On Fri, 2010-12-31 at 10:34 -0700, John Doty wrote:
> > Without offending anyone I hope, I think it would be fair to say there
> > is ONE "current" gEDA developer, and I think you would struggle to point
> > out anything detrimental Peter Brett has done to the project.
>
> Well, Peter, at least,
Hi Kai-Martin,
> -Original Message-
> From: geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org
> [mailto:geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org] On Behalf Of
> kai-martin knaak
> Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 4:32 AM
> To: geda-u...@seul.org
> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: Resistor values
On Jan 2, 2011, at 10:18 AM, Patrick Bernaud wrote:
> Still, and as a side note, look how much beneficial a change
> from "unknown" to #f (as value for no- or unknown attribute) would be.
Different layers. "unknown" is is the appropriate return when the back end will
simply put the result in th
John Doty writes:
> [...]
> We agreed it has to be addressed, yes. But who should address it?
Since it was so kindly asked, I did: my full (and final as far as I am
concerned) patch set for this issue follows this message (so our
fellow readers will get a chance to understand what we are talking
On Jan 2, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Patrick Bernaud wrote:
> John Doty writes:
>> [...]
>> The work-around for the drc2 incompatibility. Where is it?
>
> You remember that I am not the person proposing the initial patch,
> only one reviewer?
You did more than review: you thoroughly rewrote it in a way
John Doty writes:
> [...]
> The work-around for the drc2 incompatibility. Where is it?
You remember that I am not the person proposing the initial patch,
only one reviewer?
Beside with the example I proposed, it is not an "incompatibility",
but merely a (valid) warning triggered by the new code
On Jan 2, 2011, at 2:50 AM, Patrick Bernaud wrote:
> John Doty writes:
>> [...]
>> Then there's Patrick Bernaud. Bas Gjeltes and I tried to contribute a patch
>> for the attribute censorship bug, but Patrick grabbed it, unfactored my
>> Guile code, found a problem that broke drc2, and then drop
John Doty writes:
> [...]
> Then there's Patrick Bernaud. Bas Gjeltes and I tried to contribute a patch
> for the attribute censorship bug, but Patrick grabbed it, unfactored my
> Guile code, found a problem that broke drc2, and then dropped it.
Maybe you can elaborate on your last sentence
On Friday 31 December 2010, John Doty wrote:
> I think we can all be friends.
You are the one making enemies.
> Disagreement does not imply
> malice.
In your case, it does.
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-b
Bert Timmerman wrote:
>> ARE there any "current" gEDA developers?
>>
>
> Yes, I think there is lots of patches or patch series in SF
> to prove that.
For 2010 there were exactly 16 patches in the geda tracker:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=161080&atid=818428
I wouldn't call this "lot
Hi all,
> -Original Message-
> From: geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org
> [mailto:geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org] On Behalf Of Peter Clifton
> Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 4:37 PM
> To: gEDA user mailing list
> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: Resistor values.
>
> On
John Doty writes:
> And there's DJ,
I don't consider myself a gEDA developer, just a PCB developer. I think
the only significant gEDA work I've done is the PCB import netlister,
and that's in PCB's source tree anyway.
___
geda-user mailing list
geda
On Dec 31, 2010, at 8:37 AM, Peter Clifton wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-12-29 at 13:18 -0700, John Doty wrote:
>
>> Divorce gEDA from pcb. Create a schematic plugin for pcb, since that
>> seems to be what pcb users want. The flexibility of the
>> gschem/gnetlist flow is unnecessary to hobbyists. The cu
On Wed, 2010-12-29 at 13:18 -0700, John Doty wrote:
> Divorce gEDA from pcb. Create a schematic plugin for pcb, since that
> seems to be what pcb users want. The flexibility of the
> gschem/gnetlist flow is unnecessary to hobbyists. The current
> developers are dangerously pcb-centric.
ARE there
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 13:24:18 +0100
Levente Kovacs wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 00:50:07 -0600
> Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
>
> > * If the part in question can usually be described by a single value,
> > for the purposes of the signal flow in the schematic that is, then
> > give it a default of "v
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 3:56 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz
wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 23:55:04 -0500
> al davis wrote:
>
>> On Saturday 25 December 2010, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
>> > * If the part in question can usually be described by a
>> > single value, for the purposes of the signal flow in the
>
>>
>> Setting it to zero by default could even be used to signal Gschem to add an
>> extra highlight to those symbols bearing it.
>
> Yuck. Keep tools simple and clean.
