Bill Gatliff wrote: > Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: > >> The two other EDA suites I worked (eagle and protel) with maintain the >> notion of a "component" that contains all the info. In a way, this is a >> very heavy symbol that knows about slots, possible footprints and which >> schematic symbols are necessary to represent a complete component. >> >> > > They carry the symbol along with the component though, right? So if the > system doesn't know about a component in advance, it won't offer you a > symbol. > > That's not what I want. I want the concepts of symbols and components > to be completely separate, tied together only by meta-information that > says "this circuit can be represented by this symbol", and "this > component contains these circuits". > > > b.g. > > You probably want to investigate Bernd's fork, then.
http://repo.or.cz/w/geda-gaf/berndj.git (it's in there somewhere). Peter _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
