Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
Am 25.08.2011 um 21:57 schrieb Felix Ruoff:
(wenn ich das richtig rausgefunden habe, bist du/sie (blöde
deutsche Sprache) bei dem Projekt auch aktiv, oder?).
Yupp. I maintain the PCB Milling page in the wiki and created
Generation 7 Electronics, which is designed to be millable.
- 0001 let the system library allocate the temporyary file: Alberto
Maccioni wrote in his mail of 1. May 2011 that the temporary file
is sometimes needed for checking the result. He suggested to add a
switch weather the file should be removed or not. My suggestion:
Don't use tmpfile(), but use the new function gcode_get_filename()
from patch 0004 with an additional suffix for the filename '.png'.
Good idea. While I don't think looking at the PNG gives a reliable
measure wether the produced G-code is usable, the PNG is at least
always next to the file it refers to in a file browser.
- 0004 create better file names: Why should the default file-suffix
be changed to '.cnc'? I suggest to apply this patch but let the
default file-suffix as it is ('.gcode') for compatibility with
probably existing scripts using this function.
The suffix doesn't really matter, as G-code compilers can't really
agree on a common one. Go for it!
- 0005 add a flag wether to procude advanced G-code: I will suggest
to set the switch 'produce advanced G-code' to ON by default
(backwards compatibility).
Backwards compatibility vs. machine compatibility? Perhaps. I hope
dialog settings survive relaunches of the application one day, so
this will become a non-issue.
- 0007 switch from tool-radius to tool-diameter in the user
interface: This patch breaks backwards compatibility, so have a
little headache with it. I think, there is a possibility to mark
the tool-radius setting as deprecated and support both options (for
using the gcode-export with scripts). I have not done something
like this - perhaps anyone have a hint? I would also prefer to have
the tool-diameter in the user interface (as Markus' patch would do).
If I see things correctly, names in the HID setup are used for
command line options as well. Can't see how to get a command-line-
only option there.
To be honest, I don't care too much about keeping backwards
compatibility, as the G-code exporter is apparently rarely used now
and the switch to diameter will give easy to fix errors. This
exporter is likely used mostly interactive anyways, as you have to
check for errors - with a G-code viewer.
Good suggestions, Felix.
Markus
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter
http://www.jump-ing.de/
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
Am 25.08.2011 um 17:28 schrieb Markus Hitter: Am 23.08.2011 um 07:50 schrieb Felix Ruoff: as you can see, some of the patches failed to get applied. The reason for this are some changes in git head (the nanometer- conversion). I have worked to get this fixed yesterday but did not fully complete. Ganz unerwartete Unterstützung, vielen Dank. :-) ... ... O-oh, that wasn't meant to go to the list. Now I've got a red face. Markus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
Am 23.08.2011 um 07:50 schrieb Felix Ruoff: as you can see, some of the patches failed to get applied. The reason for this are some changes in git head (the nanometer- conversion). I have worked to get this fixed yesterday but did not fully complete. Ganz unerwartete Unterstützung, vielen Dank. :-) Das letzte Mal hat es gut funktioniert, ein Rebase für jeden einzelnen neuen Schritt aus master zu machen. Also erst die Version auschecken, zu der der Patchset passt, dann die Zahl der neuen Schritte zählen, dann git rebase master~38 autogen.sh make clean make git rebase master~37 autogen.sh make clean make git rebase master~36 autogen.sh make clean make git rebase master~35 autogen.sh make clean make ... bis man wieder bei master ist. Dann fallen die manuellen Korrekturen entweder ganz weg oder bleiben zumindest übersichtlich. Wenn ich da lese, dass ein Patch für nicht durchgehende Vias schon seit mehreren Jahren existiert, aber immer noch nicht eingebracht ist, dann bekomme ich das Gefühl, dass gEDA so eine Art Aufstand der Nicht-Developer braucht. Diese konsequente Verweigerung neuer Features ist zu nichts zu gebrauchen, gEDA könnte bereits sehr viel weiter sein. Gruss, Markus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
Hello Markus and all,
(English text starts after this paragraph. Nothing important here in
German said.)
danke für die Antwort (auf Deutsch! Viel einfacher für mich zu lesen ;-)
). Ich habe ein gewisses Interesse daran, dass die Patches eingepflegt
werden, da ich PCB evtl. als GCode generator für meine CNC Fräse
benutzen möchte, die zur Zeit mit der reprap-Software läuft (wenn ich
das richtig rausgefunden habe, bist du/sie (blöde deutsche Sprache) bei
dem Projekt auch aktiv, oder?). Werd jetzt trotzdem in englischer
Sprache weiterschreiben, damit sich niemand ausgegrezt fühlt.
