On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 3:37 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> I think 2 & 3 would be good ideas even if we fixed gsch2pcb.
>
Two patches attached.
First is for the pcb repo and adds quoting and escaping to the action
argument parsing in pcb. I made the quoting rules similar to those
for bash (single quot
> 2. Allow quoted strings in the action arguments which are passed as
> is. This ends up with some some questions like how do you deal with
> Action("foo" bar, baz) and you'd probably want to allow \" for a real
> quotation mark.
>
> 3. Allow escaped characters in the action arguments, where \
>
There is a new development snapshot available ...
http://gnucap.org/devel/gnucap-2009-06-11.tar.gz
Optional plugin files:
No source changes, so you can use the old source,
but you do need to recompile
http://gnucap.org/devel/gnucap-2009-06-11-models-bsim.tar.gz
http://gnucap.org/devel/gnucap-200
I have some symbols that have pins with parenthesis in the name, which
cause problems when using ChangePinName to name the footprint's pin in
PCB the pin name from the symbol (i.e. using the gsch2pcb generated
script). Commas in the pin name would cause problems as well. It's
not a huge deal but
> > Would anyone be opposed to having the netlister assume a :1 for net=
> > attributes without a colon?
> There was a patch for this available, but it did not make it in the
> official code.
I would love it if I didn't need the :1 on netlist names. Right now I
do not have :1 on my net names, and
On Jun 11, 2009, at 1:18 PM, Stefan Salewski wrote:
>
>> Would anyone be opposed to having the netlister assume a :1 for net=
>> attributes without a colon?
>
> There was a patch for this available, but it did not make it in the
> official code.
There is a confusing collection of ways a one pin
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 21:18 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
>
> There was a patch for this available, but it did not make it in the
> official code.
>
>
See
http://www.geda.seul.org/mailinglist/geda-user137/msg00098.html
___
geda-user mailing lis
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 13:47 -0500, Mark Rages wrote:
> In http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:scg, referring to the "device=" attribute:
>
> > This attribute should not be used as a label. Use a separate text object
> > for the label.
>
> What is the reasoning behind this? This is pointless redundan
In http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:scg, referring to the "device=" attribute:
> This attribute should not be used as a label. Use a separate text object for
>the label.
What is the reasoning behind this? This is pointless redundancy.
And it makes using "light" symbols harder, because you need di
On Jun 11, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Andy Fierman wrote:
> Perhaps I should ask a different question then
>
> Is there a better tool to use for gschem DRC?
No, and it's really hard to do well, because gEDA is so flexible.
What constitutes a DRC error depends on the details of *your* design
flo
Stefan,
I should have said that I am using your latest symbols after all
it was me that found the slotting bug.
I've not tried Kai-Martin's symbols yet.
:)
Andy.
http://.signality.co.uk
2009/6/11 Stefan Salewski :
> On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 17:28 +0100, Andy Fierman wrote:
>> Hi,
Perhaps I should ask a different question then
Is there a better tool to use for gschem DRC?
In the meanwhile, I think I may add a comment to the pwr pins symbol
to remind me that it will show up a refdes and slot error.
:)
I think that answers my question
Thanks,
Andy.
http://
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 17:28 +0100, Andy Fierman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm puzzled by a couple of gschem DRC errors I'm getting.
>
> I'm using Stefan Salewski's quad comparator symbol with the separate
> power pins symbol.
Please ensure that you are using a recent version from gedasymbols --
some mon
drc2 has a very narrow view of how the world works. If you are doing
a pure digital design using a single logic family using hidden power
pins, it's not *too* bad. But generally, it hides real errors behind
a flood of messages about things that aren't errors at all. gEDA is
much more flexib
Hi John,
The comparator symbol has a numslots and slotdef attributes and I have
edited the slot attribute for each. The power pin symbol does not have
a numslots or any slotdef attributes.
I've got the right pinout for each of the four comparator symbols in
gschem and as I say, the connectivity i
Did you change the slot attribute for each of the comparators?
(* jcl *)
--
You can't create open hardware with closed EDA tools.
http://www.luciani.org
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinf
Hi,
I'm puzzled by a couple of gschem DRC errors I'm getting.
I'm using Stefan Salewski's quad comparator symbol with the separate
power pins symbol. I have four comparators plus the power pin symbol
all with the refdes of U1. All symbols are given an SO14.fp footprint.
When I run:
gnetlist
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 09:57 -0400, John Luciani wrote:
> For hand soldering which footprint variation are people using?
>
> My existing passive footprints are very generous in length
I tried to use your 0805 and 0603 (imperial) footprints. But the space
between the pads was very small, not much
> For hand soldering which footprint variation are people using?
I am currently using the M (most) definitions for both hand soldering
and production. I have found them very reasonable to use. I even
managed to hand solder a QFN package from the "most"
definitionsalthough my pass rate was only
For hand soldering which footprint variation are people using?
My existing passive footprints are very generous in length making for
very easy assembly by hand. I would like to get some smaller footprints
that are not too difficult for hand assembly. The IPC M footprints
do not look too difficult.
20 matches
Mail list logo
