At 11:31 PM 9/29/2008, you wrote:
If you just update the schematic and import the new net list,
doesn't that cause the trace for that net to be ripped up?
It doesn't rip it up, but it does show up as a short.
And how is that then fixed?
It's not fixed. You still have to edit
John == John Luciani [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The 2005 version gives the correct centroid or may just default to
the value of the mark which happens to be the correct centroid for
this footprint.
Centroid coordinates are computed by averaging the coordinates of all
pads of an element
DJ Delorie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Still, the pcb file format is very old and probably due for a
redesign. I suspect if I ever find time to redo the internal layer
infrastructure, I might end up changing it for that.
I love the PCB file format, its hackability. I hope, the scope of
that
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 3:41 AM, David Kuehling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John == John Luciani [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Personally, I would prefer using the element's mark for XY-Data. This
would give me some control that the current output lacks. Eg. there are
many packages for which
I don't think you understood my question.
I answered as best I could, given the question and its context.
Updating the schematic does not cause the pcb layout to be
automatically fixed.
The answer is that it is fixed by the user manually fixing it.
Yes, that's always the case.
I don't
I love the PCB file format, its hackability. I hope, the scope of
that redesign will be (incompatible) changes to accommodate new
features, enhanced extensibility, but not a completely new format.
My current thinking is to use the resource file format, which we
already use for menu
At 10:59 AM 9/30/2008, you wrote:
/ I don't think the direction of the changes is especially
important.
I do. I've gotten the two out of sync before, by fiddling with a
layout without going back to the schematic, or by hacking the hardware
directly during assembly. It really sucks for the
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 23:31 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
The XML parsing libraries are huge and have dependencies, in order to
support the large degree of flexibility that XML offers. We don't
need all that. It's overkill for us, esp since we already have an
xml-like parser that's much
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Peter Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could we translitteate the guts of it into a non-XML, more line-based
format? (Again, if people are dead-against XML for some or other
reason.)
s-expressions? I think somewhere someone made a bet that they could
make LISP
Can't you verify the layout against the schematic netlist at any
time?
You can verify the pcb layout file against the schematics, yes.
Verifying the physical board against the schematics is much harder.
So, I've decided to always follow the schematics first ideal, for
both virtual and
Since it is portable, and externally maintained, the only reason not to
consider a library like this would be depending on how maintained it
is, and how frequently it is going to break ABI.
We'd still have to define a language to use within the XML syntax; XML
is just a container. However,
Peter Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.3M 2008-09-25 13:36 /usr/lib/libxml2.so.2.6.32
The PCB binary is only 840k stripped.
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 12:43 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
Since it is portable, and externally maintained, the only reason not to
consider a library like this would be depending on how maintained it
is, and how frequently it is going to break ABI.
We'd still have to define a language to use
[I'm not really a big XML fan, FWIW]
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:43 PM, DJ Delorie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
industry support for xml is like industry support for zip files.
It's not the syntax that's important, it's the data structure within
it. Just because we're using XML does NOT mean that
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 12:50 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
Peter Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1.3M 2008-09-25 13:36 /usr/lib/libxml2.so.2.6.32
The PCB binary is only 840k stripped.
PCB is only a tiny part of the story. Yes, libxml2 is bigger than the
core of PCB - but
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Peter Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was specifically meaning - support a syntax which is legal XML, but
not actually XML. Then you wouldn't have to support xpath, xinclude,
and all the other baggage associated with XML.
You could, for example, define the
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 19:03 +0200, Bernd Jendrissek wrote:
[I'm not really a big XML fan, FWIW]
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:43 PM, DJ Delorie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
industry support for xml is like industry support for zip files.
It's not the syntax that's important, it's the data
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 19:06 +0200, Bernd Jendrissek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Peter Clifton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, writing from scratch a lexer/parser that parses a subset of XML
is worse than just re-using an already available, externally
maintained (by *other*
I was refering to IPC-2581. I know XML is just a syntax / grammar.
Hmmm... IPC-2581 is freely downloadable (although its reference IPCs
are not).
http://webstds.ipc.org/2581/2581intro.htm
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
The lesstif one is smaller:
linux-gate.so.1 = (0x00a28000)
libXm.so.2 = /usr/lib/libXm.so.2 (0x0057e000)
libXpm.so.4 = /usr/lib/libXpm.so.4 (0x00d98000)
libXmu.so.6 = /usr/lib/libXmu.so.6 (0x00f84000)
libXt.so.6 = /usr/lib/libXt.so.6 (0x0011)
pcb version 20080202 (GTK)
Program writes preferences file (size of main window ...) to
~/.pcb/preferences when program is terminated by clicking on cross at
right upper corner of window, but not if program is terminated by
File/QuitProgram.
Maybe this is an old/known/minor bug, but it was new
Hi all,
I have some large currents and I have 0.250 mounting holes to connect
to the ground plane. I can reduce the clearance using shift k but I'm
not able to get a substantial thermal relief. The four traces from the
pin annulus to the ground plane are so thin that they may evaporate.
Am Dienstag, den 30.09.2008, 15:17 -0400 schrieb Ian Chapman:
Hi all,
I have some large currents and I have 0.250 mounting holes to connect
to the ground plane. I can reduce the clearance using shift k but I'm
not able to get a substantial thermal relief. The four traces from the
pin
Two ways:
1. Draw thick lines through the pin, overlapping the thermal webs.
2. Edit your .pcb file and change the Thermal[] line from 0.5 to 1.0
or larger. A setting of 0.5 makes the webs as wide as the
clearance gap. Bigger settings make bigger webs. Unfortunately,
it's a
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 22:31 -0500, Kipton Moravec wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 19:19 -0400, Mike Jarabek wrote:
Kipton Moravec wrote:
You can use this program on the Viewdraw schematics, and all symbol
files, running it should give a brief command line synopsis. When you
set up your
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 19:47 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
pcb version 20080202 (GTK)
Program writes preferences file (size of main window ...) to
~/.pcb/preferences when program is terminated by clicking on cross at
right upper corner of window, but not if program is terminated by
Perhaps add the concept of a Quit Handler in the core, for things
that have to be done when pcb is gracefully shutting down?