Thank you for the 'tutorial'. I have much other things to do, so I think
it will need some days for me to review all your patches.
There has been some discussion already about Markus' patch-set which I
will summarise here and add some own comments. Please everybody, give
your comments.
- 0001 let the system library allocate the temporyary file: Alberto
Maccioni wrote in his mail of 1. May 2011 that the temporary file is
sometimes needed for checking the result. He suggested to add a switch
weather the file should be removed or not. My suggestion: Don't use
tmpfile(), but use the new function gcode_get_filename() from patch 0004
with an additional suffix for the filename '.png'.
- 0004 create better file names: Why should the default file-suffix be
changed to '.cnc'? I suggest to apply this patch but let the default
file-suffix as it is ('.gcode') for compatibility with probably existing
scripts using this function.
- 0005 add a flag wether to procude advanced G-code: I will suggest to
set the switch 'produce advanced G-code' to ON by default (backwards
compatibility).
- 0007 switch from tool-radius to tool-diameter in the user interface:
This patch breaks backwards compatibility, so have a little headache
with it. I think, there is a possibility to mark the tool-radius setting
as deprecated and support both options (for using the gcode-export with
scripts). I have not done something like this - perhaps anyone have a
hint? I would also prefer to have the tool-diameter in the user
interface (as Markus' patch would do).
I have not reviewed the other patches completely (have stopped at 0010).
I will write again, when I have new questions/suggestions.
If there are no negative comments in the next days I will do the changes
I suggested and start to apply this patches step by step.
Kind regards,
Felix
By the way: Has anyone started to review the commandline-docu patches I
have posted last Thursday (gEDA-user: PCB Docu: Patch for command-line
options)?
@Kai-Martin: I did not forget about your patch for 'Select all connected
items'
Am 25.08.2011 17:28, schrieb Markus Hitter:
Am 23.08.2011 um 07:50 schrieb Felix Ruoff:
as you can see, some of the patches failed to get applied. The reason
for this are some changes in git head (the nanometer-conversion). I
have worked to get this fixed yesterday but did not fully complete.
Ganz unerwartete Unterstützung, vielen Dank. :-)
Das letzte Mal hat es gut funktioniert, ein Rebase für jeden einzelnen
neuen Schritt aus master zu machen. Also erst die Version auschecken,
zu der der Patchset passt, dann die Zahl der neuen Schritte zählen, dann
git rebase master~38
autogen.sh make clean make
git rebase master~37
autogen.sh make clean make
git rebase master~36
autogen.sh make clean make
git rebase master~35
autogen.sh make clean make
...
bis man wieder bei master ist. Dann fallen die manuellen Korrekturen
entweder ganz weg oder bleiben zumindest übersichtlich.
Wenn ich da lese, dass ein Patch für nicht durchgehende Vias schon
seit mehreren Jahren existiert, aber immer noch nicht eingebracht ist,
dann bekomme ich das Gefühl, dass gEDA so eine Art Aufstand der
Nicht-Developer braucht. Diese konsequente Verweigerung neuer Features
ist zu nichts zu gebrauchen, gEDA könnte bereits sehr viel weiter sein.
Gruss,
Markus
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter
http://www.jump-ing.de/
___
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
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
I forgot to mention, that I refer to the latest patch-set available at
https://bugs.launchpad.net/pcb/+bug/699497 (Patch set of 2011-08-13.
Am 25.08.2011 21:57, schrieb Felix Ruoff:
Hello Markus and all,
(English text starts after this paragraph. Nothing important here in
German said.)
danke für die Antwort (auf Deutsch! Viel einfacher für mich zu lesen
;-) ). Ich habe ein gewisses Interesse daran, dass die Patches
eingepflegt werden, da ich PCB evtl. als GCode generator für meine CNC
Fräse benutzen möchte, die zur Zeit mit der reprap-Software läuft
(wenn ich das richtig rausgefunden habe, bist du/sie (blöde deutsche
Sprache) bei dem Projekt auch aktiv, oder?). Werd jetzt trotzdem in
englischer Sprache weiterschreiben, damit sich niemand ausgegrezt fühlt.
Thank you for the 'tutorial'. I have much other things to do, so I
think it will need some days for me to review all your patches.
