribute symbols? Why hasen't the users contributed more? I think it's partly because symbols are often specialized to a particular project or approach. Perhaps there are not too many users. Perhaps it is a case of: The tools have been built but the users are not comming.Anyway, just curious Well, if you go to my area at gedasymbols.org, you'll find symbols for VLSI design and symbolic circuit analysis. Those won't work for pcb. But they're useful for their intended purposes. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Creating bill of materials?
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:40 PM, John Doty [1]j...@noqsi.com wrote: On Aug 18, 2011, at 4:05 PM, John Hudak wrote: So, this causes me to ask the question: Why hasen't gattrib been removed from:[3][2]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:gaf as well as any other instances? Perhaps because some of us use it. While the concept is good, the implementation is worthless, and apparently has been 'around' with the same sort of problems since 2006. It's useful for touch up of a few attributes, but not for the broad changes you want. The spreadsheet approach really doesn't scale well anyway. If you have 300 bypass capacitors in a project, it's much more efficient to have a heavy project-specific bypass capacitor symbol with all of the necessary attributes inside it. Then, to change your bypass capacitor selection, you need only edit that one symbol rather than 300 instances. Unfortunately, gattrib is an orphan: its developer is no longer active on the gEDA project. So, although it remains useful within its limits, nobody is fixing its bugs. Do you wish to volunteer? As a person who is trying to give the gEDA approach a try, frustrations mount daily in trying to make progress. There is no gEDA approach. There are many gEDA approaches. gEDA is a toolkit, not an integrated tool. If you expect it to lead you down some specific usage pathway you will be disappointed. Part of the game is adapting it to the flow your job needs. Its power is that you *can* adapt it to *your* needs: you aren't stuck with an approach that doesn't fit those needs. This brings up another issue that I am curious aboutthe one of component symbol libraries. My expectation (hope, guess?) was with an effort that is open source, users would contribute their symbols to the library, User-contributed symbols are available at [3]gedasymbols.org. and the symbol library would be huge. I didn't find that reality. I assumed this because users would 'giveback' to the community. Clearly some have done this. I plan on doing this (if I continue down this path). So why hasen't the component mfgs been inclined to develop and contribute symbols? Why hasen't the users contributed more? I think it's partly because symbols are often specialized to a particular project or approach. Perhaps there are not too many users. Perhaps it is a case of: The tools have been built but the users are not comming.Anyway, just curious Well, if you go to my area at [4]gedasymbols.org, you'll find symbols for VLSI design and symbolic circuit analysis. Those won't work for pcb. But they're useful for their intended purposes. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. [5]http://www.noqsi.com/ [6]j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list [7]geda-user@moria.seul.org [8]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user There is no gEDA approach. There are many gEDA approaches. gEDA is a toolkit, not an integrated tool. If you expect it to lead you down some specific usage pathway you will be disappointed. Part of the game is adapting it to the flow your job needs. Its power is that you *can* adapt it to *your* needs: you aren't stuck with an approach that doesn't fit those needs. With all due respect, I have read/heard this philosophy a number of times. I don't expect and never have expected to be lead anywhere. If one reads the [9]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:gaf website, there is a clear impression that these tools can work together in some fashion. That fashion is dictated by what ever the users end goal is. This strongly implies a lot of 'flexibility', which means that the tools have been tested for interopeability. There is, however, a very clear statement about one tool using another tools output, performing some function, and perhaps generating output that can be used by the upstream tool or downstream tool. If this funtionality does not work, and even go so far as to corrupt either the input file or the resultant output file, then, quite simply, the tool is worthless. (Which makes me wonder why anyone would use a flakey tool to do anything to something they have spent so much time developing at the risk of having it broken/destroyed). As far a spreadsheet approach scaling well, I also beg to differ. A simple global substitute on a unique string will fix the probem. Even a global search with selective substitution will be more efficient
gEDA-user: Has anyone in this group seriously used KiCAD?
Pros/cons? and please, no philosphy about integrated vs independent tools...I am interested in aspects such as what things work? what doesn't? user experiences such as strengths and weakness (again actual/functional and not philosophy) Thanks John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Creating bill of materials?
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Joshua [1]jos...@laserlinc.com wrote: I agree with Delorie. I also was only making slow progress with gattrib. I found the copy and paist functionality limited and strange. I also was confronted with the add column bug. If I remember correctly it corrupted my files when it shifted the properties from one heading to the next. That is why I started exporting to a oocalc. Then I was able to get a lot more work done as oocalc is a refined product. I hadn't found the sch2csv or csv2sch scripts at that time and thus made my own version called gattrib_csv. Not only have I been able to edit the properties en-mass, but I have also been able to import data generated by other users provided as xls files. I now use the one and the same tool to generate the bill of materials for the project as I do to edit the properties. [2]http://public.laserlinc.com/Joshua/gattrib_csv.java compiled by gcj --main=gattrib_csv -o gattrib_csv gattrib_csv.java Yes, the functionality of those (DJ Delorie) scripts (from what little I have been able to find that describes what they do), seem to fit the attribute edit and BoM generation requirements very nicely. I hope I can say the same after I try them out. So, this causes me to ask the question: Why hasen't gattrib been removed from:[3]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:gaf as well as any other instances? While the concept is good, the implementation is worthless, and apparently has been 'around' with the same sort of problems since 2006. As a person who is trying to give the gEDA approach a try, frustrations mount daily in trying to make progress. This brings up another issue that I am curious aboutthe one of component symbol libraries. My expectation (hope, guess?) was with an effort that is open source, users would contribute their symbols to the library, and the symbol library would be huge. I didn't find that reality. I assumed this because users would 'giveback' to the community. Clearly some have done this. I plan on doing this (if I continue down this path). So why hasen't the component mfgs been inclined to develop and contribute symbols? Why hasen't the users contributed more? Perhaps there are not too many users. Perhaps it is a case of: The tools have been built but the users are not comming.Anyway, just curious -John References 1. mailto:jos...@laserlinc.com 2. http://public.laserlinc.com/Joshua/gattrib_csv.java 3. http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:gaf ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: Creating bill of materials?
