[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: gEDA-user: Re: putting spice commands and options in gschem
> Just to put the record straight (just in case), I did try google a
> little.
Excellent! I stand corrected!
> Which made me try the spice-directive-1.sym and
> spice-model-1.sym from "spice" library components in gschem. These
> allowed me to include a file, or so it seems since I couldn't make it to
> work for I couldn't find detailed documentation on these components on
> the web.
It's been a while since I used spice-sdb, but I think you can use the
spice-include-1.sym symbol to include some arbitrary SPICE cards into
teh netlist. Try "gnetlist -h" to see what the behavior of the
include symbol is. Also, the spice-directive-1.sym symbol will insert
arbitrary SPICE cards into your netlist. Note that since
attributes can have multiple lines, you can use one symbol to put
several cards (lines) of SPICE statements into your netlist.
> So, yes I am a newbie, but not clueless. I did try google, but maybe not
> *thoroughly*. There is a whole lot of documentation about spice, but I
> haven't been able to find a whole lot on gschem. Will give yours a try.
My document about spice-sdb is included with the gEDA distribution, as
well as being available on the web. I am not against answering
questions, and am always happy to help somebody who has made an honest
to help himself effort first.
As for this morning's little flame-fest, I do think that calls to
improve the documentation are best answered with a request for
participation. I have contributed a number of docs to the gEDA
project, as well as code. Interestingly, I have received (and
gratefully incorporated) lots of patches to my code (including to
spice-sdb), but I have almost never received patches to my
documentation. I get suggestions, but no patches. If open-source
stuff is not well documented, it's apparently because most open-source
developers just can't be bothered to write documentation, or even
submit patches against existing documents. Why is that?
Stuart