Re: gEDA-user: PCB & Gschem

[Karel Kulhavy <clock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:30:46PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> > I Guess i got to say footprint= but still havent worked out what for
> > diodes resistors capacitors
> 
> "it depends".  *You* have to decide which physical component you're
> going to use, and pick (or make) a footprint that matches it.  There's
> a couple of footprings in 2_pin_thru-hole_packages, more in ~generic,
> more in ~geda, more in ~ressitor, etc.
> 
> I usually keep a spare copy of pcb running so I can put footprints on
> a blank board and see what they look like, assuming I haven't created
> them myself for a specific part.
> 
> > also wouldnt it make sense for Gschem to have a drop down list of
> > footprints and you just select the one you want .
> 
> They don't make monitors that big ;-)
> 
> And you're asking about an old question - light vs heavy symbols.  The
> purpose of gschem is NOT to design your pcb; its to design the
> circuit.  Something like gattrib or a database app would assign
> footprints to symbols based on available stock, corporate preferences,
> custom footprints, etc.

I think it should be in gschem. From the schematic you can tell if the
capacitor is filtering or not and if you need low-ESR footprint or not.
You cannot tell from gattrib what function the part is doing. However
having the same functionality in gattrib together with gschem would be
even better.

> 
> Currently, we're adopting the "light symbol" policy, which means that
> the designer has to add the information, but allows for a smaller
> library of symbols.

Why is the gsymcheck -vv then complaining about missing footprint=
information?

CL<
> 
> That's why programs like gattrib exist - to help with the migration
> between the symbolic (gschem) and the physical (pcb).