Perhaps I have not progress through the development cycle far enough, but, it there a way generate a bill of materials (BoM) from gschem and/or PCB? In my readings I have not come across reference to BoMs. I am thinking that one could be made by specifying the BoM headings of interest (which would be the desired attributes from gschem) in a BoM template file, have a program comb through the components in gschem and create a csv file suitable for Excel to use. Along these lines, are there program provisions in gschem and/or pcb that allows one to create user define attributes for a component? (e.g. component supplier, pointer to relevant documentation such as an app note, or even a note attribute). Again, thank you for your feedback John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Creating bill of materials?
oops, I forgot that in my original post: gEDA : GPL Electronic Design Automation This is gattrib -- gEDA's attribute editor Gattrib version: 1.6.1.20100214 -J On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Andy Fierman [1]andyfier...@signality.co.uk wrote: What version of gattrib are you using? I opened a bug report on SourceForge about what seems to be the same problem back in 2009: Bugs item #2793743, was opened at 2009-05-19 11:18 The version of gattrib I was using then was 1.4.0.20080127 from the Debian lenny repos. I don't know if that bug report can still be accessed since the SourceForge Tracker had been disabled: [2]https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=818426aid=2793 743group_id=161080 Sorry, knowledge buffer now empty. Andy. [3]signality.co.uk On 17 August 2011 15:40, John Hudak [4]jjhu...@gmail.com wrote: Very cool, thank you! So, I tried itand it produced output that was not expected, and I would go so far as to say that it is wrong. Attached is a jpg file of how the original attribute-component matrix looks like. Then I do an Add attribute column and I get the result shown in modified attribute pic... Ummm, I expected to see a blank column with my designated heading appended to the right of the existing column. What I got was my new column PREPENDED before the last column, and populated with the contents of the original last column. So what did I do wrong?!? John On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Andy Fierman [1][5]andyfier...@signality.co.uk wrote: Hi John, Sounds like you've not yet found this: [2][6]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-gnetlist I know, netlist isn't necessarily the first search term that comes to mind when looking for info on how to generate a BoM ... See also: [3][7]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-attribs Cheers, Andy. [4][8]signality.co.uk On 17 August 2011 13:24, John Hudak [5][9]jjhu...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps I have not progress through the development cycle far enough, but, it there a way generate a bill of materials (BoM) from gschem and/or PCB? In my readings I have not come across reference to BoMs. I am thinking that one could be made by specifying the BoM headings of interest (which would be the desired attributes from gschem) in a BoM template file, have a program comb through the components in gschem and create a csv file suitable for Excel to use. Along these lines, are there program provisions in gschem and/or pcb that allows one to create user define attributes for a component? (e.g. component supplier, pointer to relevant documentation such as an app note, or even a note attribute). Again, thank you for your feedback John ___ geda-user mailing list [6][10]geda-user@moria.seul.org [7][11]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list [8][12]geda-user@moria.seul.org [9][13]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:[14]andyfier...@signality.co.uk 2. [15]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-gnetlist 3. [16]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-attribs 4. [17]http://signality.co.uk/ 5. mailto:[18]jjhu...@gmail.com 6. mailto:[19]geda-user@moria.seul.org 7. [20]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user 8. mailto:[21]geda-user@moria.seul.org 9. [22]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list [23]geda-user@moria.seul.org [24]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list [25]geda-user@moria.seul.org [26]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:andyfier...@signality.co.uk 2. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=818426aid=2793743group_id=161080 3. http://signality.co.uk/ 4. mailto:jjhu...@gmail.com 5. mailto:andyfier...@signality.co.uk 6. http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-gnetlist 7. http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-attribs 8. http://signality.co.uk/ 9. mailto:jjhu...@gmail.com 10. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 11. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user 12. mailto:geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Creating bill of materials?
