Bert Timmerman wrote:
Hi Dan and all,
And after being called in for having dinner, and putting the kids to bed, I
ran ./pcbtest and didn't get the message: "Share installation path is...".
good! that should only happen with mingw.
Hi Dan,
I did a fresh check out of pcb.
./configure ran without any problems.
make did the usual things and I went to make a fresh cup of coffee (or two)
when I saw it hitting the pcblib-newlib script.
On a P4 3GHz 1Gb and 80GB available disk space it took about 68 minutes to
build, andit stumbled on the puller.png (I forgot the maintainer mode again
;-).
Now for people with older hardware this is certain a job to run at night,
while you're sleeping.
yeah, I'm not happy with how long this takes. It shouldn't take so long
but on some systems, calling sh over and over is expensive.
I noticed a couple of things on which I would like to make some remarks.
1) I think now is the time to reconsider "light versus heavy footprints", by
this I mean: should all values of the 0.25W resistors be available as heavy
footprints ?
no. I'm planning on removing a bunch of those.
2) Some, but not all, footprints seem to have tabs between parameters in the
pin/pad definitions, for instance: all amphenol footprints.
3) the amp and bourns footprints (and maybe others I didn't check) have a
lot of comment lines in the beginning of the footprint file, and also
between the lines.
it is because you're getting the raw output instead of something that
has been loaded and resaved by pcb.
4) I think adding another search path for newlib style footprints is not a
Good Thing (TM), is there a reason for not adding the generated M4
footprints to the newlib directory.
I'll think about this.
_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
