On Saturday 29 January 2005 2:52 am, Karel Kulhavy wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 05:45:14PM -0500, Joshua Boyd wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 10:42:48PM -0500, Marvin Dickens wrote:
> > > I realize that this is probably not going to popular with everybody,
> > > but it would be nice if all o
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 05:45:14PM -0500, Joshua Boyd wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 10:42:48PM -0500, Marvin Dickens wrote:
> > I realize that this is probably not going to popular with everybody,
> > but it would be nice if all of the tools that require a gui were built
> > using the same libra
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 09:14:35PM -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
> On Jan 12, 2005, at 8:27 PM, Bert Douglas wrote:
> >>>Motif is, as well as Xaw, X11 Toolkit based, but as a comercial
> >>>product lots of people prefer something free.
> >>
> >> Lesstif.
> >
> >Motif is now open.
> >http://www.openg
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 07:54:51PM -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
> This has been my experience as well. C++ is a horrid abortion, in my
> opinion. C++ code that's truly portable isn't very common.
And it isn't even all that hard to get it reasonably portable. It's
just less likely to be perfec
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 10:42:48PM -0500, Marvin Dickens wrote:
> I realize that this is probably not going to popular with everybody,
> but it would be nice if all of the tools that require a gui were built
> using the same library. Preferably, one that ports really easily.
> It seems to me that Q
At Fri, 14 Jan 2005 00:09:46 -0500,
Ales Hvezda wrote:
> Recently somebody did succeed in building on cygwin by disabling
> the test in the configure script. I generally do not support cygwin
> because it did some rather odd path translations which didn't quite work
> for me (things may be
[snip]
>I tried compiling geda on cygwin but got an error that it wasn't
>supported. Is there a way in cygwin to do this or use gcc with mingw
>in cygwin?
I prefer mingw, especially since the official win32 gtk+ libraries
are built for mingw.
Recently somebody did succeed in bui
At Thu, 13 Jan 2005 23:48:25 -0500,
Ales Hvezda wrote:
> I haven't said much in this thread, but I will comment now. :-)
> I have had great success with gtk+ 1.2 and 2.0 on various Unix platforms,
> Linux, and Windows (and I have seen gEDA/gaf run on MacOSX as well).
> gtk+ is a portable GUI
[snip]
>Gschem and friends
>
>geda GUI/Project Manager (GTK+-1.2)
>setup GUI Installer(GTK+? )
gtk+ 1.2.x or 2.x
>gschemSchematic Capture(GTK+-2.0)
>utils Utilities(Text Based)
>gnetlist Netlist Generation (Text Based)
>gsymcheck Symbol Checker
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 09:33:03PM +0100, Mario Klebsch wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi!
>
> Am 13.01.2005 um 00:57 schrieb Daniel Nilsson:
> >I take note of the post that this is the wrong list for this topic and
> >apologize for bringing it up here.
>
> Allthoug
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 03:40:18PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> > I have seen this, too. But when it looks like Motif, does it feel
> > like Motif, too? Last time, I tried such an app, the answer was
> > no. :-(
>
> As a Motif developer at the time, no, it didn't. We used it anyway.
>
> But tha
> I have seen this, too. But when it looks like Motif, does it feel
> like Motif, too? Last time, I tried such an app, the answer was
> no. :-(
As a Motif developer at the time, no, it didn't. We used it anyway.
But that's why *I* prefer the option that the GUI is abstracted away
from the appli
> The first verion of X11, I used, was X11R3. Motife was already in use
> by that time. It probably is much older the Qt, Gtk Tk and most of the
> other widget sets. Only xview and the open look widget set are nearly
> as old.
That was Motif 1.0. Since then, 1.1, 1.2, and 2.0 have been releas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 13.01.2005 um 00:49 schrieb DJ Delorie:
I've seen GUI toolkits that did that. You could look like Motif under
Windows, look like Windows under OpenView, look like OpenView under
Motif, etc. And all changeable on the fly.
I have seen this, too.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 13.01.2005 um 00:57 schrieb Daniel Nilsson:
I take note of the post that this is the wrong list for this topic and
apologize for bringing it up here.
Allthoug there are several technical aspects of GUI-choice, that mainly
are of developers inter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 13.01.2005 um 00:47 schrieb Bert Douglas:
From: "Mario Klebsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tk requires code written in tcl.
