> > I've just started using geda, I actually gave it a shot once before > but gave up when the install hit bumps. This time I pushed > through these bumps and have something that sort of works. > Anyway, I thought that I would share my experience and ask > if this was representative:
[ snip ] This kind of report is kind of representative, particularly for newbies. Unfortunate but true. The Install CD was meant to address the install problem, but the producers of Linux distros have made this difficult since they change the configuration of the distro with each new release, and the Installer is not smart enough to keep up. I will be releasing a new version of the installer Any Day Now. . . . Hopefully, it will work with FC5 and SuSE 10.1 just as well as it did with FC3 and SuSE9.3. Also, the folks who say "use emerge foo.bar" or "apt-get baz.woof" to install don't understand that the real problem is the complexity and lack of coherence of the components in gEDA. Yes, you can do "emerge geda", but what about PCB? How is the totally ignorant user to know that he also needs PCB? And ngspice? and gerbv? This is our problem to fix. I do think the OP tried to run the software without actually knowing the first thing about which program does what. For example, not understanding how to deal with the M4 stuff is a two-fold problem: 1. PCB shouldn't rely upon M4 macros for footprints in 2006. There should be a unified footprint system based upon the newlib. 2. The OP apparently can't install unix software since the M4 stuff wasn't found in his search path. A real unix user knows how to find the M4 stuff and configure the search path. (3. Perhaps gsch2pcb needs updating to know where to look for the M4 stuff? ISTR that it hardcodes the paths to the usual M4 locations.) I will say that 40% of the problem has to do with the OP. He needs to read the manuals a little bit and learn how to deal with installing unix software. However, I do think that one should be able to use gEDA (or any software) without needing to read the manual or being a unix power user. Therefore, we have work to do also; our portion of the problem is the remaining 60%. Finally, it does deserve mention that gEDA is an *open-source* project. That means that the developers work on it for fun, as a hobby. The also release it to the general public with no guarantees (as it says in the GPL), and give it away for free (as in beer). Lots of people are able to work through whatever difficulties and then become very productive with the software. It is a very powerful suite, after all. They do it because they appreciate the fact that gEDA is free (as in beer) and because once they work through it they become productive. The OP wanted to use the software for free, but was disappointed that he couldn't make it work for him. That is too bad, but he does have the possibility of asking for help on the user group, or -- better -- paying somebody to help him set it up. That is, I do have sympathy for his plight, but OTOH, my sympathy is limited since gEDA is a freebie and the OP didn't want the software enough to consider paying for support. > Anyway, I've given up on geda. I think that I gave it a pretty good > go, but in the end I'll just find software that it easier to use. I wasted > hours trying to get it to just install, and once it was installed I couldn't > get it to do anything. I searched for documentation but found little > and the docs I did find were scattered and incomprehensible. And > I just hit bug after bug after bug... Try Kicad. Good luck! Stuart _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