oh, and I should probably add this: Ubuntu 10.10, Maverick Meerkat - released in October 2010 Running under Virtual Box: 4.0.4 r70112 J On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:25 AM, John Hudak [1]jjhu...@gmail.com wrote: oops, I forgot that in my original post: gEDA : GPL Electronic Design Automation This is gattrib -- gEDA's attribute editor Gattrib version: 1.6.1.20100214 -J On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Andy Fierman [2]andyfier...@signality.co.uk wrote: What version of gattrib are you using? I opened a bug report on SourceForge about what seems to be the same problem back in 2009: Bugs item #2793743, was opened at 2009-05-19 11:18 The version of gattrib I was using then was 1.4.0.20080127 from the Debian lenny repos. I don't know if that bug report can still be accessed since the SourceForge Tracker had been disabled: [3]https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=818426aid=2793 743group_id=161080 Sorry, knowledge buffer now empty. Andy. [4]signality.co.uk On 17 August 2011 15:40, John Hudak [5]jjhu...@gmail.com wrote: Very cool, thank you! So, I tried itand it produced output that was not expected, and I would go so far as to say that it is wrong. Attached is a jpg file of how the original attribute-component matrix looks like. Then I do an Add attribute column and I get the result shown in modified attribute pic... Ummm, I expected to see a blank column with my designated heading appended to the right of the existing column. What I got was my new column PREPENDED before the last column, and populated with the contents of the original last column. So what did I do wrong?!? John On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Andy Fierman [1][6]andyfier...@signality.co.uk wrote: Hi John, Sounds like you've not yet found this: [2][7]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-gnetlist I know, netlist isn't necessarily the first search term that comes to mind when looking for info on how to generate a BoM ... See also: [3][8]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-attribs Cheers, Andy. [4][9]signality.co.uk On 17 August 2011 13:24, John Hudak [5][10]jjhu...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps I have not progress through the development cycle far enough, but, it there a way generate a bill of materials (BoM) from gschem and/or PCB? In my readings I have not come across reference to BoMs. I am thinking that one could be made by specifying the BoM headings of interest (which would be the desired attributes from gschem) in a BoM template file, have a program comb through the components in gschem and create a csv file suitable for Excel to use. Along these lines, are there program provisions in gschem and/or pcb that allows one to create user define attributes for a component? (e.g. component supplier, pointer to relevant documentation such as an app note, or even a note attribute). Again, thank you for your feedback John ___ geda-user mailing list [6][11]geda-user@moria.seul.org [7][12]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list [8][13]geda-user@moria.seul.org [9][14]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:[15]andyfier...@signality.co.uk 2. [16]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-gnetlist 3. [17]http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:faq-attribs 4. [18]http://signality.co.uk/ 5. mailto:[19]jjhu...@gmail.com 6. mailto:[20]geda-user@moria.seul.org 7. [21]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user 8. mailto:[22]geda-user@moria.seul.org 9. [23]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list [24]geda-user@moria.seul.org [25]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list [26]geda-user@moria.seul.org [27]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:jjhu...@gmail.com 2. mailto:andyfier...@signality.co.uk 3. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=818426aid=2793743group_id=161080 4. http://signality.co.uk/ 5. mailto:jjhu...@gmail.com 6. mailto:andyfier...@signality.co.uk 7. http
Re: gEDA-user: Layer button backgrounds
However you change the buttons, please ensure that it is VERY obvious what selection is made/mode it is currently in. I've seen far to many sw products where pushing a button to engage some action or select a mode failed to notify the user (either noticeable visual change, audio sound, or both) as to the state of the system. there were some cases when the change was so slight that it was almost impossible to see the change. -J On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Colin D Bennett [1]co...@gibibit.com wrote: On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 20:48:48 +0200 Felix Ruoff [2]fe...@posaunenmission.de wrote: I personally like the new style you created. Its very nice! I think the reason for adding this small rectangles is, that its easier to see, if the button is pressed. Good point. I do like the full color fill you show, Andrew. However, I think we need a better way of indicating which layers are visible. Perhaps a little X or checkbox icon on the button? I already dislike the current buttons' indication of which layers are visible (change of fill color and text color with inset or outset border). Maybe something better can be done. Regards, Colin Am 18.08.2011 04:00, schrieb Andrew Poelstra: Hey all, I am working on moving the Gtk layer-selector into its own widget (see bug 699482, for example), and cleaning up the code. A question I have for the group is: why are the backgrounds of the layer buttons in little rectangles? Is there opposition to making the background fill the whole buttons, like so?: [3]http://wpsoftware.net/andrew/dump/buttons.png It would simplify the code a bit and IMHO looks more modern. There is a bit of an optical illusion making the new buttons seem bigger, but I checked in gimp and there is no change in size. ___ geda-user mailing list [4]geda-user@moria.seul.org [5]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:co...@gibibit.com 2. mailto:fe...@posaunenmission.de 3. http://wpsoftware.net/andrew/dump/buttons.png 4. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 5. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Creating bill of materials?
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak [1]k...@familieknaak.de wrote: Andy Fierman wrote: I don't know if that bug report can still be accessed since the SourceForge Tracker had been disabled: [2]https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=818426aid=2793743 group_id=161080 All bugs have been imported to launchpad. This particular report got number #698608 : [3]https://bugs.launchpad.net/geda/+bug/698608 Unfortunately, nothing has been done about it. It was still listed as new some minutes ago. The faulty behavior shows in my install, too. So I changed the status to confirmed. gattrib seems to be a bit neglected by developers. It feels more like a proof of concept than like a powerful tool. In my humble opinion, it would be better export/import to a spread sheet application like oocalc or gnumeric. This would avoind reinventing lots of wheels. If anything special is needed within the spread sheet, oocalc comes with full fledged scripting ability... ---)kaimartin(--- PS: Would you guys mind not to top-post? Consider this: A: You're wrong Q: I'v never found that to be true A: Because it makes following messages more difficult Q: Why is top-posting evil? -- Kai-Martin Knaak Email: [4]k...@familieknaak.de [5]http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x6C0B9F53 not happy with moderation of geda-user I think the concept of import/exporting into a spreadsheet program is an approach worthy of consideration as well. I had Excel in mind when I made my initial observations about the program. Since the gattribute capability seems to have been untouched for a long time, this further supports that what ever is done to fix it, should rely on tools that have good and sustained development efforts sustaining it. J References 1. mailto:k...@familieknaak.de 2. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=818426aid=2793743group_id=161080 3. https://bugs.launchpad.net/geda/+bug/698608 4. mailto:k...@familieknaak.de 5. http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: personal component library frustration-HELP/suggestions please?
