Re: gEDA-user: Matching footprints with symbols

[Mike Bushroe <mbushroe@xxxxxxxxx>]

     No, that's not what I'm talking about. Footprints depend on the
     layout tool: gschem is properly agnostic about what layout tool
     you're using.
     John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
     [1]http://www.noqsi.com/
     [2]jpd@xxxxxxxxx

   So that means the shortcoming is with gchs2cpb? We need a better way of
   stitching two disparate (and intentionally agnostic) tools that
   newcomers wish to use as if they were an application suite.
   We need some way for gsch2pcb to stop at each undefined or unmatched
   footprint, and since we are running gsch2pcb, we know that the origin
   of the item is a symbol in gschem, so the symbol can be listed,
   described, tabulated, or displayed, and then a file browsing window,
   dialog box, command line menu would open up to go searching to find a
   matching footprint for that symbol, do some basic reality checks on the
   pin numbers/names/attributes and possibly either allow the user to fix
   problems in the symbol or footprint  and save the modified version in
   the project directory, or allow the user to keep looking for a better
   match. This would be easiest if done in a GUI like gschem and pcb, but
   possible even for a command line only interface. Although matching up
   pins and pads in two text listings of symbol and footprint attributes
   would be difficult.
      By moving the 'repair' process to gsch2pcb, it would allow gschem
   and pcb to remain completely agnostic of each other, although to me
   that sounds more like slightly incompatible with each other. On the
   other hand, I have never used Spice or any other the other second
   programs (backends?) that gschem is expected to feed. It may be that
   with that wider perspective I would be able to see clearly why you want
   gschem and pcb to remain disjoint. On the other hand, if the interface
   and conversion programs and scripts between all the tools was more
   complete, intuitive and foolproof, then the entire package of tools
   could be combined under a single IDE and act like a unified suite of
   tools, like I expect most of the commercial packages work.
   Mike

References

   1. http://www.noqsi.com/
   2. mailto:jpd@xxxxxxxxx


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