There has been some discussion already about Markus' patch-set which I
will summarise here and add some own comments. Please everybody, give
your comments.
- 0001 let the system library allocate the temporyary file: Alberto
Maccioni wrote in his mail of 1. May 2011 that the temporary file is
sometimes needed for checking the result. He suggested to add a switch
weather the file should be removed or not. My suggestion: Don't use
tmpfile(), but use the new function gcode_get_filename() from patch
0004 with an additional suffix for the filename '.png'.
- 0004 create better file names: Why should the default file-suffix be
changed to '.cnc'? I suggest to apply this patch but let the default
file-suffix as it is ('.gcode') for compatibility with probably
existing scripts using this function.
- 0005 add a flag wether to procude advanced G-code: I will suggest to
set the switch 'produce advanced G-code' to ON by default (backwards
compatibility).
- 0007 switch from tool-radius to tool-diameter in the user interface:
This patch breaks backwards compatibility, so have a little headache
with it. I think, there is a possibility to mark the tool-radius
setting as deprecated and support both options (for using the
gcode-export with scripts). I have not done something like this -
perhaps anyone have a hint? I would also prefer to have the
tool-diameter in the user interface (as Markus' patch would do).
I have not reviewed the other patches completely (have stopped at
0010). I will write again, when I have new questions/suggestions.
If there are no negative comments in the next days I will do the
changes I suggested and start to apply this patches step by step.
Kind regards,
Felix
By the way: Has anyone started to review the commandline-docu patches
I have posted last Thursday (gEDA-user: PCB Docu: Patch for
command-line options)?
@Kai-Martin: I did not forget about your patch for 'Select all
connected items'
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
On Fri, 19 Aug 2011, Markus Hitter wrote: Am 15.08.2011 um 22:37 schrieb kqt4a...@comcast.net: I was especially interested in the drillmill function but I have not been able to get that to work I check the box and only get plain drilling Did you look into the outline G-code file? As drill-milling and outline milling often uses the same tool, I've put the drill-mills there. As a beginner this was not very intuitive I wanted to drill mill but not cut out the outline so I ignored the outline setting If I adjust the outline settings properly I get drill milling but also outline cutout Thanks Richard ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
On Fri, 19 Aug 2011, Markus Hitter wrote: Am 15.08.2011 um 22:37 schrieb kqt4a...@comcast.net: I was especially interested in the drillmill function but I have not been able to get that to work I check the box and only get plain drilling Did you look into the outline G-code file? As drill-milling and outline milling often uses the same tool, I've put the drill-mills there. A fresh 'git pull' broke this patch again ## 0001-HID-gcode-let-the-system-library-allocate-the-tempor.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #2 succeeded at 314 (offset 10 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 440 (offset -2 lines). ## 0002-HID-gcode-make-use-of-MAXPATHLEN.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 448 (offset -2 lines). ## 0003-HID-gcode-get-rid-of-tabulators-in-gcode.c.-Pure-whi.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #5 succeeded at 252 (offset 10 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 277 (offset 10 lines). Hunk #7 succeeded at 380 (offset 11 lines). Hunk #8 succeeded at 397 (offset 11 lines). Hunk #9 FAILED at 405. Hunk #10 succeeded at 429 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #11 succeeded at 735 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #12 succeeded at 748 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #13 succeeded at 805 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #14 succeeded at 839 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #15 succeeded at 853 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #16 FAILED at 876. Hunk #17 succeeded at 909 (offset -10 lines). Hunk #18 succeeded at 931 (offset -10 lines). 2 out of 18 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c.rej ## 0004-HID-gcode-create-better-file-names.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 116. Hunk #4 succeeded at 278 (offset 10 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 430 (offset 11 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 494 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #7 succeeded at 562 (offset -2 lines). 1 out of 7 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c.rej ## 0005-HID-gcode-add-a-flag-wether-to-produce-advanced-G-co.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #2 succeeded at 177 with fuzz 1. Hunk #3 succeeded at 424 (offset 11 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 458 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 547 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 566 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #7 succeeded at 607 (offset -2 lines). patching file src/hid/gcode/trace.c patching file src/hid/gcode/trace.h ## 0006-HID-gcode-Avoid-more-than-one-G-or-M-code-per-line-f.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 553 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #2 succeeded at 586 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 622 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 654 (offset -2 lines). ## 0007-HID-gcode-switch-from-tool-radius-to-tool-diameter-i.