Thank you Stephen. When you say 'others rely on them'..Why do they rely on them? I get the feeling that there is some feature or property that some ppl find important enough to use them (over the other libraries). My first attempt at creating symbols is with DJboxsym. It was successful but the second two bullet points at the website made for more questions without answers that could possibly throw up roadblocks further down the road: 1. symbols are in my compromise' format..u HOW compromised? What is compromised? 2. No DRC support (use my sym2/csv2sym programs for that). What the heck is DRC (not spelled out anywhere - first rule in writing a document that I learned in grade school was ALWAYS spell out an acronym the first time it is used), and now I need another special program that does what??? And how does it alter the route to attaining my goal?? As an enduser, I personally don't care if it is written in perl, python, pascal, smalltalk, lisp, algol68 or Cray Fortran. As a developer, it may be important. As a result, thinking that there is something 'non-native' in this approach, I looked for others. BTW, the link does not work - Wireshark informs me that the route is established but does not respond..time out error. -John On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Stephen Ecob [1]silicon.on.inspirat...@gmail.com wrote: Hi John, On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 7:24 AM, John Hudak [2]jjhu...@gmail.com wrote: I always add the options skip-m4 and use-files because I don't want any of the M4 generated footprints, ever. But this may be due to personal prejudice. This brings up another issue I am havingAs a neophyte to this tool set (but not to EDA tools in general), what is the deal with m4 files? I've read through a lot of stuff in this area, dating from 2003 through now, and I still don't know if m4 files are good/bad? to be used/avoided? I'd guess the majority of the community don't use it, but there are certainly some who rely on it. I am attempting to put a EDA workbench together in a reasonably integrated way. Part of this is to create a (local) big symbol library so that it can be used and managed. What I don't want to do is grab component and footprint libraries that are old, brittle, or cause gschem or PCB to die. From my perspective, all of the inconsistent information is very confusing. Quite simply, where is the 'best' symbol and footprint library and the best way to create compatible symbols and footprints? Sorry, there is no agreed 'best' way. Various members of the community use the tools in widely varying ways. The tools are flexible enough to work well for for applications ranging from AC power wiring looms to ASIC layout. (After going through 3 different methods of generating symbols, it seems that creating one graphically within gschem is the one least laden with holes...true?) I sometimes use that method, but my current work is with FPGAs and I find the best way for making the symbols I need is DJboxsym: [3]http://vivara.net/cgi-bin/djboxsym.cgi This tool is very convenient for my FPGA work, but when I'm working with BJTs, FETs, diodes and triacs I use the graphical route. Stephen Ecob Silicon On Inspiration Sydney Australia [4]www.sioi.com.au ___ geda-user mailing list [5]geda-user@moria.seul.org [6]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:silicon.on.inspirat...@gmail.com 2. mailto:jjhu...@gmail.com 3. http://vivara.net/cgi-bin/djboxsym.cgi 4. http://www.sioi.com.au/ 5. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 6. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: personal component library frustration-HELP/suggestions please?
I've created two directories in my home directory to store symbol files that I create, and another directory to store footprints I create: /home/jjh/project/component_symbols /home/jjh/project/component_footprints How do I modify gschem to look in my home directory for symbols AS WELL AS THE DEFAULT symbol directory? e.g I want my symbol directory in my user directory to appear in the Select Component component selection window. If you have a suggestion on how to organise this in a better way, please let me know, and also tell me how to implement it. gschem v 1.6.1.20100214 Thanks much John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: personal component library frustration-HELP/suggestions please?
