rom: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 18 April 2002 13:01
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
Thanks Dave,
One more thing, can you try creating a netlist and then try loading that
into a PCB using the Netlist Manager | Netlist Load comm
Thanks Dave,
One more thing, can you try creating a netlist and then try loading that
into a PCB using the Netlist Manager | Netlist Load command (as opposed to
using the Update PCB synchroniser). Does it crash? This would then
confirm Shuping's bug and the proposed bug database entry. Prob
.ddb to anyone if interested.
Thanks,
Dave Buckley
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 18 April 2002 00:03
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
On 02:40 PM 17/04/2002 -0700, Shuping Lew said:
>I use
>-Original Message-
>From: Matt Pobursky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 2:23 PM
>To: Protel EDA Forum
>Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
>
>
>On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:07:39 -0700, Tony Karavidas wrote:
>
Thank you. ABD. I like the idea.
Shuping
-Original Message-
From: Abd ulRahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 3:21 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
At 02:40 PM 4/17/2002 -0700, Shuping Lew wrote
At 02:40 PM 4/17/2002 -0700, Shuping Lew wrote:
>I use some notes on every schematic project. So I created a schematic symbol
>named "note" for it. To avoid the warning of missing footprint, I also
>created a footprint named "blank" to associate with that symbol.
I think there is a better way. Yo
k"(there is not primitive on
the footprint at all). I deleted component "note" from the netlist, it seems
ok now...
Shuping
-Original Message-
From: Matt Pobursky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 2:23 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:07:39 -0700, Tony Karavidas wrote:
>Was it your motherboard? ;)
>
>What hardware component did you "delete"
Lew --
Yes, please elaborate. Telling us exactly what the problem was
and how you fixed it might help some other list member in the
future. It might also be seen by A
Was it your motherboard? ;)
What hardware component did you "delete"
Tony
> -Original Message-
> From: Shuping Lew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 1:25 PM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Acc
Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
At 10:13 AM 4/17/2002 -0700, Shuping Lew wrote:
>---I created netlist for each sheets. There are total 25 sheets. I then
>loaded them individaully. There were no problem.
If the problem was, for example, that you had an inc
EXE tweek, etc)
It should go to Protel for eval.
Tony
> -Original Message-
> From: Abd ulRahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 12:25 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
>
At 10:13 AM 4/17/2002 -0700, Shuping Lew wrote:
>---I created netlist for each sheets. There are total 25 sheets. I then
>loaded them individaully. There were no problem.
If the problem was, for example, that you had an incorrect scope such that
some net names were duplicated between sheets even
ew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 10:14 AM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
>
>
> Dear ABD,
>
>
>
> First of all, yes, I would strongly suspect a bug, though a damag
Dear ABD,
First of all, yes, I would strongly suspect a bug, though a damaged
executable is a possible but unlikely culprit. Mr. Wilson is correct, it
should not be possible to cause an access violation with bad (or good)
netlist data.
One factor not stated so far: did the Schematic pass a ful
At 03:23 PM 4/16/2002 -0700, Shuping Lew wrote:
>I tried to load a netlist file to PCB. It has over 1,100 components. I
>receiced a warning of access violation. It says: Access Violation at address
>OF086CC6 module Exception Occurred in PCB: Netlist...
First of all, yes, I would strongly susp
resources down.
Good Luck
Mike Reagan
EDSI Frederick MD
- Original Message -
From: Shuping Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'Protel EDA Forum' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
>
Ian Wilson's questions are good ones. Did you enter the schematic and
generate the Netlist? If you entered the schematic, and if it is an option,
I would begin by resetting all Identifiers to ?. That is, do a global change
of all R's to R?, all C's to C?, etc, for all components. Then use Tools/
er
know).
JaMi Smith
-Original Message-
From: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 3:57 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
On 03:23 PM 16/04/2002 -0700, Shuping Lew said:
>I tried to load a netlist f
Why not send it to Protel for evaluation??
> -Original Message-
> From: Shuping Lew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 4:15 PM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
>
>
> Bria
ccess violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
On 03:23 PM 16/04/2002 -0700, Shuping Lew said:
>I tried to load a netlist file to PCB. It has over 1,100 components. I
>receiced a warning of access violation. It says: Access Violation at
address
>OF086CC6 module Exception Occurred in PCB: N
-
From: Brian Sherer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 3:59 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] FW: Access violation -- Is it a Protel bug?
Shuping, I've had similar problems in Protel'98 which were
traced to duplicate Identifiers giving duplicate pins;
On 03:23 PM 16/04/2002 -0700, Shuping Lew said:
>I tried to load a netlist file to PCB. It has over 1,100 components. I
>receiced a warning of access violation. It says: Access Violation at address
>OF086CC6 module Exception Occurred in PCB: Netlist...
>
>I had the same problem months ago. Th
Shuping, I've had similar problems in Protel'98 which were
traced to duplicate Identifiers giving duplicate pins; apparently
causing a database that was too large for either Protel or my
machine to handle in available memory. Something similar
happened reloading a netlist to an existing layout ha
Warning
Unable to process data:
multipart/mixed;boundary="=_NextPart_000_0005_01C1E55A.A530A310"
25 matches
Mail list logo