Tk is separate from tcl and can be used without tcl.
There are Tk bindings for many languages such as python and lisp.
AFAIK, par
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 13.01.2005 um 00:08 schrieb DJ Delorie:
Since Motif is almost as old as Xaw, lots of newer UI features are
missing there, too.
This is just plain wrong, sorry. Motif is a lot newer than Xaw and
has a ton more features.
The first verion of X11, I
On Thursday 13 January 2005 00:55, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > Motif also is not GPLed, someone will complain about this.
>
> So use Lesstif instead. I don't know why people keep ignoring the
> fact that "Motif" is a style (as well as an implementation), and
> "Lesstif" is a GPL implementation of that s
Magnus Danielson wrote:
From: "Bert Douglas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: gEDA-user: PCB suggestion
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:27:38 -0600
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Dave McGuire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Motif is, as well as Xaw, X11 Toolkit base
Bert Douglas wrote:
From: "Dave McGuire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Motif is, as well as Xaw, X11 Toolkit based, but as a comercial
product lots of people prefer something free.
Lesstif.
Lesstif appears to require Cygwin for current versions of Windows
Motif is now open.
http://www.opengroup.org/openm
From: "Bert Douglas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: gEDA-user: PCB suggestion
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:27:38 -0600
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> From: "Dave McGuire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > > Motif is, as well as Xaw, X
On Jan 12, 2005, at 8:27 PM, Bert Douglas wrote:
Motif is, as well as Xaw, X11 Toolkit based, but as a comercial
product lots of people prefer something free.
Lesstif.
Motif is now open.
http://www.opengroup.org/openmotif/
Oh hey, I was unaware of that. Haven't done any Motif programming in
From: "Dave McGuire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Motif is, as well as Xaw, X11 Toolkit based, but as a comercial
> > product lots of people prefer something free.
>
>Lesstif.
Motif is now open.
http://www.opengroup.org/openmotif/
On Jan 12, 2005, at 5:48 PM, Mario Klebsch wrote:
As other people noticed, finding
good documentation is a little hard but more importantly getting help
is not easy at all. I asked for help in a few related newsgroups but
the answers I got were not terribly helpful.
Since Xaw is so ugly, almost nob
On Jan 12, 2005, at 6:27 PM, Karel Kulhavy wrote:
People are pretending that the real problems are in the choice of the
right
fancy widgeting kit. They try to cover the shameful fact that mankind
is unable
to make even the basic levels of system functionality correctly, even
in the
21st century.
On Jan 12, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Karel Kulhavy wrote:
It seems to me that QT is a good choice for this because for the most
part, it write once and compile anywhere.
Qt is a C++ library supplying a C++ API. PCB as well as gschem and co
are written in C.
I have more problems compiling C++ apps than C ap
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 06:49:17PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> > What about making Options -> GUI where you would have a radio button for
> > the GUI? You could switch it back and forth and look at the program change
> > UI dynamically. It would be wonderful :)
>
> I've seen GUI toolkits that di
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 11:48:04PM +0100, Mario Klebsch wrote:
> >Doing a little
> >research and following similar discussions on the GTK list I think
> >baseing a layout program on the GnomeCanvas would be fairly
> >straightforward
>
> Allthough I am in favour of using Gtk for Pcb, I would not li
> Motif also is not GPLed, someone will complain about this.
So use Lesstif instead. I don't know why people keep ignoring the
fact that "Motif" is a style (as well as an implementation), and
"Lesstif" is a GPL implementation of that style.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 12:12:53AM +0100, Mario Klebsch wrote:
> >I also agree with the poster who said that the first step is to
> >separate the GUI code from the other code. Ales has looked at this
> >briefly & says that about 1/3 of this is already done, 1/3 is trivial,
> >and 1/3 of the GUI co
> What about making Options -> GUI where you would have a radio button for
> the GUI? You could switch it back and forth and look at the program change
> UI dynamically. It would be wonderful :)
I've seen GUI toolkits that did that. You could look like Motif under
Windows, look like Windows unde
From: "Mario Klebsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Tk requires code written in tcl.
Tk is separate from tcl and can be used without tcl.
There are Tk bindings for many languages such as python and lisp.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 11.01.2005 um 18:15 schrieb Stuart Brorson:
The other choices (motif, Qt, wxWidgets) aren't as portable as GTK.