I always add the options skip-m4 and use-files because I don't want any of the M4 generated footprints, ever. But this may be due to personal prejudice. This brings up another issue I am havingAs a neophyte to this tool set (but not to EDA tools in general), what is the deal with m4 files? I've read through a lot of stuff in this area, dating from 2003 through now, and I still don't know if m4 files are good/bad? to be used/avoided? I am attempting to put a EDA workbench together in a reasonably integrated way. Part of this is to create a (local) big symbol library so that it can be used and managed. What I don't want to do is grab component and footprint libraries that are old, brittle, or cause gschem or PCB to die. From my perspective, all of the inconsistent information is very confusing. Quite simply, where is the 'best' symbol and footprint library and the best way to create compatible symbols and footprints? (After going through 3 different methods of generating symbols, it seems that creating one graphically within gschem is the one least laden with holes...true?) Thanks to all who replied to my previous questions. J On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak [1]k...@familieknaak.de wrote: John Hudak wrote: I've created two directories in my home directory to store symbol files that I create, and another directory to store footprints I create: /home/jjh/project/component_symbols /home/jjh/project/component_footprints How do I modify gschem to look in my home directory for symbols AS WELL AS THE DEFAULT symbol directory? This is easier than not using the default lib at all. For gschem and gsch2pcb put the following lines in your user gafrc: /--- $HOME/.gEDA/gafrc ;(reset-component-library) ; don't use system symbols ;(reset-source-library) ; don't use system location for subcircuits ; Allow to source symbols from the current working directory (define current-working-directory .) (component-library current-working-directory symbols in project dir) (source-library current-working-directory) ; Allow to source symbols from the local copy of geda-symbols (define symbols FULL-PATH-TO-YOUR-SYMBOL-DIR) (component-library symbols) ; In case you have symbols in subdirs you can build additional paths on ; the fly. This example is for symbols/analog/diode (component-library (build-path symbols analog diode)) ; This statement makes gschem automatically enter subdirs: (component-library-search symbols) \-- To make gsch2pcb find your footprints, add the following to your project file: /-- YOUR-PROJECT.g2p --- schematics YOUR-PROJECT.sch output-name YOUR-PROJECT elements-dir FULL-PATH-TO-THE-DIR-BELOW-THE_DIRS-THAT-CONTAIN-YOUR-FOOTPRINTS \--- I always add the options skip-m4 and use-files because I don't want any of the M4 generated footprints, ever. But this may be due to personal prejudice. To get your footprints in the PCB chooser edit the library line in $HOME.pcb/preferences while there is no instnce of PCB running: library-newlib = FULL-PATH-TO-THE-DIR-ETC:./footprints:. Note, that unlike with gschem/gnetlist, you have to provide the Dir below the dir that actually contains the footprints. If you have a suggestion on how to organise this in a better way, please let me know, and also tell me how to implement it. IMHO, your set-up is perfectly fine :-) Hope, this helps. ---)kaiamrtin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Email: [2]k...@familieknaak.de [3]http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x6C0B9F53 not happy with moderation of geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list [4]geda-user@moria.seul.org [5]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:k...@familieknaak.de 2. mailto:k...@familieknaak.de 3. http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x6C0B9F53 4. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 5. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: personal component library frustration-HELP/suggestions please?
So, let me paraphrase what I think you said: I create (or use) one m4 template (either symbol or footprint), that is 'generic' and when I want to instantiate that template in gschem I can add/specify additional properties, i.e. #pins, signal direction, etc. ?? Sort of like the schematic contains a reference to the generic component, and the gschem contains the additional properties associated with the component and when gschem 'combines them' it produces the desired graphic on the screen. T/F?? If that is the case, I can see how (as one person stated) if I try to invoke gschem to see a schematic in which the base objects are referenced (and not contained in the file), and it cant find the referenced library, the whole thing falls apart.(unless once the schematic is generated, it does contain all the drawing information but in a form that cannot be edited, unless the reference to the generic component can be made). I still don't get it...so for a neophite to this tool, should I use them or not? I guess I could make that decision if I knew the pros and cons of the approach. Is this layed out somewhere in a single document? Thanks again for your guidance patience. -John On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 6:50 PM, DJ Delorie [1]d...@delorie.com wrote: This brings up another issue I am havingAs a neophyte to this tool set (but not to EDA tools in general), what is the deal with m4 files? They're dynamically generated (M4 is a parser). So, you create one M4 template for a, say, DIP part, and then you can ask for any DIPN footprint and it generates one with the right number of pins. In theory. In practice, we list all the pin counts we use, but it does mean that all the DIPN footprints are one pattern, all the SOJN are one, all TQFPN are one, etc. ___ geda-user mailing list [2]geda-user@moria.seul.org [3]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:d...@delorie.com 2. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 3. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: tragesym error - help please!
Hi Werner: Thank you for pointing out the error, however, I am using Open Office and from what I can see, there is no way to save as text. In open office, if I say File-Save As, the options are: Text CSV, with options to change the Character set (Unicode UTF8 is the default), Field Delimiter, options are , ; : tab space, and Text Delimiter, options are: ' I tried Field delimiters of: tab and space, with text delimiter options of and ' (all combinations), and none of them worked. I looked at M$ Excel (2007) and it indeed has the save as text file (tab delimited) option (I did not try this approach. (I found this somewhat strange in that using open sources tools to construct the symbols would not have the proper format (e.g. open office spreadsheet) but M$ Excel does. ) I did copy the open office spreadsheet file into gedit, saved it, and it worked. Thank you! John On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Werner Hoch [1]werner...@gmx.de wrote: Hi John, On Samstag, 13. August 2011, John Hudak wrote: The file is attached. Thank you for taking the time to look at it. The cells in the csv-file has a comma s seperator. tragesym expects a tab as seperator. You should use save as txt and not save as csv. It's the step5 in the tutorial: [2]http://www.geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:tragesym_tutorial BTW, there is an error in the tragesym error statement...It should be 'attribute' and not 'attribut'...hey, i should be lucky I even get this much..lol It's just a typo or missing translation (attribute in english is Attribut in german). Regards Werner ___ geda-user mailing list [3]geda-user@moria.seul.org [4]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:werner...@gmx.de 2. http://www.geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:tragesym_tutorial 3. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 4. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: PCB opengl?
On 08/13/2011 06:10 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: Who are the people, who are in the position to do so? What effort is needed? Not me. I'm hoping to do some work on gnetlist scheme programming to get verilogAMS netlists to connect well with gnucap, but have to spend time doing housing construction work instead to counter the downward trend of the USA to be like Argentina was debt-wise. So, I can't spend any time scheme programming, even though I've done Cadence Skill lang. (LISP) programming to do EDA automation before. Tip money would speed that up. JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: tragesym error - help please!
