Re: gEDA-user: HOWTO configure geda for heavy symbols?

[Stuart Brorson <sdb@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> Yes, I know about the heavy/light symbol arguments, read through the
> discussions and made up my mind. I won't need flexibility the light
> approach offer -- no need to use zillions of different resistor models.
> Quite the contrary, for economic reasons I will go out of my way to stick
> with as little diversity as possible. In addition, gattrib adds numerous
> possibilities of systematic error to the workflow and is generally is not
> very smooth. Hence my desire to avoid this step.

That's fine.  GEDA can be easily modified to support just about any
configuration you wish.  At your own location, that is . . . .

> The docs state, that geda prefers light symbols but can be can be
> configured for the heavy approach. Just what does this decision involve?

One way:

1.  Create a new directory to hold the heavy symbols.
2.  Create copies of each symbol in the new directory.
3.  Insert the desired attributes into each .sym file.
4.  Modify gafrc to point to the new symbol directory.

> Footprint should be optionally visible and editable in the schematic. This
> can be accomplished with the visibility flag and the action "hide specific
> text". That way I can do exceptions interactively in gschem. Existing
> symbols with hidden footprints are easy to modify. Every symbol needs a
> default footprint attribute. I have to make up my mind about this anyway,
> so this is no additional work. Anything else I have to adapt to the heavy
> approach?

Nope.  You got it.

> Now I already have some projects completed with light symbols. I find,
> that symbols get updated but attributes changed to visible do not get
> promoted if I open these old schematics. Is there any way to promote the
> attributes of elements already instantiated?

I believe this involves playing around with system-gafrc or one of the
other RC files.

One other thought:  Now that you've decided to create a heavy symbol
library, how about hosting it on your webpage for others to download?

As for putting it into the regular gEDA distribution, I strongly vote
against that since a heavy symbol library implies a big maintainence
burden on the gEDA developes, one which I am not interested in
supporting.  OTOH, if others want to distribute heavy symbols for the
benefit of the community, go for it!

Stuart


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