Motif is as well as Xax Xt-based and would require the least changed to
Pcb. Unfortunately it also is the least modern one, too, so l
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 11:59:36PM +0100, Mario Klebsch wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi!
>
> Am 11.01.2005 um 04:42 schrieb Marvin Dickens:
>
> >It seems to me that QT is a good choice for this because for the most
> >part, it write once and compile anywhere.
>
>
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 11:56:54PM +0100, Mario Klebsch wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi!
>
> Am 11.01.2005 um 04:24 schrieb DJ Delorie:
> >Better would be to isolate the GUI parts so we can swap out GUIs at
> >build time.
What about making Options -> GUI where you
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 11:48:04PM +0100, Mario Klebsch wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi!
>
> Am 11.01.2005 um 04:15 schrieb Daniel Nilsson:
>
> >While working on fixing the problems with the mode buttons only
> >working on some combinations of X and window manager
> Motif is, as well as Xaw, X11 Toolkit based, but as a comercial product
> lots of people prefer something free.
Use Lesstif. It's GPL.
> Since Motif is almost as old as Xaw, lots of newer UI features are
> missing there, too.
This is just plain wrong, sorry. Motif is a lot newer than Xaw a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 11.01.2005 um 04:42 schrieb Marvin Dickens:
It seems to me that QT is a good choice for this because for the most
part, it write once and compile anywhere.
Qt is a C++ library supplying a C++ API. PCB as well as gschem and co
are written in C.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 11.01.2005 um 04:24 schrieb DJ Delorie:
Better would be to isolate the GUI parts so we can swap out GUIs at
build time.
Other developers have tried this one, but noone really managed to
achive this goal.
A GUI is not just the look but also the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 11.01.2005 um 04:15 schrieb Daniel Nilsson:
While working on fixing the problems with the mode buttons only
working on some combinations of X and window managers I realized how
old the Athena Widgets are by now.
It should be notet here, that the
[ Ales here, I'm reposting this since majordomo didn't recognize the
e-mail as being subscribed to the geda-dev/geda-user mailinglist. ]
-- Cut here --
From: Marvin Dickens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 00:33:35 -0500
Typically, vias are are in front of the pad or behind it under t
[ Ales here, I'm reposting this since majordomo didn't recognize the
e-mail as being subscribed to the geda-dev/geda-user mailinglist. ]
-- Cut here --
From: Arnim Littek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 21:09:03 +1300 (NZDT)
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Al Davis wrote:
> > Has anybody looked
After reading your reply, I am left with the impression that a TK port
is either being planned or is underway. If this is true, who is
doing it and what all is going to be ported?
Best
Marvin Dickens
> On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 12:15 -0500, Stuart Brorson wrote:
> Since there is apparently a Tk
> | In your opinion, what library do you think plays well with the most
> | architetures/OS's? It seems to me that the library that plays well
> | among the different architetures/OS's is what any new gui should be
> | written in.
>
> For my part, I've had good luck w/ GTK+ on Linux/i386, Linux/AM
On Jan 11, 2005, at 5:52 AM, Bob Paddock wrote:
While we here might not like the idea of Windows, it is a requirement
of the
real world.
Heh. Not quite.
Just say "no", man.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire "I've watched Harley people throw up
Cape Coral, FL on th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marvin Dickens wrote:
| On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 23:09 -0500, Dan McMahill wrote:
|
|
|>I'm not a QT fan. Despite the claims I've heard to its cross-platform
|>nature, I've had fairly bad luck with having it run correctly on
|>non-intel-architecture syste
While working on fixing the problems with the mode buttons only
working on some combinations of X and window managers I realized how
old the Athena Widgets are by now. As other people noticed, finding
good documentation is a little hard but more importantly getting help
is not easy at all. I asked
On Monday 10 January 2005 10:15 pm, Daniel Nilsson wrote:
> I reached the conclusion that for PCB to survive in the long term a
> GUI based on a more modern widget set then the Athena widets will
> probably be required. This is in order to attract new developers to
> have an interest in improving
On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 23:09 -0500, Dan McMahill wrote:
> I'm not a QT fan. Despite the claims I've heard to its cross-platform
> nature, I've had fairly bad luck with having it run correctly on
> non-intel-architecture systems. FWIW,
I've had good luck with QT on Intel and PCC (IBM variety) alt
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 10:15:40PM -0500, Daniel Nilsson wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 10:30:51AM -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
> > On Jan 8, 2005, at 12:18 PM, Stuart Brorson wrote:
> > >2. The biggest reason to not use XML is that we already have a
> > >working file format with associated file r
I realize that this is probably not going to popular with everybody,
but it would be nice if all of the tools that require a gui were built
using the same library. Preferably, one that ports really easily.