So I follow the tutorial on creating a gschem symbol ([1]http://www.geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:tragesym_tutorial), get the .ods template from [2]http://www.geda.seul.org/wiki/_media/tragesym:template2.ods, fill it in with my data, save it as .csv and execute: tragesym foo.csv foo.sch and I keep getting: error: version attribut missing So, I repeat the process, and I only enter in 8 pins, and the data fields shown in the tutorial. I get the same error...wtf? The version number is clearly in the field in the .ods and .csv files, soany help is appreciated. BTW, there is an error in the tragesym error statement...It should be 'attribute' and not 'attribut'...hey, i should be lucky I even get this much..lol John References 1. http://www.geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:tragesym_tutorial 2. http://www.geda.seul.org/wiki/_media/tragesym:template2.ods ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Tag-Connect TC2030-MCP(NL) footprint, expert review
On Aug 12, 2011, at 12:04 PM, Colin D Bennett wrote:
Question: Is there any standard special attribute that can be set on
the schematic symbol so that the part (e.g., J1) does not appear on a
BOM or parts list produced by gnetlist? In this case, the footprint is
not designed to accept any installed part. In other, common cases,
parts such as tuning capacitors, inductors, optional connectors or
pull-up resistors, etc. might be marked on a schematic as “no-load” or
“DNP” (do not place). How do you handle this in gEDA?
There is no standard. I often have a spec= attribute in my flows, and I can put
DNP there, and remove parts tagged with it from the BOM with a tiny script,
e.g. '$4!=DNP{print}' in AWK.
It wouldn't be crazy to define a standard attribute for this purpose. It would
require easy changes to the BOM and partslist back ends. How would you like it
to work?
John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
j...@noqsi.com
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Automatically start wire placement when you press the hotkey?
On Aug 12, 2011, at 12:56 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: I didn't like magnetic net mode at first, because it kept guessing wrong. Since then I discovered that I was guessing wrong more than it was, so I kept it on. I think it just needs more tweaking to do the right thing more often. But what the right thing is depends on personal style and institutional conventions. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Automatically start wire placement when you press the hotkey?
On Aug 12, 2011, at 3:40 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: In this case, the right thing is to do what most people expect it to do. You have no idea what that is, and you can't have any idea without spending a lot of time actually watching a lot of people use the software. What people report is miserably unreliable as to what the *right thing* really is. I learned how to do optical telescope/instrument control software by watching astronomers work. But the system some students and I cobbled together in Forth back in the early 80's was pretty crude. So, we got a very bright MIT student to rewrite it in C as a thesis project. I told him We'll pay you to take a trip to Kitt Peak. Go and assist an observer for a few nights, see how it really works. Then you'll know what to write. But he had that coder's arrogance, wouldn't do it. Instead, he went around and interviewed observers and coded up what they *said* was the right thing. The result was gorgeous: lovely display, well organized menus, fast, efficient as a demo. But it proved unusable: too often, the right thing in the code wasn't *quite* what was really needed in a specific situation at the telescope. The crude, ugly Forth system proved more resilient: it let the observer compose what was really needed on the spot, so the observers continued to use it (to my dismay, because I didn't want to keep supporting it). John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: Version compatibility between gschem and PCB
I came across an board layout file that requires a newer version of PCB than I have installed. My version of PCB is 20091103. If I upgrade to the most recent version of PCB, will it be able to interoperate with gschem 1.6.1.20100214? Also, a clarification of terminology for me is needed. The PCB website ([1]http://pcb.gpleda.org/) lists a number of 'snapshots'..are these beta releases or are they the most recent releases for distribution? Another related question. I am running gschem and PCB under Ubuntu 10.10, Maverick Meerkat. Are there any issues in upgrading PCB for this version of Ubuntu? I guess a related question is where can I find the most recent package release of gEDA for this version of Ubuntu. Thank you for your help. -John References 1. http://pcb.gpleda.org/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Automatically start wire placement when you press the hotkey?
On Aug 11, 2011, at 5:48 AM, Krzysztof Kościuszkiewicz wrote: Author: Peter Clifton pc...@cam.ac.uk This allows magnetic net mode to be used for the start-point of a net as well as its end-point, whilst still being able to initiate net drawing with the n key. No, please, no. Magnetic net mode is a misfeature as far as I'm concerned: I always disable it. It's extremely prone to changing its mind in the milliseconds between the time I decide to click the mouse and the time I actually click it. And it never routes a net in a sensible way, so I mostly find myself holding down control when using it, so I can add midpoints in the right places. The gschem UI is very efficient with its single key switch modes *and* start an action single-key accelerators. Please keep these intact. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Automatically start wire placement when you press the hotkey?