Agreed, but if you wanted a DRC highlighter, a ? highlighted would be
a great thing to highlight.
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 13:18:24 -0500
DJ Delorie wrote:
I regret that I made that comment.
> I wish it weren't so common. Such wars are a pointless waste of time
> and serve only to drive valuable contributors away. Soon, the only
> people "working" on gEDA/PCB will be those who enjoy complaining
On Dec 28, 2010, at 7:32 PM, John Griessen wrote:
> On 12/28/2010 06:21 PM, John Doty wrote:
>> Well, the plug-in wasn't that difficult.
>
> Thanks for contributing some code John. I'm in the midst of a
> lot of obligations and low cash. I'll try to give it a look before January
> is gone.
W
As one of the principal troublemakers, let me comment.
On Dec 29, 2010, at 11:18 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> Levente Kovacs writes:
>> So don't regret it, it is getting common.
>
> I wish it weren't so common.
Then show a real commitment to the toolkit, not just to pcb for hobbyists. Lip
servi
On Dec 29, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Stephan Boettcher wrote:
> John Doty writes:
>
>> On Dec 29, 2010, at 6:23 AM, Stephan Boettcher wrote:
>>
>>> I can imagine that it's not a lot, since this is really a classical
>>> case for said design pattern.
>>
>> The real difficulty here is the complexity o
John Doty writes:
> On Dec 29, 2010, at 6:23 AM, Stephan Boettcher wrote:
>
>> I can imagine that it's not a lot, since this is really a classical
>> case for said design pattern.
>
> The real difficulty here is the complexity of the Guile<->C
> interface. The functions and data on the C side ar
Levente Kovacs writes:
> So don't regret it, it is getting common.
I wish it weren't so common. Such wars are a pointless waste of time
and serve only to drive valuable contributors away. Soon, the only
people "working" on gEDA/PCB will be those who enjoy complaining, as
there will be nobody l
On Dec 29, 2010, at 6:23 AM, Stephan Boettcher wrote:
>
> John Doty writes:
>
>> A better netlister for simulation is difficult as long as the gnetlist
>> front end has hard-coded semantics, especially for hierarchy and
>> slotting.
>
> Last year (June 2009) LWN published a very nice series b
2010/12/29 Levente Kovacs :
> On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 22:01:43 +0100
> "Johnny Rosenberg"
> wrote:
>
>> Hm… I start to regret that I asked the question in the first place…
>
> We are very good at making wars. We make wars on "what kind of fileformat to
> use", "what kind of documentation tool to use"
John Doty writes:
> A better netlister for simulation is difficult as long as the gnetlist
> front end has hard-coded semantics, especially for hierarchy and
> slotting.
Last year (June 2009) LWN published a very nice series by Neil Brown
about successful design pattern in the Linux kernel. A
On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 22:01:43 +0100
"Johnny Rosenberg" wrote:
> Hm… I start to regret that I asked the question in the first place…
We are very good at making wars. We make wars on "what kind of fileformat to
use", "what kind of documentation tool to use", "what is gschem used for" etc.
So don't
On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 00:50:07 -0600
Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
> * If the part in question can usually be described by a single value,
> for the purposes of the signal flow in the schematic that is, then
> give it a default of "value=0".
That is bad. You have to think twice that "is it a 0 Ohm resi
On 12/28/2010 06:21 PM, John Doty wrote:
Well, the plug-in wasn't that difficult.
Thanks for contributing some code John. I'm in the midst of a
lot of obligations and low cash. I'll try to give it a look before January is
gone.
JG
___
geda-user
On Dec 27, 2010, at 8:41 AM, John Griessen wrote:
> On 12/27/2010 08:43 AM, John Doty wrote:
>> Perhaps we need a real gnucap back end with this property? Or a plug-in that
>> does this?
>
> Sure, send some rent money and I'll create and test it within two months.
Well, the plug-in wasn't that
On 12/27/2010 02:56 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
No. Zero is almost always wrong.
Exactly my point - it is*supposed* to be wrong.
> The only sensible default value in this case is a copy of the reference
> > designator.
No, that's wrong too.
This seems like one of those cases where more tha
John Doty wrote:
On Dec 27, 2010, at 3:56 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 23:55:04 -0500
al davis wrote:
On Saturday 25 December 2010, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
* If the part in question can usually be described by a
single value, for the purposes of the signa
On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 09:43 -0500, John Doty wrote:
> On Dec 27, 2010, at 3:56 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 23:55:04 -0500
> > al davis wrote:
> >
> >> On Saturday 25 December 2010, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
> >>> * If the part in question can usually be described by a
>
On 12/27/2010 08:43 AM, John Doty wrote:
Perhaps we need a real gnucap back end with this property? Or a plug-in that
does this?
