Re: gEDA-bug: [Bug 698741] Re: Problematic attribute place holder values

[clifcox <698741@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Peter,

I've been a bit distracted lately, sorry. Here is the golden file for the 
test that failed:

*********************************************************
* Spice file generated by gnetlist                      *
* spice-sdb version 4.28.2007 by SDB --                 *
* provides advanced spice netlisting capability.        *
* Documentation at http://www.brorson.com/gEDA/SPICE/   *
*********************************************************
*==============  Begin SPICE netlist of main design ============
AMP2 6 unconnected_pin-1 <No valid value attribute found>
T1 5 6 <No valid value attribute found>
MX1 4 5 unknown
FL1 3 4 <No valid value attribute found>
DEF1 2 3 unknown
AMP1 1 2 <No valid value attribute found>
SOURCE 1 <No valid value attribute found>
DEFAULTS unknown
.end
* /usr/src/gaf/gnetlist/src/.libs/lt-gnetlist -g spice-sdb cascade.sch


And here is the new one:

*********************************************************
* Spice file generated by gnetlist                      *
* spice-sdb version 4.28.2007 by SDB --                 *
* provides advanced spice netlisting capability.        *
* Documentation at http://www.brorson.com/gEDA/SPICE/   *
*********************************************************
*==============  Begin SPICE netlist of main design ============
AMP2 6 unconnected_pin-1 unknown
T1 5 6 <No valid value attribute found>
MX1 4 5 unknown
FL1 3 4 <No valid value attribute found>
DEF1 2 3 unknown
AMP1 1 2 unknown
SOURCE 1 <No valid value attribute found>
DEFAULTS unknown
.end

My Question is why would you *ever* see unknown written out as if it were 
an actuall attribute? Do some of these strings have partity bits set?

        Clif


On Tue, 18 Jan 2011, Peter TB Brett wrote:

> Hi Clif,
>
> I've had to revert this patch, since it broke the gnetlist testsuite.
> Any chance of figuring out what went wrong there?
>
> Thanks!
>
> ** Changed in: geda
>       Status: Fix Committed => Triaged
>
> ** Changed in: geda
>     Assignee: Peter TB Brett (peter-b) => clifcox (clif-eugeneweb)
>
> -- 
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/698741
>
> Title:
>  Problematic attribute place holder values
>
> Status in GPL Electronic Design Automation tools:
>  Triaged
>
> Bug description:
>  In some gnetlist backends the name=? attributes cause problems because they look like
>  valid attribute values. eg file=? may be mistaken for a valid filepath, and value=? for
>  an actual value. Changing them to name=unknown is one way to solve this problem in the
>  interim. It's now safe to remove the special checks for these "?" like the one in spice-sdb.
>  This patch updates these problematic name=? attributes in some symbols to name=unknown,
>  and removes FIXME code snipit that checked for the ? value in spice-sdb.
>
> To unsubscribe from this bug, go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/geda/+bug/698741/+subscribe
>

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of gEDA Bug
Team, which is subscribed to gEDA.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/698741

Title:
  Problematic attribute place holder values

Status in GPL Electronic Design Automation tools:
  Triaged

Bug description:
  In some gnetlist backends the name=? attributes cause problems because they look like
  valid attribute values. eg file=? may be mistaken for a valid filepath, and value=? for 
  an actual value. Changing them to name=unknown is one way to solve this problem in the
  interim. It's now safe to remove the special checks for these "?" like the one in spice-sdb.
  This patch updates these problematic name=? attributes in some symbols to name=unknown,
  and removes FIXME code snipit that checked for the ? value in spice-sdb.




_______________________________________________
geda-bug mailing list
geda-bug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-bug