Sorry but I guess you missed earlier parts of this thread.
I believe I agree with you about footprints already placed in a design.
I really don't want the system to pull up an existing footprint that is
on the board, in fact that was one of my complaints, the fact is that this
software DOES
remove any footprint that is NOT the first one on the list in the symbol
from the board when doing a footprint update in synchronizer, also even if
it was one that is listed in the symbol as a footprint that could be used
for the part.
What I do really want though is on the schematic side. All I want is for the
update schematic
function to actually put the footprint name defined in the symbol that is in
my master library into the schematic symbol and actually use that footprint
on a new design. As it works now if there is a symbol in the schematic with
anything in the footprint field, if you update schematic any new footprint
will not be used, that foot print stays there. Then once it is in that
design of course I don't want any automatic function removing or changing it
unless I really need to change that particular footprint either by an all
footprint update with synchronizer or individual update using PCB Update
from library, or just putting any other footprint you want in there.
I just think a little more control needs to be added to the update
capability. I just have a problem with
the fact that I ran a function that supposedly should update a symbol in a
schematic with data from
a symbol in the library. I see that doing things on the fly in the PCB like
changing a footprint then updating schematic from that source, your saying
you would not want a library update to a symbol in the schematic to change
that footprint on you. I just think the way the system does update you will
have a problem with this. I would think there could easily be a choice here
to either append or replece data in a symbol during update. That could keep
everybody happy no matter where the source of
the update comes from.
Thanks,  just another viewpoint.

Robert M. Wolfe, C.I.D.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Multisheet Problems & Updates etc.

> Bob Wolfe wrote:
> >
> > Abdulrahman wrote
> > "The update schematic function works, that is, it updates *symbols*. It
> > not update the chosen footprint.
> >
> > In this case, I think it better to simply leave the schematic alone and,
> > instead, create a PCB library with footprint names matching those coming
> > from OrCAD. If those names are in error, then you will supply corrected
> > names to your client to be used in the future...."
> >
> > This one I would have to argue with you on.
> > An update of any symbol should update ALL of the data contained within
> > symbol that was changed. Footprint name is contained within that symbol.
> > footprint name or whatever is contained in that symbol that data should
> > to the schematic, ...
> Well, I (and probably many other Protel users) will argue back.
> The footprint names you enter when making the schematic symbol _are_
> _not_ the only legal footprints for that part - they are just possible
> footprints that will appear on a drop-down list for easy selection.  It
> is perfectly permissible to use some other footprint in place of the
> pre-defined ones, so I would _not_ want Protel to automagically change
> footprints on already-placed parts if I happen to revise the schematic
> symbol.
> I suppose that if the footprints listed in the schematic symbol were the
> only legal choices, you may have a point here, but since they aren't, I
> don't believe you do.
> --
> Peter Bennett
> 4004 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada
> GPS and NMEA info and programs:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* To leave this list visit:
* Contact the list manager:
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to