Sure, send some rent money and I'll create and test it within two months.
John
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@mo
On Dec 27, 2010, at 3:56 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 23:55:04 -0500
> al davis wrote:
>
>> On Saturday 25 December 2010, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
>>> * If the part in question can usually be described by a
>>> single value, for the purposes of the signal flow in the
>>> s
Vanessa Ezekowitz writes:
> On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 23:55:04 -0500
> al davis wrote:
>
>> On Saturday 25 December 2010, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
>> > * If the part in question can usually be described by a
>> > single value, for the purposes of the signal flow in the
>> > schematic that is, then giv
On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 23:55:04 -0500
al davis wrote:
> On Saturday 25 December 2010, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
> > * If the part in question can usually be described by a
> > single value, for the purposes of the signal flow in the
> > schematic that is, then give it a default of "value=0".
>
> No.
On Saturday 25 December 2010, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
> * If the part in question can usually be described by a
> single value, for the purposes of the signal flow in the
> schematic that is, then give it a default of "value=0".
No. Zero is almost always wrong. The only sensible default
value
On Dec 26, 2010, at 5:25 PM, Stephan Boettcher wrote:
> All the NASA QA, reviews, and stuff were annoying at first, but in the
> end there always were smart people asking the right questions at the
> right time to the right people.
Well, you've had better luck than I have. In three decades of do
John Doty writes:
> One "crazy" configuration was to reduce the number of bits/photon to
> one, and thereby achieve two orders of magnitude better time
> resolution than most people thought necessary while staying within
> data transmission restrictions. I'm told that this has been the most
> com
On Dec 26, 2010, at 3:12 PM, Bob Paddock wrote:
>>> Flexibility and specific applicability are not mutually exclusive, and for
>>> the very reasons you are citing here.
>>
>> True, but what makes this possible? It's *avoiding* specificity in the
>> foundations.
>
> I find that statement odd.
>> Flexibility and specific applicability are not mutually exclusive, and for
>> the very reasons you are citing here.
>
> True, but what makes this possible? It's *avoiding* specificity in the
> foundations.
I find that statement odd. If the foundation is not well specified
then it is not a fo
On Dec 26, 2010, at 4:14 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 12:44:54 -0500
> John Doty wrote:
>
>>> "Often", perhaps, but not usually. No matter how you slice it, the most
>>> common way to use such a symbol and its corresponding physical
>>> representation is as a component on
On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 12:44:54 -0500
John Doty wrote:
> > "Often", perhaps, but not usually. No matter how you slice it, the most
> > common way to use such a symbol and its corresponding physical
> > representation is as a component on a circuit board or in an IC.
>
> Maybe for you. But gEDA isn
Hi all,
> -Original Message-
> From: geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org
> [mailto:geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org] On Behalf Of
> ge...@igor2.repo.hu
> Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 7:06 AM
> To: gEDA user mailing list
> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: Resistor values??
On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 09:23:17PM -0500, Mark wrote:
> So, because I use several methods, a single one-size-fits-all library is just
> not going to work for me.
> I *could* make use of a library of heavy symbols but I still need the
> lightweight symbols, too. If I
> was forced to choose
On Saturday 25 December 2010 14:59:14 John Doty wrote:
> On Dec 25, 2010, at 12:49 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> > Yup, we're tyrants because we want to make it easier for 99% of our
> > users to get their jobs done.
>
> But you aren't. A special purpose pcb-centric symbol/footprint library
> would be
I see the need for something akin to a preferred default positioning, where
when a symbol is rotated there is a place where your prefer your attributes to
be placed.
Have geschem do the auto place template not part of the symbols at all
Steve
On Dec 25, 2010, at 4:48 PM, John Doty wrote:
On Dec 25, 2010, at 4:01 PM, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> Hm… I start to regret that I asked the question in the first place…
No need to regret it. It was a good question.
John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
j...@noqsi.com
Den 2010-12-25 22:12:40 skrev Stephan Boettcher
:
"Johnny Rosenberg" writes:
Hm… I start to regret that I asked the question in the first place…
Please don't.
Well, I guess it's not regrettable anyway; the question is already asked
and I think I also got a couple of great answers, th
"Johnny Rosenberg" writes:
> Hm… I start to regret that I asked the question in the first place…
Please don't.
