No Subject

[Ales Hvezda <ahvezda-at-NOSPAMseul_dot_org>]

Hi,

Your message dated: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 02:49:52 -0000
>Well..I managed to get it to compile, but had to drop back to gtk 1.0 libs to 
>do
>so.  I suspect there is a problem between gEDA and gtk+1.0.4 in this area.


Hmmmm... I have built gschem with gtk 1.0.4 and it should work, I need
to go and play with 1.0.5 but I imagine that should work as well.
How are you installing gtk+?  .deb? .rpm?  building from source and
then doing a make install?

>
>Neat program!  Looking around to see if I can find any place in the
>documentation where the library format is described.  I'm thinking of
>writting a awk script or similar program to convert Orcad libs to 
>this format if possible.  


	The library format is still undocumented because I am starting
to think about moving more toward the scheme way.  But to recap, 
a library is nothing more than a collection of .sym files, which are
really just schematic files with some restrictions.  Creating symbols
right now is not pretty and I need to work on that aspect quite a bit
more.  I will find some time to document the .sch/.sym files.


>
>Naturally I suspect you have to be a licensed owner of Orcad to 
>have the libs...but the conversion routine would still be a way to 

<side note to everybody>

	I can't stress this *enough*: If you want to contribute
any symbols to gEDA, please make sure that the licenses allow this!
Preferably either get permission from the author of the original
symbol, or do what I have been doing, create the symbol from scratch.
I would also perfer if contributed stuff is placed under the GPL, 
(after all gEDA is GNU software).

	I do not want to see any symbols which are converted from
other packages.  I don't want to taint myself with license or 
copyright problems.

</side note to everybody>

	As you mentioned, for your use, and if you own 
an Orcad lisence, then you should be able to use the converted
libraries internally.  I just want to make it clear that I don't
want to see the symbols.  :-|

>get a vast number of parts defined if  you already have access.

	Most certainly, a conversion util would be most useful.
Any work you do on a conversion script would be grand.  Thanks for 
your interest!

								-Ales