It seems to me that QT is a good choice for this because for the most
part, it write once and
> I reached the conclusion that for PCB to survive in the long term a
> GUI based on a more modern widget set then the Athena widets will
> probably be required.
Better would be to isolate the GUI parts so we can swap out GUIs at
build time. I prefer Lesstif, but a Win32 GUI would be appropriate
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 10:30:51AM -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2005, at 12:18 PM, Stuart Brorson wrote:
> >2. The biggest reason to not use XML is that we already have a
> >working file format with associated file reading and writing code.
> >Transitioning to XML is a major, architectur
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 09.01.2005 um 20:52 schrieb Bob Paddock:
*PLEASE* put some detailed comments in the source code. While some
like
Harry, Dan, and DJ might have an intuitive understanding of how it all
works,
to the point to seeing the code in their sleep, t
First, This discussion should being held on the developers forum not the users
forum.
I am cross posting to try to move it there.
I think the file format should be secondary to a discussion on wether or
not gaf/pcb should be modified from being tool centric to being data
centric.
What would thi
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 02:52:03PM -0500, Bob Paddock wrote:
> Secondly can someone please point me to the documentation for the Widget Set
> that PCB uses? I know it is the X11 Athena Widget set but where is the
> documentation for it? I spent some time yesterday trying to find it with
> Gog
> If you've got time on your hands and you want to work on PCB, ask
> Harry or Dan which of the many bugs and feature requests residing on
> sourceforge most need attention.
Ok, I went and looked at the feature request list myself. Maybe everyone
should pick their favorite bug or feature reque
> > 2. The biggest reason to not use XML is that we already have a
> > working file format with associated file reading and writing code.
> > Transitioning to XML is a major, architectural change to PCB.
> > Everybody talks about changing the program; almost nobody actually
> > implements the chan
> There is a mathematical reason to keep the number of libraries down ;-)
The usual assumption is that the reliability of a library is higher
than the reliability of the custom code it replaces, since there's
more projects discovering (and hopefully fixing) its bugs.
The real math is the probabi
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 01:25:47PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> IMHO changing the file format to XML (1) makes pcb far more complex
> than it needs to be, and (2) offers no useful benefits. Given that
> pcb already has two file parsers (one is generic, one for current and
> older pcb files) and w
IMHO changing the file format to XML (1) makes pcb far more complex
than it needs to be, and (2) offers no useful benefits. Given that
pcb already has two file parsers (one is generic, one for current and
older pcb files) and will always *need* the current pcb file parser
(for backwards compatibi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 08.01.2005 um 18:18 schrieb Stuart Brorson:
2. The biggest reason to not use XML is that we already have a
working file format with associated file reading and writing code.
Transitioning to XML is a major, architectural change to PCB.
Everybody
On Jan 8, 2005, at 12:18 PM, Stuart Brorson wrote:
2. The biggest reason to not use XML is that we already have a
working file format with associated file reading and writing code.
Transitioning to XML is a major, architectural change to PCB.
Everybody talks about changing the program; almost nobo
Regarding VHDL...
Search on sourceforge shows some applications using
it.. maybe useful?
Ken
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> This problem will probably exist in whatever sort of new file format
> one may come up with. In other words, great go to xml or whatever.
> If you don't figure out, up front, _everything_ which may go into
> the file, you'll eventually end up with things out of sync again.
Or you put both the
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 08:19:06AM -0800, Daniel J Wisehart wrote:
> On Friday 07 January 2005 09:44, Evan Lavelle wrote:
> >
> > Maybe I'm being thick here, but what exactly would the advantages of an
> > XML file format be?
>
> The main point is that XML is self-describing for people reading the
I agree with Stuart. In the event XML is needed, it would be easier to write a
stand alone program that converted the output of PCB to XML. To me, this
makes more sense from a development stand point.
--->>>Stuart stated the following<<<--
2. The biggest reason to no
> On Friday 07 January 2005 09:44, Evan Lavelle wrote:
> >
> > Maybe I'm being thick here, but what exactly would the advantages of an
> > XML file format be?
