John Doty wrote:
To the man with a hammer, everything is a nail. I can think of
three gEDA problems that have resulted from developers being scenario-
driven rather than thinking about the general case. Each one has cost
me. I'll go into the details in private email if you like.
Why in
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 08:28:19PM +, Michael Sokolov wrote:
How about we move this thread back to its original topic of blind and
buried vias, not arguments regarding whether or not PCB is part of gEDA.
I have some questions out of plain curiosity: completely aside from the
question of
Gabriel Paubert wrote:
I'm asking out of plain curiosity - I hope that I never have to make a
board with such vias as I've heard that they add a bit of sadomasochistic
flavor to board bringup/debug efforts - but then I guess some boards are
so cramped for space that you can't avoid them...
Bill Gatliff b...@billgatliff.com wrote:
The latest generation of BGA parts have so many pins on the package,
packed so tightly together, that it isn't possible to get all the
signals out of the chip in two layers and still have the traces large
enough to meet specs.
[...]
I'm told that
On Sep 27, 2009, at 10:54 AM, Martin Maney wrote:
I was going to comment on one point, but once you start writing...
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 06:16:42AM -0600, John Doty wrote:
More useful and friendly to *what kind* of user? The kind that would
prefer spending an hour mousing around to
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:01:23 +, Michael Sokolov wrote:
I'm told that the OMAP3430's Package-on-Package configuration requires
at least six layers to get all the signals out. Ugh.
OK, that explains the need for a lot of layers. But how does the need
for blind/buried vias arise?
The
Hi guys,
This is a vague bug report at best - hence mentioned here in case it
means anything to anyone. I've not really got enough to file anything
useful in Bugzilla yet!
I've been working on GL code for a PCB design app. It uses various bits
in the stencil buffer for sub-compositing. To avoid
Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:01:23 +, Michael Sokolov wrote:
I'm told that the OMAP3430's Package-on-Package configuration requires
at least six layers to get all the signals out. Ugh.
OK, that explains the need for a lot of layers. But how does the need
Ok, stop it guys, this is just too painful.
pieces just don't work together very well. The mess of issues that
arise between gschem and PCB are perhaps the most discussed, but all
the parts I've had occasion to use feel more like a random collection
of tools than a proper toolset - one
Peter Clifton wrote:
Ok, stop it guys, this is just too painful.
I just lost a whole toolbox full of lovely (high quality) new tools.
They were on board the wave-rig I've spent the last 3 years working on -
when it capsized last week... oops. (I was also on board some minutes
before it
John Doty wrote:
On the other hand, when you're putting together a project, you have
some idea of what those needs are, so that's the time to add
weight. And for big projects, it's handy to have a set of heavy
symbols identified by role: bypass_capacitor, low_noise_opamp,
etc. Then,
Bill Gatliff wrote:
I haven't come across a situation that required a buried via, so I can't
comment on that. Can't even guess, actually.
That's just a via that has no top or bottom layer impact, only the ones between
the layers it connects
are consumed. One benefit is the pad stack can
Peter Clifton wrote:
I'm looking on all of this in the context of how trivial gEDA/gaf is
compared to $real_world. A number of people (including myself) are lucky
to be alive and uninjured after the wave rig went down.
Perhaps I'm still not that well adjusted on what matters though - I'm
El mar, 29-09-2009 a las 09:38 -0500, Bill Gatliff escribió:
[snip]
The latest generation of BGA parts have so many pins on the package,
packed so tightly together, that it isn't possible to get all the
signals out of the chip in two layers and still have the traces large
enough to meet
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 13:46 -0500, John Griessen wrote:
Peter Clifton wrote:
I'm looking on all of this in the context of how trivial gEDA/gaf is
compared to $real_world. A number of people (including myself) are lucky
to be alive and uninjured after the wave rig went down.
Perhaps
Hi Werner and Alan,
I just re-forked/re-cloned spicelib on github.com from Werners
repository.
Getting and installing the models with make all just seems to work.
Running make test does run the test script, but all tests seem to
fail.
I think I need to do something in between make all and make
Peter Clifton wrote:
I might have to do some more theoretical PhD work though.. that will be
a shock after all that practical work.
Well, at least you won't have to figure out a way to make your data fit
the theoretical models! :)
b.g.
--
Bill Gatliff
b...@billgatliff.com
Hello,
I have started writing an ebuild (install script) for Gentoo Linux for
the upcoming gEDA 1.6.
Compiling is indeed really fast now due to parallel build, and the whole
installation process seems to be easier (when building from source, as
we do for Gentoo).
First remark:
ste...@amd64-x2
I haven't come across a situation that required a buried via, so I can't
comment on that. Can't even guess, actually.
Boss says All those parts will find in that case, whats the problem
with routing the board?.
Problem is the Boss doesn't think traces take any physical space.
Think pocket
Buried vias allow more than one via in the same vertical zone possibly -- not
sure?
Yes, with one exception -- If blind and buried vias overlap the same
layers. For example, say you have an 8-layer board, and you have
blind vias from layers 1-4, and 5-8, and buried vias from 3-6, you are
not
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 21:00:45 Stefan Salewski wrote:
I think for gEDA 1.4.3 we had --disable-stroke. Now --without-stroke and
-disable-stroke seems to be unrecognized. How can we disable stroke if
libstroke is installed, but we do not want to use it?
--without-libstroke (as you would
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 21:43 +0100, Peter TB Brett wrote:
--without-libstroke (as you would know if you'd checked ./configure --help).
Thanks.
Of course I have checked ./configure --help, but I think I changed old
1.4.3 --disable-stroke to wrong --without-stroke.
Bob Paddock wrote:
For example, say you have an 8-layer board, and you have
blind vias from layers 1-4, and 5-8, and buried vias from 3-6, you are
not able to do that since the blind and buried involve the same
layers.
Wow, that means super dense is possible with a fab that is close
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 22:00 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
Hello,
I have started writing an ebuild (install script) for Gentoo Linux for
the upcoming gEDA 1.6.
In build.log we have
checking pkg-config is at least version 0.9.0... yes
In
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 22:28:33 Stefan Salewski wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 22:00 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
Hello,
I have started writing an ebuild (install script) for Gentoo Linux for
the upcoming gEDA 1.6.
In build.log we have
checking pkg-config is at least version
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 21:56:19 Stefan Salewski wrote:
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 21:43 +0100, Peter TB Brett wrote:
--without-libstroke (as you would know if you'd checked ./configure
--help).
Thanks.
Of course I have checked ./configure --help, but I think I changed old
1.4.3
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 22:00 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
Hello,
I have started writing an ebuild (install script) for Gentoo Linux for
the upcoming gEDA 1.6.
These are the warnings in the build.log for Gentoo-Linux on AMD64,
gcc4.1.2
AMD64-X2 gEDA-gaf # uname -r
2.6.30-gentoo-r3
AMD64-X2
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:11:25AM -0600, John Doty wrote:
On Sep 27, 2009, at 10:54 AM, Martin Maney wrote:
I suppose it depends on whether gEDA is only for those who use it for
hours every day and thus find the cost of learning to and configuring
things to work just the way they want them an
Wow, that means super dense is possible with a fab that is close tolerance...
blind vias 1-3, buried 4-5, blind vias 6-8, then maybe add two more layers
dedicated to gnd plane pwr plane for a total of ten layers for ultra dense
high speed boards like cell phones.
Worst I've heard of is 32
29 matches
Mail list logo
