Re: gEDA-user: A little puzzled about the purpose of gschem

[Madhusudan Singh <singh.madhusudan@xxxxxxxxx>]

   Thanks for a reasonable response to my post.

   Yes, an initial investment is often needed, but that ought to be an
   investment that deals with non-standard components that are not of
   common interest. Second, before your response, no one (at least as I
   read it) said that you could save the spice directives with the symbol
   itself. People talked about copying and pasting things from an existing
   schematic, but that is not the same thing.

   This rekindles my interest in gschem. One followup question - is it
   possible to pack symbols with commonly used public domain spice models
   and create a library that other users of gschem can employ (and would
   then be able to use without all that initial investment of time) ? If
   yes, why has no one ever done it (the project is pretty mature) ? If
   no, what are the legal / technical reasons for that choice ?

   Its not just LTSpice. kicad (not that I have used it, but reading from
   the descriptions) supposedly also does a more seamless spice simulation
   AND has pcb layout tools integrated.

   Not embedding the commonly available spice models for common components
   appears to be a retrograde choice for gschem. But I am happy to hear
   that the symbols can be saved with the model itself. Whether or not a
   proper shared library can be created is a different matter.

   On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Geoff Swan
   <[1]shinobi.jack@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

       Most tools require some preliminary investment in terms of setting
     up
       libraries to the satisfaction of the user, plus general
       familiarisation. I think you will find you only need to modify
     your
       symbol once to include the appropriate SPICE directives. If you
     save
       this symbol you can then reuse it (not trying to make you suck
     eggs
       here but this argument seems stalled to the point of stating the
       obvious).
       The purpose of gschem does not include containing a library of
     symbols
       that include all possible spice and pcb footprint information.
     gEDA
       includes gattrib to ease the process of customising symbols - this
     is
       not the only method of adding/editing attributes though.
       Comparing gEDA with LTSpice is a bit odd once you understand the
       purpose of gEDA. LTSpice by definition has all the SPICE
     information
       for all its library components - but I'll warrent it has very
     little
       information about component footprints. gEDA is much more powerful
     and
       versatile than LTSpice but does require you to do a bit of manual
     work
       to begin with. There is discussion about creating a database
     separate
       to gschem that may in the future provide SPICE symbol data for
     standard
       components. Depending on how this is integrated into the workflow,
       perhaps this would ease your concerns. Not much help at this stage
       though...
       All the best,
       Geoff
     _______________________________________________
     geda-user mailing list
     [2]geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
     [3]http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user

References

   1. mailto:shinobi.jack@xxxxxxxxx
   2. mailto:geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   3. http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user


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