--
Stephan
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Den 2010-12-25 20:59:14 skrev John Doty :
On Dec 25, 2010, at 12:49 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
John Doty writes:
"Often", perhaps, but not usually. No matter how you slice it, the
most common way to use such a symbol and its corresponding physical
representation is as a component on a circuit
On Dec 25, 2010, at 12:49 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> John Doty writes:
>>> "Often", perhaps, but not usually. No matter how you slice it, the
>>> most common way to use such a symbol and its corresponding physical
>>> representation is as a component on a circuit board or in an IC.
>>
>> Maybe
John Doty writes:
>> "Often", perhaps, but not usually. No matter how you slice it, the
>> most common way to use such a symbol and its corresponding physical
>> representation is as a component on a circuit board or in an IC.
>
> Maybe for you.
Your opinion doesn't change the statistics. gEDA
On Dec 25, 2010, at 11:51 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 07:33:30 -0500
> John Doty wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 25, 2010, at 1:50 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
>>>
>>> Resistors are just one of many component types out there have a value, no
>>> matter what type of package they c
On Sat, 25 Dec 2010 07:33:30 -0500
John Doty wrote:
>
> On Dec 25, 2010, at 1:50 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
> >
> > Resistors are just one of many component types out there have a value, no
> > matter what type of package they come in
>
> Resistors often don't come in packages.
"Often", per
On Dec 25, 2010, at 1:50 AM, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
>
> Resistors are just one of many component types out there have a value, no
> matter what type of package they come in
Resistors often don't come in packages. I use resistors in VLSI design, and
textbook symbolic abstractions of resistors
Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> Now I'd like to save my ”new” symbol somewhere.
If you added the attribute in the schematics (the document
with the title block), you did not create a new symbol. You
just attached an attribute to an instance of the symbol.
To really change and save a symbol, you'd:
1
On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 12:15:17 -0500
John Doty wrote:
> > Yes, a default
> > library can only be a starting point and cannot fit
> > everybody's needs. But does the starting point really
> > have to be so poor that it fits virtually nobody's needs
>
> Well, I was using the valueless passive symb
"Johnny Rosenberg" writes:
> Sorry for my ignorance (English is not my main language), but what does
> ”footprint” mean in this situation? I know the word, just not what it
> means in this case…
"Getting Started with PCB" has a list of terms. I have a copy online
here:
http://www.delorie.c
On Dec 23, 2010, at 8:27 PM, kai-martin knaak wrote:
> Oh my, a symbol without a value attribute!
> I forgot, just how light the default library symbols are.
> Can anyone point me to a reason? Why do we distribute the
> default library in such a crippled state?
Because the default library is a m
Stefan Salewski wrote:
> If we rotate symbols 180 degree, text is made upright again by
> special logic in gschem, so that it may look like the symbol is
> not rotated at all. For this invisible rotation, text alignment
> mark works wrong, left/right top/bottom is exchanged. This can
> confuse p
Den 2010-12-24 13:37:34 skrev Stefan Salewski :
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 12:43 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
Now I'd like to save my ”new” symbol somewhere.
There is not really a reason to save it, because you have only moved the
text around and modified the alignment mark. OK, added a value
a
Den 2010-12-24 13:20:39 skrev Peter Clifton :
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 12:22 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
I tried that now,since you suggested it. Unfortunately it doesn't work
like I expected: Left seems to mean right, right seems to mean left,
upper
seems to mean lower and lower seems to me
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 12:32 +0100, kai-martin knaak wrote:
> The description refer to the position of the alignment mark
> relative to the text itself.
For gschem 1.6.1 there is still one strange thing, which I mentioned
years ago on this list, and still do not really understand:
If we rotate s
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 12:43 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> Now I'd like to save my ”new” symbol somewhere.
There is not really a reason to save it, because you have only moved the
text around and modified the alignment mark. OK, added a value
attribute. For the current schematic, you can simple
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 12:22 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> I tried that now,since you suggested it. Unfortunately it doesn't work
> like I expected: Left seems to mean right, right seems to mean left, upper
> seems to mean lower and lower seems to mean upper. Upper left seems to be
> defau
Den 2010-12-24 12:34:27 skrev timecop :
footprint = what the pads/holes/silk/wahtever on pcb for this
component look like.
Aah… that makes sense. Thanks.
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Johnny Rosenberg
wrote:
Den 2010-12-24 02:27:33 skrev kai-martin knaak :
You may take a look at the s
Den 2010-12-24 12:32:36 skrev kai-martin knaak :
Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
type e x, or (Edit->Edit Text) select Middle-Middle alignment
move the alignment mark to the center of the resistor.
