On May 19, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: > Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote: > >> KMK didn't say what he means by "unusable", > > Most immediately: The symbols in the default lib do not contain footprint > attributes. Not even an empty ones. This prevents them to "just-work" for > the most common work-flow of geda: gschem -> gnetlist -> pcb -> gerbv
What's the footprint for a transistor? A resistor? A 7400? All of these come in many packages and many also expect a 1:1 mapping from package to footprint, but that isn't how it works. > > >> The first thing that comes to mind is that, for both Gschem and PCB, >> the libraries need recategorized. > > ack. > The historically grown structure is less than stellar. And the scope needs > to be reduced to what can sensibly be delivered. The libs should not suggest > completeness where thay can only provide a (good) starting point. It isn't so much the libs, as the lib browser, which sends the selected part straight to the schematic, thus giving the user the false impression that they're finished with it. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