Ditto John 2011/8/11 yamazakir2 [1]yamazak...@gmail.com I agree, magnetic mode is an instant disable for me everytime I install gschem On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:38 AM, John Doty [2]j...@noqsi.com wrote: On Aug 11, 2011, at 5:48 AM, Krzysztof Kościuszkiewicz wrote: Author: Peter Clifton [3]pc...@cam.ac.uk This allows magnetic net mode to be used for the start-point of a net as well as its end-point, whilst still being able to initiate net drawing with the n key. No, please, no. Magnetic net mode is a misfeature as far as I'm concerned: I always disable it. It's extremely prone to changing its mind in the milliseconds between the time I decide to click the mouse and the time I actually click it. And it never routes a net in a sensible way, so I mostly find myself holding down control when using it, so I can add midpoints in the right places. The gschem UI is very efficient with its single key switch modes *and* start an action single-key accelerators. Please keep these intact. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. [4]http://www.noqsi.com/ [5]j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list [6]geda-user@moria.seul.org [7]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list [8]geda-user@moria.seul.org [9]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user References 1. mailto:yamazak...@gmail.com 2. mailto:j...@noqsi.com 3. mailto:pc...@cam.ac.uk 4. http://www.noqsi.com/ 5. mailto:j...@noqsi.com 6. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 7. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user 8. mailto:geda-user@moria.seul.org 9. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Version compatibility between gschem and PCB
On Aug 11, 2011, at 8:40 AM, John Hudak wrote: If I upgrade to the most recent version of PCB, will it be able to interoperate with gschem 1.6.1.20100214? pcb is only one of the many layout programs gEDA can export to, along with simulators and other targets. That interface is thus very stable: changes would be difficult to coordinate. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: PCB nanometer git tree
On 08/10/2011 06:04 PM, Andrew Poelstra wrote: Please test this and let me know what needs to be done. Thanks! Thanks Andrew. busy til Wednesday, then will try it out. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Wireless comms options
On 08/08/11 06:21, Chris Smith wrote: I'm guessing that composite will be easier to work with? Depends on the video sender products you find. If there's one for analog, that's problem solved. Do you have plenty of power at both ends? Google shows that there are plenty of video sender products out there, most of which seem to operate at 1.7-1.9GHz or 2.4GHz. Analog or data? With the compression you said was available, data might use less power and be cheaper modules... You haven't said much about the compression. Does H.264 completely define it? Are there modes of operation all called H.264? ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Constraint-based PCB footprint design
On 08/07/11 21:47, Rob Spanton wrote: https://xgoat.com/wp/2011/08/08/playing-with-footprints-and-constraints/ The tool is by no means complete... it's the result of just a few hours work right now. Thanks for sharing that, looks like python style of sub-function.sub-function.function() Code chunks of that seem more reusable than anything in a footprint file. John -- Ecosensory ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Linux Desktop für gEDA
On Aug 5, 2011, at 1:27 PM, yamazakir2 wrote: To this day I still am not sure why anyone would willing use a mac. I have been consistent in this stance for the past 20+ years when I was forced to use a mac in elementary school for the first time. 20 years ago was the time of systems 6 and 7, the Mac's low point. The basic problem was that the original Mac system was not really an operating system. It was essentially a library of utility functions for standalone programs. While that was sensible for a graphical computer with 128k RAM, 64k ROM, and a floppy, it didn't scale well. The common resource management that is the essence of an operating system was gradually added on as features. This did not work well, causing conflict and instability that increased with successive system versions up to 7. By MacOS8, Apple had at least figured out the nature of the mess they were in, and were able to take some steps toward fixing it, but they didn't have a truly solid foundation until MacOSX. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Linux Desktop für gEDA
On 08/05/11 14:35, yamazakir2 wrote: Do you guys use your linux box for general desktop usage or only EDA? Both. Email is via Mozilla thunderbird, which seems to handle cross platform things well. I still don't have a player for .wmv video working though. Using Firefox with the latest flash plugin gives you youtube and vimeo movie formats, and sound is working more ways with less hangups and with less configuring than several years ago. Open office is working well enough to communicate with a few windows users without too much loss. If you needed to communicate quickly with a team of windows users, it might pay to use a vmware windows install on linux to access documents quickly without changing them any so they can be used for updates. I was liking a few KDE apps, like kword, but KDE got so invasive and took up so much disk space, I stopped using it. My linux install, with lots of engineering project data takes up close to 17GB, and I have stacks of cheap 20GB 80pin SCSI drives I back up to, so I don't want to let it expand any further for a couple of years... then maybe backups on servers will be the thing to do. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Wedana milestone reached
On 08/06/11 08:54, Павел Таранов wrote: 3. Trac plugin introduced. See demo http://demo.wedana.org/night_builds/trac 4. We have own domain now: http://www.wedana.org launched. Also http://demo.wedana.org available. Looks good. I could not figure how to use the origin input to get a symbol view off the lower left corner... ?When I entered a pos number, the symbol view is off screen. neg number had no effect... Position (inc): 0:0 John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Wedana milestone reached
On 08/06/11 14:24, Павел Таранов wrote: When I entered a pos number, the symbol view is off screen. neg number had no effect... Position (inc): 0:0 Seems it is not obvious, but after you change value in position, press Draw button. The result when I do that is the symbol moves to the left for Position (inc): 4:2 and is off screen for 5:2 or 4:3 John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Linux Desktop für gEDA
On 08/04/11 13:08, Markus wrote: What desktop are you using for gEDA? Xfce on debian unstable ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Linux Desktop für gEDA
