Abdulrahman,
Thank you very much for trying to help. Sorry if I was not precise enough.
I will try a few experiments this week, I was planning on doing them sooner,
but could not. I will test out all of my concerns and report to the forum
what I find
as precise as possible. I believe from past attempts that it is just the way
Protel structures
its library and update capability.
Hopefully this will then shed some light as to whether, like you said,
there is a real bug or I just have a bug and need to adjust the way I am
looking at my problem.
In ref. to your other email, I don't want the system to do all my work but
to me the type of update
I think should happen seems so far not to be, but I will try and verify that
and report soon.
Thanks
Bob
Robert M. Wolfe, C.I.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] multi sheet problems


> At 06:26 PM 12/27/2001 -0500, Bob Wolfe wrote:
> >Well Guys and Gals,
> >All I know is a while back I tried a number of times to keep an alternate
> >footprint to no avail. I made a contact switch symbol which had 2 pins.
> >I needed 3 different footprints for this same function. So rather than
> >creat 3 separate symbols I just added the other 2 footprints to the list.
> >Well if you do need to update footprints with synchronizer it ripped up
> >the ones that used the 2nd and 3rd footprint on th elist
> >an dreplaced it with the 1st EVERY time.
>
> There are two update processes, in discussing this we should be careful
not
> to confuse them. One is to update the schematic symbols from a modified
> library symbol. The other is to update a PCB from information on the
> schematic. Okay, Mr. Wolfe added footprints to the list of footprints in
> the library. What then? He did not say.
>
> Assuming that by "synchronizer" he means Update PCB from schematic, and
> that by "the ones that used the 2nd and 3rd footprint" he meant schematic
> symbols with the second and third choices made so that those footprints
> appear in the edit symbol dialog in schematic, and that there were
> corresponding PCB components presumably manually placed, the behavior he
> has reported is not confirmed by anyone else so far (with the possible
> exception of an old P98 bug).
>
> I urge writers who are having a difficulty such as that reported by Mr.
> Wolfe to take the trouble and time to become very precise in describing
> what happened. Not only will this make response easier, but more than half
> the time, I would guess, one will figure iout the problem oneself. I don't
> know for sure if this is the case here, and this is not personal against
> Mr. Wolfe, most of us do not write -- or speak, for that matter -- with
> precision, we have strong points in other areas and we communicate
> sketchily, which can work very well face-to-face, especially if there is a
> listener who is willing to seem stupid, i.e., "I don't understand...."
>
> So let me describe what Mr. Wolfe should have done, in my opinion.
>
> (1) Edit the library symbols to have the three optional footprints. Make
> the first one the most commonly used, if there is any difference. Save the
> library.
>
> (2) Update the schematic from the library with that symbol open, so that
> all instances of the symbol now have the three choices.
>
> (3) Go to each one of them and choose the correct footprint for that
instance.
>
> (4) Update PCB with "update component footprints" checked. The
synchronizer
> should now replace all instances with footprints other than those chosen
> for them. Those which already have a footprint of the same name will be
> untouched.
>
> If he did this, and footprints were replaced with footprints *other than
> those specified in the edit symbol dialog in schematic*, then we have a
bug.
>
> >  I finally got fed up and made 3
> >separate
> >symbols (by the way Protel was no help on this either) for the 3
footprints
> >an dhaven't had a problem since. As lon gas I did not try to update any
> >footprints with them all on one symbol it was OK.
>
> The information transfer in the synchronizer is usually the same as would
> be transfered with a net list. The footprint field in the net list is what
> has been entered in the footprint field on the symbol; quite often this is
> manually entered, it is not even from the schematic. If the schematic
> footprint field for a symbol is empty, the net list field will likewise be
> empty, and Load Netlist will leave any existing footprint in place.
> Likewise the synchronizer will do the same. At least it should!
>
> >Now I don't know what other buttons or oprions to click on or off. It
seem
> >syou either
> >want update footprints or you don't.
>
> Frankly, once you have placed the correct footprint information in the
> schematic, you should want to always update footprints. And you should
> always preview changes unless you are very confident that everything is
> copacetic. If a footprint change macro is created, you want to see it
> before approving it. When you are first creating a PCB, you might skip the
> preview, but whenever you are making small changes, you should definitely
> preview the macros to make sure that what is being changed is what you
want
> to change and nothing else.....
>
> >  Unless there are some other config
> >items burried somewhere
> >to play with???
>
> No, it is terribly simple. But sometimes we get a wild hair in our head
> that makes simple things complicated, so we can overlook the obvious. I
> suspect that this has happened to Mr. Wolfe because he keeps mentioning
the
> footprint options but has not actually mentioned the chosen footprint,
> which may be one of the choices or it may be something completely
different....
>
> *Footprints are not controlled from the library.*
>
> I don't know what happens if a footprint choice has been made for a symbol
> and then the symbol is updated from library to add choices. It *should*
> leave the footprint field untouched, but I would not bet on it.... It is
> conceivable that there is a problem here, and that it is behind Mr.
Wolfe's
> experience....
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Abdulrahman Lomax
> Easthampton, Massachusetts USA
>

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to