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #2 succeeded at 457 (offset -2 lines). ## 0008-HID-gcode-add-a-comment-about-the-tool-diameter-into.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #2 succeeded at 542 (offset -2 lines). ## 0009-HID-gcode-simplify-code-a-bit.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 639 (offset -2 lines). ## 0010-HID-gcode-use-drill-cycles-only-for-advanced-G-code.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #2 succeeded at 636 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 651 (offset -2 lines). ## 0011-HID-gcode-postpone-closing-the-mill-file-until-the-d.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #2 FAILED at 396. Hunk #3 succeeded at 576 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 644 (offset -2 lines). 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c.rej ## 0012-HID-gcode-finally-add-predrilling.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #2 FAILED at 171. Hunk #3 succeeded at 455 with fuzz 2 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 595 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 647 (offset -2 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 669 (offset -2 lines). 1 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c.rej ## 0013-HID-gcode-enhance-accuracy-of-the-distance-report-fo.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 592 (offset -8 lines). Hunk #2 succeeded at 676 (offset -8 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 693 (offset -8 lines). ## 0014-HID-gcode-remove-a-leftover-debug-printf.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 485 (offset -8 lines). ## 0015-HID-gcode-provide-info-about-drill-diameters-in-G-co.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #3 succeeded at 595 (offset -8 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 641 (offset -8 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 661 (offset -8 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 1062 (offset -16 lines). ## 0016-HID-gcode-sort-drills-not-only-by-distance-but-also-.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 226 (offset -6 lines). Hunk #2 succeeded at 259 (offset -6 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 613 (offset -8 lines). ## 0017-HID-gcode-report-one-drill-diameter-only-once-in-the.patch patching file src/hid/gcode/gcode.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 677
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011, Markus Hitter wrote: Am 13.08.2011 um 00:45 schrieb Markus Hitter: For a new patchset, I can't promise a point in time. I had luck! No surprises, just rebasing commit for commit was sufficient. New patchset available: https://bugs.launchpad.net/pcb/+bug/699497/comments/44 Markus Everything compiled OK I was especially interested in the drillmill function but I have not been able to get that to work I check the box and only get plain drilling I am undoubtedly doing something wrong Thanks Richard ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
Am 10.08.2011 um 23:01 schrieb kqt4a...@comcast.net: On Wed, 10 Aug 2011, Andrew Poelstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 01:25:35PM -0500, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote: [Jun 25 patches from https://bugs.launchpad.net/pcb/+bug/699497] [compilation error in gcode.c] Other than 'Don't do that' any suggestions? Ask Traumflug nicely to rebase his patches on current git again? If you can tell me how to contact him I will ask, nicely I'm here, just can't catch up the list daily. For a quick result, you might want to go back to around 2011-06-25 in the git repository. For a new patchset, I can't promise a point in time. gEDA/PCB receives quite fundamental changes these days, but I'll work on it. Markus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
Am 13.08.2011 um 00:45 schrieb Markus Hitter: For a new patchset, I can't promise a point in time. I had luck! No surprises, just rebasing commit for commit was sufficient. New patchset available: https://bugs.launchpad.net/pcb/+bug/699497/comments/44 Markus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 01:25:35PM -0500, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote: [Jun 25 patches from https://bugs.launchpad.net/pcb/+bug/699497] [compilation error in gcode.c] Other than 'Don't do that' any suggestions? Ask Traumflug nicely to rebase his patches on current git again? It would be nice if a dev could take the time to review and commit these patches. They've been hanging around the tracker forever and reflect poorly on our willingness to work with new developers. Having said that, I certainly don't have time. ;) -- Andrew Poelstra Email: asp11 at sfu.ca OR apoelstra at wpsoftware.net Web: http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: This patch is breaking compile
On Wed, 10 Aug 2011, Andrew Poelstra wrote: On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 01:25:35PM -0500, kqt4a...@comcast.net wrote: [Jun 25 patches from https://bugs.launchpad.net/pcb/+bug/699497] [compilation error in gcode.c] Other than 'Don't do that' any suggestions? Ask Traumflug nicely to rebase his patches on current git again? If you can tell me how to contact him I will ask, nicely It would be nice if a dev could take the time to review and commit these patches. They've been hanging around the tracker forever and reflect poorly on our willingness to work with new developers. Having said that, I certainly don't have time. ;) -- Andrew Poelstra Email: asp11 at sfu.ca OR apoelstra at wpsoftware.net Web: http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew/ ___ 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