I tried that now,since you suggested it. Unfortunately it doesn't work
like I expected: Left seems
Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
>> You may take a look at the symbols in http://gedasymbols.org
>> Many of them are "heavy", meaning, they come with value and
>> footprint attribute included.
>
> Sorry for my ignorance (English is not my main language), but
> what does ”footprint” mean in this situation
footprint = what the pads/holes/silk/wahtever on pcb for this
component look like.
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Johnny Rosenberg
wrote:
> Den 2010-12-24 02:27:33 skrev kai-martin knaak :
>
>> You may take a look at the symbols in http://gedasymbols.org
>> Many of them are "heavy", meaning, th
Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
>> type e x, or (Edit->Edit Text) select Middle-Middle alignment
>> move the alignment mark to the center of the resistor.
>
> I tried that now,since you suggested it. Unfortunately it doesn't work
> like I expected: Left seems to mean right, right seems to mean left
Den 2010-12-24 02:27:33 skrev kai-martin knaak :
You may take a look at the symbols in http://gedasymbols.org
Many of them are "heavy", meaning, they come with value and
footprint attribute included.
Sorry for my ignorance (English is not my main language), but what does
”footprint” mean in
Den 2010-12-24 01:10:55 skrev Stephan Boettcher
:
"Johnny Rosenberg" writes:
Yet another newbie question then:
I tried to enter a value of a resistor
(/usr/share/gEDA/sym/analog/resistor-2.sym, my operating system is
Ubuntu 10.10) but the position of the value needs to be adjusted a
bit.
Den 2010-12-24 11:30:52 skrev Peter TB Brett :
On Friday 24 December 2010 10:27:20 Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
Den 2010-12-24 00:53:38 skrev Stefan Salewski :
> On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:38 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:31 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
>> > Value: → Ente
On Friday 24 December 2010 10:27:20 Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> Den 2010-12-24 00:53:38 skrev Stefan Salewski :
> > On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:38 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote:
> >> On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:31 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> >> > Value: → Enter ”390k”.
> >> >
> >> > Does it look nice?
Den 2010-12-24 00:53:38 skrev Stefan Salewski :
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:38 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote:
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:31 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> Value: → Enter ”390k”.
>
> Does it look nice? It certainly does not on my system.
>
> Am I doing this right at all?
>
Ah, no
Den 2010-12-24 00:38:35 skrev Stefan Salewski :
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:31 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
Value: → Enter ”390k”.
Does it look nice? It certainly does not on my system.
Am I doing this right at all?
May it be related to your OHM sign? I never use it, and I do not see it
of
Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> Here's what I do:
> Draw a resistor somewhere (Add component → Basic devices →
resistor-2.sym).
Oh my, a symbol without a value attribute!
I forgot, just how light the default library symbols are.
Can anyone point me to a reason? Why do we distribute the
default library
"Johnny Rosenberg" writes:
> Yet another newbie question then:
>
> I tried to enter a value of a resistor
> (/usr/share/gEDA/sym/analog/resistor-2.sym, my operating system is
> Ubuntu 10.10) but the position of the value needs to be adjusted a
> bit. How can I do that?
>
> It should look like t
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:38 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:31 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
>
> > Value: → Enter ”390k”.
> >
> > Does it look nice? It certainly does not on my system.
> >
> > Am I doing this right at all?
> >
>
Ah, now I understand you problem:
You
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:31 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> Value: → Enter ”390k”.
>
> Does it look nice? It certainly does not on my system.
>
> Am I doing this right at all?
>
May it be related to your OHM sign? I never use it, and I do not see it
often in professional sheets. It ok if you
Den 2010-12-24 00:08:41 skrev Stefan Salewski :
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:00 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
Yet another newbie question then:
I tried to enter a value of a resistor
You can change the alignment mark of text, select the text, and select
"Edit/Edit Text" from menu. In the popup
On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:00 +0100, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:
> Yet another newbie question then:
>
> I tried to enter a value of a resistor
You can change the alignment mark of text, select the text, and select
"Edit/Edit Text" from menu. In the popup window there is an alignment
field.
Not sure
Yet another newbie question then:
I tried to enter a value of a resistor
(/usr/share/gEDA/sym/analog/resistor-2.sym, my operating system is Ubuntu
10.10) but the position of the value needs to be adjusted a bit. How can I
do that?
It should look like this:
–––[390kΩ]–––
But it rather lo
85 matches
Mail list logo