>
> The main point is that XML is self-describing for people reading the file,
> which makes backward and forward compatibility trivial co
On Friday 07 January 2005 09:44, Evan Lavelle wrote:
>
> Maybe I'm being thick here, but what exactly would the advantages of an
> XML file format be?
The main point is that XML is self-describing for people reading the file,
which makes backward and forward compatibility trivial compared to what
Mario Klebsch wrote:
>... What I really like is the ability to have some signals
> drawn using a different color. This is esecially usefull for Vcc and
> Gnd on two and one layer designs. These Signaly require speciial
> attention and I often have to identify them. In eagle I usually use
> "sho
From: Karel Kulhavy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: gEDA-user: PCB suggestion
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 18:48:04 +
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 07:34:17PM +0100, Magnus Danielson wrote:
> > From: Al Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subje
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 07:34:17PM +0100, Magnus Danielson wrote:
> From: Al Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: PCB suggestion
> Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:27:49 -0500
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > On Friday 07 January 2005 11:38 am, Danie
From: Al Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: gEDA-user: PCB suggestion
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 12:27:49 -0500
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Friday 07 January 2005 11:38 am, Daniel J Wisehart wrote:
> > Why not use a neutral standard like XML?
>
> Because
Mario Klebsch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote*:
>
>Am 07.01.2005 um 04:56 schrieb harry eaton:
>> For what it's worth, I never liked the layer grouping concept but I've
>> preserved it for full backward compatibility for those who have used
>> it. It
>> was one of the few part of Thomas' original work th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 07.01.2005 um 16:40 schrieb Stephen Meier:
Bob,
Please see
http://www.alchemyresearch.com/bga.jpg
http://www.alchemyresearch.com/bga-soldermask.jpg
The via is in the pad as the pictures will show. Make a pad drill a
via right through its center.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Am 07.01.2005 um 04:56 schrieb harry eaton:
For what it's worth, I never liked the layer grouping concept but I've
preserved it for full backward compatibility for those who have used
it. It
was one of the few part of Thomas' original work that I d
On Friday 07 January 2005 11:38 am, Daniel J Wisehart wrote:
> I know that going to a VHDL like structure would be
> convenient for one of the tools, but all of the other tools
> would have to change. And does it really make sense to have
> Verilog inside of a VHDL block?
No matter what standard
Charles Lepple wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 08:38:55 -0800, Daniel J Wisehart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why not use a neutral standard like XML?
Not to stifle the discussion, but to prevent knee-jerk reactions to
the use of the "X word":
http://www.geda.seul.org/mailinglist/geda-dev27/threads.html#0
Karel Kulhavy wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:14:08PM -0500, Daniel Nilsson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 07:10:34PM -0500, harry eaton wrote:
but nothing beyond 6 layers. It is rare indeed that more than 8 copper
layers are required. Usually when 10 and 12 layer boards are made it is
b
On Friday 07 January 2005 11:38 am, Daniel J Wisehart wrote:
> Why not use a neutral standard like XML?
Because XML really doesn't say much. All it really does is to
specify a syntax based on tags like to begin a scope
named foo, and to end it. Everything meaningful is
specified in DTD fi
On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 09:09:39 -0800, Stephen Meier
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a start of such a list and will try to post it later today.
Looking forward to checking that out.
Just noticed that the thread subject is still "PCB suggestion"...
might want to add "file formats" somewhere in
I also wrote some extensive modifications to gnetlist and smaller
modifications to libgeda and gschem inorder to use hierchical busses. My
patches havn't yet come up to the standards that Ales need for them to
be includded in GAF but hopefully soon I will find some time to clean
them up.
Steve
I also wrote a utility program that takes a pcb-land pattern finds it in
the pcb file and puts a via through each hole. I found it was easier to
eliminate unneeded vias by hand then to insert them by hand. If there is
an interest in such a utility I will post it.
Steve Meier
Why not find as many possible proposed standards as possible list the
merits of each and make a decission. The decission may not be to adapt
one of the standards it may be to make our own standard or to modify an
existing standard. But we should look at how languages are used and what
are our n
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 08:38:55 -0800, Daniel J Wisehart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not use a neutral standard like XML?
