Hi Guys -- I just checked in a bunch of changes which implement the new RC file readin scheme as described below. I have also renamed system-commonrc to system-gafrc.
The changes compile without problems here, and the programs all seem to work. When you get a chance, please check the code out of CVS, do "makereconfig && make config && make install" as usual and give it a quick test. If you find a problem, please let me know. Thanks, Stuart > > Hi All, > > >$system/gafrc > >$home/gafrc > >./gafrc > >$system/gschemrc > >$home/gschemrc > >./gschemrc > > > Okay this order is fine with me too. I really didn't have > a good reason for advocating the other way. > > > >It works fine. The only problem is that I get a warning when it tries > >to find the "required system-gafrc" file: > > This message will go away once you rename the system-commonrc > to system-gafrc, right? > > [snip] > >I like Peter's suggestion that the system-commonrc become the > >system-gafrc. This is a good first step on the road to migrating > >towards using gafrc everywhere & deprecating the old g[schem | netlist > >| attrib | symcheck]rc system. It does require some changes to the > >*rc.in files -- particularly in the symbols directory -- but that I > >don't mind doing. > > Okay. > > > > >I don't think the old system should go away; that might cause breakage > >of legacy schematics. However, we can incorporate the new gafrc > >system while deprecating the old system for new designs. > > > I don't think we will ever be able to get rid of the other rc files, > mainly because things that are gschem specific have to go somewhere. > > > > >One question: If I make changes to libgeda, I would like to have > >folks test my stuff. Are there any volunteers out there who are > >willing to get stuff out of CVS, build it and test it when I post an > >update? Peter? > > I'll review and test the changes. Feel free to checkin the changes > when you get a chance. > > >In general, it would be a good thing to have a few beta testers who > >can verify that the code in CVS builds reliability. > > If you break CVS, don't worry about it. Things are easily fixed. > Thanks. > > -Ales > >
