On 01:28 PM 13/07/2001 +0100, Andrew Ircha said:
>Summary: An open PCB appears to pay no regard to the added pcb libraries
>in the explorer pane, and instead will obtain footprints from another
>open pcb library.
>Do others think this is unreasonable?
>Andrew Ircha

It looks like a bug - but I am not sure I fully understand the sequence 
your are doing.

With libraries it is easy to not communicate exactly what you are doing due 
to the confusion between open for editing and available in the PCB editor.

When you say Update PCB, I assume you are using the PCBLib process 
UpdatePCB which you observe affects all open PCBs.  Is this correct?

UpdatePCB will affect all PCBs that are open with a component of the same 
name, regardless of:
1) which library that component originally came from,
2) what other libraries are open for editing,
3) whether a library is available in the PCB editors library list.

I think it may be this last point that is catching you.  It is very poor 
behavior but I suspect it is by design so therefore Protel will not call it 
a bug. But as users of the program we can say it stinks.

In a nutshell, to answer your question "Which library is used in 
"UpdatePCB"".  The library from which you ran UpdatePCB.  And any component 
in any open PCB, regardless of DDB or available libraries, is updated.

You should also notice that when you make a library available in a PCB 
using the Add/remove.. function, this makes that library(ies) available in 
all other PCBs open for editing in that instance of Protel, regardless of 
which DDB they are in.  This is an example of historical design decisions 
now being outdated and requiring urgent correction.

One of Protel's biggest failings is that you cannot track or specify from 
which library a component comes from.  I would hope and expect that we will 
see *major* changes in library management in the next version.  I would 
like it to be the next service pack but I suspect that this may not be 
practical as it will affect, I assume, file formats.

(Speaking of forthcoming service packs: I wonder if such a beast does in 
fact exist. I suspect there is pressure inside Protel to make rumored 
autorouter improvements a carrot to encourage upgrades - but this is all 
complete and utter speculation. I would like to be proved wrong.)

Ian Wilson

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*                      - or email -
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum
* Contact the list manager:
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to