But atexit() seems OK to me too.
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
In my last pcb I used vias with thermals to connect traces to ground
plane. Later I considered this as a minor bug of my own because thermals
makes no sense there.
I just started a new board and does this some mistake.
But it seems that DJ uses thermals too for his 4.3 SMT Blinker
tutorial.
Is
But it seems that DJ uses thermals too for his 4.3 SMT Blinker
tutorial.
It's a tutorial, don't use it as an example of the Right Way to do
things. Besides, I have to manually solder all my vias, so I *want*
thermals there.
Is there a reason for using thermals for plain vias, which need no
Am Dienstag, den 30.09.2008, 23:42 +0200 schrieb Stefan Salewski:
In the wiki I found the recommendation to press right
mouse button to switch of panning, but it seems not to work in pcb
20080202 with GTK GUI.
Sorry, I just tried to verify that right mouse button does not work --
now its
Am Dienstag, den 30.09.2008, 23:53 +0200 schrieb Stefan Salewski:
I will investigate it and report...
Right mouse button works perfectly to toggle panning -- my error was
that I have moved the mouse while I pressed the right button. I works
only if the mouse is a rest.
Best regards
Stefan
You need a 1.1mm (43 mil) hole for the three signal pins, on 2.5mm (98
mil) centers. That leaves 55 mil between drills, you can have 20 mil
annulus (43+20+20 = 83 mil size) with 15 mil space between them.
The pin itself is only 0.8mm (32 mil) so you can probably get away
with a 35 mil drill if
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 19:47 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
pcb version 20080202 (GTK)
Program writes preferences file (size of main window ...) to
~/.pcb/preferences when program is terminated by clicking on cross at
right upper corner of window, but not if program is terminated by
Thanks DJ
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:11 PM, DJ Delorie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You need a 1.1mm (43 mil) hole for the three signal pins, on 2.5mm
(98
mil) centers. That leaves 55 mil between drills, you can have 20
mil
annulus (43+20+20 = 83 mil size) with 15 mil
Is there a document that shows what each value stored in the .sym file
means? I have some translation errors, and I do not know what is going
on.
For example the lines that start with T look like they have a
X position
Y position
then 7 numbers but I do not know what they represent.
Is this
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 18:20 -0500, Kipton Moravec wrote:
Is there a document that shows what each value stored in the .sym file
means? I have some translation errors, and I do not know what is going
on.
For example the lines that start with T look like they have a
X position
Y position
How do you flood an exsisting plane with components,via's and etches
on it in PCB?
I searched the manual and online references and cannot find any
reference to ground flooding anywhere.
Thanks,
Fred
Kingston Co.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
geda-user
Peter Clifton wrote:
I've coded a web-app using XSLT before now, and can honestly say I would
rather write _scheme_ than write XSLT again.
Scheme for goodness sake!! ;)
Reusing scheme/guile makes a lot of sense. I think any way that creates
a way to have any attribute attached to any
Rick Collins wrote:
What IPC is doing can open the door
for a much greater degree of compatibility in EDA file formats and
program compatibility. But this will happen only if the developers
want it to.
You've painted a partial picture.
Why would What IPC is doing open the door? And
At 12:28 AM 10/1/2008, you wrote:
Rick Collins wrote:
What IPC is doing can open the door
for a much greater degree of compatibility in EDA file formats and
program compatibility. But this will happen only if the developers
want it to.
You've painted a partial picture.
Why would What
Compatibility refers to multiple tools. You know, like...
compatibility. Does that really need explanation?
Which tools? You've given no examples of any tools that support
IPC-2581. Who will we be compatible with?
Since the largest tool vendors are on the committee that is creating
the
At 12:59 AM 10/1/2008, you wrote:
Compatibility refers to multiple tools. You know, like...
compatibility. Does that really need explanation?
Which tools? You've given no examples of any tools that support
IPC-2581. Who will we be compatible with?
I didn't realize that you don't know
I didn't realize that you don't know anything about the standard.
Don't jump to conclusions.
no one currently supports it
Good reason for us to ignore it for now, then. We're way to small to
get involved before there's a solid foundation of support and benefit
behind it.
Like Microsoft
On Oct 1, 2008, at 1:10 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
Like Microsoft and ISO?
How is this relevant?
They're a large vendor that got a standard created, but there are zero
implementations of that standard, and likely, will never be any.
Not to jump in, but...They're a large vendor whom nobody
Not to jump in, but...They're a large vendor whom nobody with a
technical clue takes seriously. I think their standards are much
more likely to be ignored than most anyone else's.
I think that helps my point. Talk is cheap, results speak for
themselves. Supporting IPC-2581 with PCB
On Oct 1, 2008, at 1:17 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
Not to jump in, but...They're a large vendor whom nobody with a
technical clue takes seriously. I think their standards are much
more likely to be ignored than most anyone else's.
I think that helps my point. Talk is cheap, results speak for
At 01:10 AM 10/1/2008, you wrote:
I didn't realize that you don't know anything about the standard.
Don't jump to conclusions.
Are you knowledgeable about the standard or not? I can't tell what
your point is.
no one currently supports it
Good reason for us to ignore it for now, then.
47 matches
Mail list logo