On Aug 5, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Josh Jordan wrote: manager issues. Does anyone use geda on osx? Sure. Works fine. Of late, it's been my main platform for gEDA, since I've been on the road a lot, and the MacBook has a bigger screen than the Linux netbook. I have given osx a good try and found it lacks basic features such as expanding a window to take up half the screen, you have to buy an app for that! Basic feature? Nah. Given the general capability to resize a window to any useful size, there is no need to have a feature here. Good software design avoids such trivial special-case features. They just add to the fog. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Linux Desktop für gEDA
On Aug 5, 2011, at 12:35 PM, yamazakir2 wrote: Do you guys use your linux box for general desktop usage or only EDA? For general desktop use, I tend to gravitate to the MacBook, but I'm not limited to it. If I need a lot of windows in view, the Linux box with two monitors is the machine of choice if I'm in the office. The totalitarian regularity of Mac applications is convenient for general desktop use, but not necessary. As Apple's hostility to users (as opposed to passive consumers) appears to be on the rise, it is likely that I will be phasing out the Mac in the future. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Problem With SOT23-5? Invisible Guardband Around Landpattern; Arcs in Silkscreen
The problem in the SOT23-5 may be the dash in the filename. Try changing to a name like SOT23_5. (* jcl *) -- http://www.wiblocks.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Power relay question
On Jul 28, 2011, at 4:04 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: This is the type of problem that just screams PIC10 !! :-) Or 4000-series CMOS logic. Nice thing about 4000 series in this application is that it can operate on unregulated 12V. The lower cost of the simpler relay would easily pay for the logic chips, and you could add in some safety features and debouncing for free. Then dump the relay and use a power MOSFET :-) Yep. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Power relay question
On Jul 28, 2011, at 7:03 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: Or 4000-series CMOS logic. Nice thing about 4000 series in this application is that it can operate on unregulated 12V. I thought of that, but a linear regulator just for the pic would be cheap, and you get debounce, multi-input state machines, and a watchdog for no extra cost... Simple state machines and debounce are easy with MSI, too, and you don't need a software development setup. Arguably easier to debug a simple MSI circuit than a program. Even if I ran a 4000 right on the 12v, I wouldn't count on that 12v to be very clean if it has motors running off it. Electrically braking a motor with an H-bridge can spike the power rails. 4000 series is extremely resistant to noise on the power rails. I've run it off raw stepper motor power, no problem. I think that's really its remaining niche: slow logic running on noisy raw power. And a pic + regulator (sot-26 + sot-323) is probably going to be smaller than the equivalent 4000-series chips anyway. If you use a 12V H-bridge you need level translation, too. That's sometimes annoyingly expensive in one way or another. But of course, there are zillions of ways of doing it, it's up to the designer to pick what's best for their needs. Agreed. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: possible collaborators on PCB, gschem [Kicad (or another FOSS tool)]
He says, We do quite complex PCB design, and for us it's important to have high-performance quality tools. One option is to try to get some community effort behind Kicad (or another FOSS tool) and bring it on par with some of the non-open tools Also said, Does the router feature push shove? This is a big must for us. I would also need an expert's assessment on whether pcb would be a good, modular, clean base to improve on. What I hear informally is that it wouldn't So there you have our image problem even though pcb has a plugin API. Larry Doolittle is going to be there in person. What can we tell them to get them interested in gEDA more than KiCAD? They are interested in and collaborating with Icarus verilog's Steve W. probably for FPGAs and may not care about chips. John -- Forwarded message -- From: *Javier Serrano* javier.serr...@cern.ch mailto:javier.serr...@cern.ch Date: Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:04 AM Subject: [OH Updates] Looking for a Kicad expert To: upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org mailto:upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org Hi all, I am looking for a Kicad expert who would like to come to Grenoble (France) in October to present Kicad and discuss about future trends in FOSS EDA during the ICALEPCS Open Hardware Workshop (http://www.ohwr.org/projects/ohr-meta/wiki/OHWorkshop). Let me give some bits of context: - The ICALEPCS OH workshop is mainly attended by people who also attend the ICALEPCS conference, i.e. people interested in the development of control and data acquisition hardware and software for big Physics labs. I started organizing the workshop before knowing about the summit, but I still think it makes sense because many of the attendees could not have attended the summit anyway. I think that community is very complementary to this one, and by having some CERN people attend the summit we hope we can stay coherent. - The next big thing for us in OH is the tools. We are actively collaborating with Steve Williams co. in bringing VHDL and SystemVerilog support to Icarus Verilog, and we think Icarus can reach a degree of quality and performance in mixed-language simulation where we should be able to use it exclusively [1]. Then we will be able to use Verilog cores from our US friends :) and they will be able to use our VHDL cores without the need of a non-open simulator. - I am not an expert on PCB design tools, but people tell me FOSS tools are still some way behind their non-open counterparts. We do quite complex PCB design, and for us it's important to have high-performance quality tools. One option is to try to get some community effort behind Kicad (or another FOSS tool) and bring it on par with some of the non-open tools, but I do not know a) how hard that would be and b) what the Kicad people would think of that. So I am looking for a speaker/debater who would like to participate in the OH workshop in October and bridge that gap. If you or someone you know would like to do it, please contact me privately. Thanks! Javier [1] Notice I don't represent the whole of CERN in this, just a corridor of hackers with an attitude. ___ updates mailing list upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org mailto:upda...@lists.openhardwaresummit.org http://lists.openhardwaresummit.org/listinfo.cgi/updates-openhardwaresummit.org -- Ecosensory 1218 W 39th St. Austin TX 78756 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
