Re: gEDA-user: Locking down auto-routed traces?

[Bob Paddock <bpaddock@csonline.net>]

On Sunday 16 May 2004 11:34 am, harry eaton wrote:
> My version doesn't seem to add any blobs. While I have a work-in-progress
> version that's not in CVS yet, there is nothing in the code that I think
> would affect this. My guess is that the current CVS version doesn't create
> such blobs. 

The code I'm using came from CVS yesterday morning.
I'll do a completely clean checkout and try that.

> It's also curious that the blobs in your example file DON'T 
> have the AUTOFLAG set, indicating that they weren't created by the
> autorouter.

> Any chance these were created by the "trace optimizer?"

I did not run any of the trace optimizations.  I placed all the parts
in the bottom section then ran Autoroute-all-rats, to find out where I needed 
to improve the parts placement.  At that point the blobs appeared in
the top section.

> I don't recommend manually futzing with any internal pcb flags, which is to
> say I don't think you should follow Dan's suggestion. Instead simply use
> the :RipUp(Selected) facility to only rip-up the targeted nets and/or lock
> : them.

I did not know RipUp could be used to lock them, without removing them?

What I'm doing is creating a board that has all of the peripherals in the top 
section, all I2C based.  The bottom section will have different CPU's on 
different projects.  I'm happy with the top section as it is.  As
I work on the lower section I'd like the top section to be left alone by
the optimizers and router.

> > bottom section, the auto router adds "blobs" to several of the power nets
> > in the top section.   It is always a power net, never a signal net, and I
> > don't see what is different between the ones it chooses to blob verses an
> > identical neighbor that it doesn't blob.
> >
> > I've uploaded an example to Source Forges bug tracker page.