On Oct 29, 2006, at 11:37 AM, Dan McMahill wrote:
to a sun, I would do "make g++ CC" which would build it twice,
once with g++ and then with Sun's own compiler.
Should I be on the lookout for one of those ultra sparc's Dan M
likes?
There are chip co's in my town Maybe could get you one c
John Griessen wrote:
al davis wrote:
Years ago, when I had access
to a sun, I would do "make g++ CC" which would build it twice, once
with g++ and then with Sun's own compiler.
Should I be on the lookout for one of those ultra sparc's Dan M likes?
There are chip co's in my town Maybe
al davis wrote:
Years ago, when I had access
to a sun, I would do "make g++ CC" which would build it twice,
once with g++ and then with Sun's own compiler.
Should I be on the lookout for one of those ultra sparc's Dan M likes?
There are chip co's in my town Maybe could get you one cheap
On Friday 20 October 2006 01:31, John Coppens wrote:
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1292 1995-08-14 15:29
> /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/public/cm/cmr17.tfm
>
> (rather old...)
That is the same size and date as the one I have.
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-
On Saturday 21 October 2006 00:24, John Coppens wrote:
> Sri - the dvi is not generated at all. I suppose the
> configure.old doesn't include the docs.
It builds it only if you ask for it.
Do "make man" from the project root, or cd to man and do "make".
In the man directory, you can do things li
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 20:13:37 -0400
"John Luciani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since the DVI file is generated can you view it with xdvi? If you can
> I would think
> that the problem may be with fontmapping.
Sri... Hadn't noticed that the make script seems to remove the output
(dvi)? As far as I
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 20:13:37 -0400
"John Luciani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since the DVI file is generated can you view it with xdvi? If you can
> I would think
> that the problem may be with fontmapping.
Hi John.
Sri - the dvi is not generated at all. I suppose the configure.old
doesn't inc
On 10/20/06, Dan McMahill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John Coppens wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 01:35:29 -0400
> Dan McMahill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>% kpsewhich -progname=dvipdfm -format=tfm cmr17
>>/usr/pkg/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/public/cm/cmr17.tfm
>>
>>man dvipdfm may give enough info
On Oct 20, 2006, at 7:47 PM, Dan McMahill wrote:
% kpsewhich -progname=dvipdfm -format=tfm cmr17
/usr/pkg/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/public/cm/cmr17.tfm
man dvipdfm may give enough info to dig into it. I'm afraid I'm
not going to be able to help much beyond this.
on6jc ~$ kpsewhich -progname=dvip
John Coppens wrote:
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 01:35:29 -0400
Dan McMahill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
% kpsewhich -progname=dvipdfm -format=tfm cmr17
/usr/pkg/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/public/cm/cmr17.tfm
man dvipdfm may give enough info to dig into it. I'm afraid I'm not
going to be able to help much
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 01:35:29 -0400
Dan McMahill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> % kpsewhich -progname=dvipdfm -format=tfm cmr17
> /usr/pkg/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/public/cm/cmr17.tfm
>
> man dvipdfm may give enough info to dig into it. I'm afraid I'm not
> going to be able to help much beyond this.
John Coppens wrote:
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 00:54:43 -0400
Dan McMahill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem is that on John's computer, something is messed up in the
latex installation so dvipdfm fails to find cmr17.tfm.
Ok... I have
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1292 1995-08-14 15:29
/usr/share
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 00:54:43 -0400
Dan McMahill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem is that on John's computer, something is messed up in the
> latex installation so dvipdfm fails to find cmr17.tfm.
Ok... I have
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1292 1995-08-14 15:29
/usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/publ
John Coppens wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:22:48 -0400
al davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What are the error messages? Did you try
using "./configure.old" instead of "./configure"?
I've sent the messages to Dan, who promised to send you the patches...
That ok?
The problem is that on Jo
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:22:48 -0400
al davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What are the error messages? Did you try
> using "./configure.old" instead of "./configure"?
I've sent the messages to Dan, who promised to send you the patches...
That ok?
> > I had to go into each directory and
> > com
John Coppens wrote:
2) Only later I detected 0.35 on the seul site. (Google still thinks the
gnu gnucap site is more important, so the 0.31 comes out first _ I do
think you should eliminate the 0.31 or upload 0.35 there).
This version stops compiling when there is a problem with the
documentatio
Thanks for the reply.. Without feedback things don't improve.
On Thursday 19 October 2006 14:22, John Coppens wrote:
> 1) On the GNU site, the latest distro is 0.31 and no
> indication that newer versions exist. I can't compile this
> version...
I know about that one. I guess it is somewhat lik
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:35:32 -0400
al davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why don't you try gnucap? At least if it does have a problem I
Al,
Several items:
1) On the GNU site, the latest distro is 0.31 and no indication that newer
versions exist. I can't compile this version...
2) Only later
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:35:32 -0400
al davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> gnucap 0.34 had a similar problem, but would usually report
> nonconvergence instead. Since it used the same algorithm that
> would be expected. 0.35 has it partially fixed, but not all
> devices that can be switches hav
On Thursday 19 October 2006 04:01, Karel Kulhavy wrote:
> > gnucap 0.34 had a similar problem, but would usually report
> > nonconvergence instead. Since it used the same algorithm
> > that
>
> Or "open internal node"?
That means your circuit doesn't work.
The Spice equivalent is something like
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 10:35:32PM -0400, al davis wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 October 2006 15:59, John Coppens wrote:
> > I was (trying to) simulate a switching power supply,
>
> A warning ... ngspice has some problems with its step size
> control that sometimes gives wrong results, particularly on
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 15:59, John Coppens wrote:
> I was (trying to) simulate a switching power supply,
A warning ... ngspice has some problems with its step size
control that sometimes gives wrong results, particularly on
circuits like switch mode power supplies. The problem is shows
wi
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:05:23 -0400 (EDT)
Stuart Brorson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The best way to know is to inspect the SPICE netlist. There is no
> guarantee that the parts in the gEDA symbol library have the pins set
> up in the correct orientation.
That's why I reported it on the list - a
The best way to know is to inspect the SPICE netlist. There is no
guarantee that the parts in the gEDA symbol library have the pins set
up in the correct orientation.
Please remember that the "pinseq" attribute is used in spice-sdb to
know in which order to emit pins. If your symbol's pins are
Hi all.
I was (trying to) simulate a switching power supply, and used the
'schottky' diode symbols, copied it, and added a model (1N5822 from
Motorola). After some experiments with strange results, could it be that
the diode pins are reversed? It did conduct the wrong way...
The normal 'diode' ha
25 matches
Mail list logo
