Re: gEDA-user: Basic questions from a gEDA & Linux noob (replies to Vol15, Issue 24)

[John Griessen <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dan McMahill wrote:
I'd think it would be easy
> enough to create a symbol where the bulk terminal is an implicit 
> connection like some of the digital chips have already.  Just be sure 
> that you are sure of the right names.  I'd think this would be 
> compatible with the existing flow, but perhaps I'm missing something.


I think its about SPICE netlist depending on pinseq, and pinseq depends on having a pin, or does it?

Could you make a FET source terminal be a pin with name S and pinseq=3 and somehow have
a pinseq=4 related to the substrate without having  another pin?  He doesn't want to lose substrate in the netlist,
just tie it to S for this particular "part" or transistor layout.

John Griessen


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