[1] says so:
component
Valid in: Schematic files ONLY
///
But if create:
$ cat share/gschem/test-1.sym
v 20080127 1
C 100 1300 1 270 0 led-1.sym
{
T 700 500 5 10 0 0 270 0 1
device=LED
T 500 500 5 10 1 1 270 0 1
refdes=LED?
T 900 500 5 10 0 0 270 0 1
symversion=0.1
}
On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 18:12 -0400, Mark wrote:
On Sun October 25 2009 12:53:32 am Mark wrote:
It's 1 am so I'm off to sleep but I will give the debugger a shot tomorrow.
Ok, it's been more like a week. :)
Peter C.,
You'll find the back trace in the attached file. I had to run it with
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 13:09 +0100, Karl Hammar wrote:
[1] says so:
component
Valid in: Schematic files ONLY
///
But if create:
Sounds like a bug... we should be rejecting things like that in case
anyone finds some strange unintended behaviour, then starts to rely on
it in a way
On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:13:23 +, Peter Clifton wrote:
Was there something specific you were trying to achieve by inserting
components in a symbol file?
I do this all the time. It allows me to insert often used sub circuits
from my local library. The components inside these blocks are
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 13:29 +, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:13:23 +, Peter Clifton wrote:
Was there something specific you were trying to achieve by inserting
components in a symbol file?
I do this all the time. It allows me to insert often used sub circuits
On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:33:50 +, Peter Clifton wrote:
If you were to paste one of those blocks as a symbol (rather than the
include as individual objects feature, then that would lead to
unknown, un-tested consequences. Doing that ought to trigger some kind
of warning, possibly refusing to
Peter Clifton:
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 13:09 +0100, Karl Hammar wrote:
[1] says so:
component
Valid in: Schematic files ONLY
///
But if create:
Sounds like a bug...
Bug or not.
[2] specifically says:
Can my local library cover frequently needed sub circuits?
Yes,
Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
I do this all the time. It allows me to insert often used sub circuits
from my local library.
.
.
.
I use Include-as-individual-objects to import these blocks into the
actual schematic. Thus, there is no recursive structure in the *.sch file
and gnetlist has no
On Sun November 1 2009 07:59:26 am Peter Clifton wrote:
As it stands, the back-traces don't help a great deal, since they are
missing a load of the debug information required.
What distro do you use? Usually there are -dbg, -dbgsym or -debug
packages for various libraries. To fill in the ??
On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 13:09 +0100, Karl Hammar wrote:
[1] says so:
component
Valid in: Schematic files ONLY
///
But if create:
Sounds like a bug... we should be rejecting things like that in case
anyone finds some strange unintended behaviour, then starts to rely on
it in
$ ./autogen.sh
checking for ./configure.ac ... yes
checking for ./build-tools/desktop-i18n ... yes
checking for autoconf ... /usr/bin/autoconf
checking for autoheader ... /usr/bin/autoheader
checking for automake ... /usr/bin/automake
checking for aclocal ... /usr/bin/aclocal
of attributes
May I humbly beg to CC such messages to gEDA-user?
you see, I'm too nasty person to be subscribed to gEDA-dev
and I usually don't read the archives;
it is mere occasion that I read this message
(I was curious about when pcb-20091101 is coming).
PLEASE don't commit multiple fixes
12 matches
Mail list logo