Not to stifle the discussion, but to prevent knee-jerk reactions to
the use of the "X word":
http://www.geda.seul.org/mailinglist/geda-dev27/threads.html#00018
http://www.ged
On Thursday 06 January 2005 16:59, Al Davis wrote:
> > Has anybody looked to see if IEEE or any other organization
> > has any official standards? It would seem to me that adopting
> > standards from an official organization would be the way to
> > go. Kind of like Linux and POSIX.
>
> There are to
Bob,
Please see
http://www.alchemyresearch.com/bga.jpg
http://www.alchemyresearch.com/bga-soldermask.jpg
The via is in the pad as the pictures will show. Make a pad drill a via
right through its center. The board layers are glued, then on the bottom
side the via holes were coated in soldermask. M
Karel Kulhavy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote*:
>
>On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 05:58:10AM -0500, Bob Paddock wrote:
>> On Friday 07 January 2005 01:57 am, Stephen Meier wrote:
>> > I feal like I have to step in here. With a 900 pin BGA (30 rows by 30
>> > columns) at a 1mm (39 mil) pitch. Four signal layers
> Then it matured and companies like MS, SUN and others no longer liked
> it because it cut into their sales. Need I mention SCO? The main reason
> Linux survived the SCO thing had nothing to do with SCO lying. It had to
> do with support from IBM and other commericial entities who, in essence,
> f
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 05:58:10AM -0500, Bob Paddock wrote:
> On Friday 07 January 2005 01:57 am, Stephen Meier wrote:
> > I feal like I have to step in here. With a 900 pin BGA (30 rows by 30
> > columns) at a 1mm (39 mil) pitch. Four signal layers are just bearly
> > able to route all the signal
On Friday 07 January 2005 01:57 am, Stephen Meier wrote:
> I feal like I have to step in here. With a 900 pin BGA (30 rows by 30
> columns) at a 1mm (39 mil) pitch. Four signal layers are just bearly
> able to route all the signals out from under the bga. That was using via
> in pad and squeezing t
harry eaton wrote:
I wonder why they get so hot that they need
fans when there are no power connections. My point is it's usually possible
to route a board with far fewer layers than are actually used.
The world has changed quite a bit since the birth of 'pcb': With very
high density, very high p
I feal like I have to step in here. With a 900 pin BGA (30 rows by 30
columns) at a 1mm (39 mil) pitch. Four signal layers are just bearly
able to route all the signals out from under the bga. That was using via
in pad and squeezing two 4 mil traces between pads/layer. That left 4
layers for gr
> Am 06.01.2005 um 01:10 schrieb harry eaton:
> > The Pentium processor chip has only 7 wiring layers; it must be of
> > "medium
> > to low" complexity!
> >
> > Eight copper layers is not presently a serious limitation to users;
>
> Eight copper layers does not mean eight wiring layers, You often h
Al Davis wrote:
On Thursday 06 January 2005 07:05 pm, M. P. Dickens wrote:
Let's be reasonable: Free EDA tools are not looked upon as
good for business by the vast majority of commerical EDA
tools makers.
You might be surprised to find out how they really look at the
open-source tools. Many of
On Thursday 06 January 2005 07:05 pm, M. P. Dickens wrote:
> Let's be reasonable: Free EDA tools are not looked upon as
> good for business by the vast majority of commerical EDA
> tools makers.
You might be surprised to find out how they really look at the
open-source tools. Many of the propri
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:00:15AM +, Karel Kulhavy wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:14:08PM -0500, Daniel Nilsson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 07:10:34PM -0500, harry eaton wrote:
> > > but nothing beyond 6 layers. It is rare indeed that more than 8 copper
> > > layers are required.
Personally, I think any development should be towards open standards.
My reasoning behind this is based on the compuserve gif debacle, the
push for software patents and current copyright laws.
Let's be reasonable: Free EDA tools are not looked upon as good for
business by the vast majority of comm
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:14:08PM -0500, Daniel Nilsson wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 07:10:34PM -0500, harry eaton wrote:
> > but nothing beyond 6 layers. It is rare indeed that more than 8 copper
> > layers are required. Usually when 10 and 12 layer boards are made it is
> > because the desi
> 2. I think we will use PCB for a long time coming yet. You might
> experience difficulty selling your idea to the F/OSS Fundis, who
> don't like anything commercial. Moreover, although there is a lot of
> talk about new features for PCB, I suspect that there is not that much
> development act
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
