On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 11:33:39PM +0200, Benoît Roehr wrote:
> Does someone have a turnkey solution for building and running eeschema alone
> ? Can it be done by tweaking winbuilder ? (help help !)
Well, if you only touch eeschema the rebuild will only recompile that!
So I see no needs for tweak
The only problem I have had is the OpenGL rendering mode in pcbnew requires
an OpenGL version that is not available on one of my laptops.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscr
John,
I prefer the attached patch. Bazaar doesn't really have a clean way to
merger from mail that I'm aware of so attachments work the best for me.
Thank you for the patch. I committed it along with a few coding policy
fixes in r5171.
Cheers,
Wayne
On 10/7/2014 9:48 AM, John Beard wrote:
>
Hi,
I have just managed to install in Mint 17 with python scripting turned on. I
downloaded python-wxgtk3.0 and python-wxgtk3.0-dev from the ubuntu utopic
(14.10) repositories on the web. Just install by double-clicking them in the
file manager.
http://packages.ubuntu.com/utopic/python-wxg
Hi Benoît,
I am not sure that it is possible to compile and run eeschema on its own
after the recent kiface architecture change.
What is it that you are trying to do that you want a standalone eeschema?
Adam Wolf
Cofounder and Engineer, W&L
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Benoît Roehr
wrote:
The branch and merge request are now up to date with the "Total" text instead.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help
>The only occurences of Module I can see atm is in the PCBEditor and they
>should be replaced by Footprint or Component depending on the context.
Yes this entire patch is only changes to the pcbnew. I grepped down
most occurrences and also manually looked for them.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:15 PM,
Hello, dear developers,
I have some ideas of improvement for the Schematic editor. Making C++ in
microcontrollers is no problem for me but I know very little about
software compilation for x86 platforms. I'll will also need to learn
about wxWidget :D
Does someone have a turnkey solution for
Le 08/10/2014 19:40, Andy Peters a écrit :
On Oct 8, 2014, at 5:08 AM, Mark Roszko wrote:
I use footprint myself. Though footprint seems to imply what a PCB
must have in order to accommodate a part, eg, pads, silk. Are the 3d
models part of this? If they are, then footprint might not be the
In response to a message written on 08.10.2014 22:40, from Nick Østergaard:
> The question is not clear, but there is a mirror option. Use that. I
> have used that a lot for double sided prints.
Question is simply and clear. Film photography still firmly fixed in the
production of PCBs…
Negative i
On 10/8/2014 4:17 PM, Milan Horák wrote:
>
>
>
> Přeposlaná zpráva
> Předmět: negative printing
> Datum: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 21:36:01 +0200 (CEST)
> Od: Priskin Imre
> Komu: stran...@tiscali.cz
>
>
>
> Dear ' ',
> I would like print the pcb into film with negati
The question is not clear, but there is a mirror option. Use that. I
have used that a lot for double sided prints.
2014-10-08 22:35 GMT+02:00 Milan Horák :
> Nope. Question from the user. And I am unable to answer it.
> So maybe it belongs to users list.
>
> Milan
>
> Dne 8.10.2014 v 22:27 Nick Øs
Nope. Question from the user. And I am unable to answer it.
So maybe it belongs to users list.
Milan
Dne 8.10.2014 v 22:27 Nick Østergaard napsal(a):
Is this a bug report?
2014-10-08 22:17 GMT+02:00 Milan Horák :
Přeposlaná zpráva
Předmět:negative printing
Datum:
Is this a bug report?
2014-10-08 22:17 GMT+02:00 Milan Horák :
>
>
>
> Přeposlaná zpráva
> Předmět:negative printing
> Datum: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 21:36:01 +0200 (CEST)
> Od: Priskin Imre
> Komu: stran...@tiscali.cz
>
>
>
> Dear ' ',
> I would like print the pcb into f
Přeposlaná zpráva
Předmět:negative printing
Datum: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 21:36:01 +0200 (CEST)
Od: Priskin Imre
Komu: stran...@tiscali.cz
Dear ' ',
I would like print the pcb into film with negative for negative photoresist.
In the plotting i see this option, but
Well I submitted the merge proposal for the renames
seeing how Wayne and others are for it in the majority.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Carl Poirier wrote:
> I totally agree with Andy Peters.
>
> Symbol for the schematic parts and footprint for the PCB parts. If KiCad
> ever gets to the point
I totally agree with Andy Peters.
Symbol for the schematic parts and footprint for the PCB parts. If KiCad
ever gets to the point of having predefined symbol-footprint-3D-SPICE-etc.,
then it would be great to be able to describe these as components, without
disturbing the nomenclature of something
Missing from this pull request is changing "Total issues" to just
"Total" like you suggested in the other email thread.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Mark Roszko wrote:
> Sorry my bad, I accidently deleted the branch at one point when
> messing around with the git-bzr bridge which broke down fo
Sorry my bad, I accidently deleted the branch at one point when
messing around with the git-bzr bridge which broke down for me :(
I submitted a new merge request.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@l
On Oct 8, 2014, at 5:08 AM, Mark Roszko wrote:
>> I use footprint myself. Though footprint seems to imply what a PCB
>> must have in order to accommodate a part, eg, pads, silk. Are the 3d
>> models part of this? If they are, then footprint might not be the
>> best term.
