gEDA-dev: referencing or embedding symbols?

[John Doty]

On Jul 13, 2007, at 8:45 AM, John Griessen wrote:

> Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
>
>> Currently, there is no easy way to fully control where gschem and
>> gsch2pcb look for symbols and footprints. It is even difficult to  
>> make
>> them ignore the systems libraries. (see the threads in geda user  
>> on this
>> topic)
>
>>
>> Note, this thread is _not_ about a reduction of flexibility. It is  
>> about
>> default settings. This mainly affects how gschem should behave for  
>> the
>> uninitiated newbie and intermediate users.
>
>
> I think a better default for gschem and pcb would be a small subset  
> that covers
> most easily buildable parts like SMT R and C plus radial R and C,
> and not the whole set of possible libraries.  Then adding little used
> potentially bad footprints or symbols with tricky details would not  
> come up for newbies.

I cannot see how this can work in practice for a general gEDA  
release. No two people will ever agree on what such a subset needs.

I can see how this could work for simple projects in an institutional  
sandbox, like a university teaching lab, where somebody can spend the  
time to make the symbol library match the stockroom. But not out in  
the wild world: there we just need to emphasize the customization of  
symbols.

>
> To do this would require a way to fully and obviously control where  
> gschem and
> gsch2pcb look for symbols and footprints.  I think that's important.

Yes.

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd at noqsi.com