>> I agree with this. W
Den 08/10/2014 11.38 skrev "Benoît Roehr" :
>
> Hello dear developers.
>
> Le 08/10/2014 10:08, Andrew Zonenberg a écrit :
>>
>> Second the vote for consistency, no matter which way it goes.
>>
>> Personally, I have a slight preference for "footprint" over "module" as
>> well.
>>
>> On Wed, 2014-10
Mark,
Did you remove this merge request? I clicked on the link and Launchpad
says it's missing. I notice that you've committed changes to this
branch since the original merge request so I'm not sure if you are still
working on it. What is the status of this branch? Is it ready for review?
Way
True; I'd buy a copy for the project if it would help. A compliant land
pattern gemerator would be insanely great for Kicad.
I saw the responses above - footprint it is.
On Oct 8, 2014 6:40 AM, "Mark Roszko" wrote:
> IPC defines "footprint" equivalent to "land pattern" in IPC 7351 on page 4.
>
Tom,
I am completely fine with that answer.
This was also a question from a user who has been struggling with a Mac
build--I asked them what their system is because as far as I know all Macs
that can run an OS that can run KiCad have plenty of GPU cycles left over...
Adam Wolf
Cofounder and Engi
>Thanks for your work, I've not had a chance to look at the merge request.
No problem.
>I'm currently working on the eeschema options dialog to improve the template
>field names editor so please don't change that at the moment,
Ok, personally I haven't found much issue with the Options dialog.
o
On 08.10.2014 15:36, Adam Wolf wrote:
Hi folks,'
This is something I was asked yesterday and I don't know the answer. Is
there a way to tell KiCad to compile for software rendering only, or do
we have a hard dependency on GPUs now?
I checked
https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~kicad-product-committe
IPC defines "footprint" equivalent to "land pattern" in IPC 7351 on page 4.
The land pattern generator is a separate issue, but first you need people
paying $130 for the spec.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad
Hi folks,'
This is something I was asked yesterday and I don't know the answer. Is
there a way to tell KiCad to compile for software rendering only, or do we
have a hard dependency on GPUs now?
I checked
https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~kicad-product-committers/kicad/product/view/head:/Documentatio
This. If there was also an IPC compliant land pattern generator, Kicad
would show up in the search results for people doing Mil/Aero work, which
would be a great market to capture.
On Oct 8, 2014 4:13 AM, "Lorenzo Marcantonio"
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 12:10:44PM +0100, Tim Hutt wrote:
> >
On 10/8/2014 8:29 AM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> On 10/8/2014 2:45 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:37:40AM -0400, Mark Roszko wrote:
>>> So from what I remember, Kicad used to call alot of pcb footprints as
>>> "modules". Sometimes it was "module", other times "footprint
On 10/8/2014 2:45 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:37:40AM -0400, Mark Roszko wrote:
>> So from what I remember, Kicad used to call alot of pcb footprints as
>> "modules". Sometimes it was "module", other times "footprint module"
>> and now "footprint". Footprint seems to
On 10/8/2014 12:34 AM, Mark Roszko wrote:
> I was thinking it could be "Total issues", "Warnings", "Errors",
> having the word "count" repeat 3 times seems...redundant. Total errors
> is also wrong since its warnings + errors.
>
Using "Total" would be just as clear and would line up nicer with
"W
Hehe, look at that, its still a disputed name. Well we got to fix it.
I went with footprint because it seemed like alot of newer features
with with that name, the "module editor" was called the "footprint
editor" originally in the launcher as well which is what caused me to
really want to fix it(yo
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 12:10:44PM +0100, Tim Hutt wrote:
> I can check again and find out exactly tonight if anyone wants? I think
> "footprint" is the most descriptive in any case (I don't see how it is a
> module at all in fact).
I agree it's more common footprint. By the way the 'official' IPC
This is fantastic. It is one of the more confusing (and easy to fix!)
things about Kicad. I did a small survey of data sheets when a while ago to
see what they call them. There was some variety but footprint was the most
popular. I can't remember exactly but it was definitely used in more than
50%
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 11:38:34AM +0200, Benoît Roehr wrote:
> Hello dear developers.
>
> Le 08/10/2014 10:08, Andrew Zonenberg a écrit :
> >Second the vote for consistency, no matter which way it goes.
> >
> >Personally, I have a slight preference for "footprint" over "module" as
> >well.
> >
>
Hello dear developers.
Le 08/10/2014 10:08, Andrew Zonenberg a écrit :
Second the vote for consistency, no matter which way it goes.
Personally, I have a slight preference for "footprint" over "module" as
well.
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:56 +1100, Mitch Davis wrote:
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:47
Hi Mark,
Thanks for your work, I've not had a chance to look at the merge request.
Generally discussion is always a great idea because it's hard to glean
from a diff what the intended changes are and what the impact is going
to be. I'm at work at the moment so still can't review the diff.
I'm cu
Second the vote for consistency, no matter which way it goes.
Personally, I have a slight preference for "footprint" over "module" as
well.
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 18:56 +1100, Mitch Davis wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Mark Roszko wrote:
> > Hehe, well, I guess everything can be renamed
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Mark Roszko wrote:
> Hehe, well, I guess everything can be renamed in the opposite
> direction. But consistency is needed.
YES PLEASE! A number of people I've spoken to were really confused by
this inconsistency.
I use footprint myself. Though footprint seems to
40 matches
Mail list logo
