Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/02/04/14:02:34
>>> By the way, why are m4 footprints deprecated in gEDA? That looks like a
>>> step backwards.
>>
>> Mostly, "not generally available on Windows"
>
> Anyone capable of running gEDA on Windows is more than capable of installing
> gnuwin32. http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/ Has M4 and the other
> needed 'missing' things like ls, which etc.
>
> What I see on the list is people usually disable M4 because it
> conflicts in odd ways with footprint files.
> Which has noting to do with the operating system.
I'll accept some responsibility for the idea that m4 footprints are
deprecated. Long ago, when I was putting together the document about
PCB and footprints, I tried to make the process as easy as possible
for new users. When I was learning to use PCB, I wasn confused by the
program's behavior w.r.t. footprints until I figured out that there
were two separate, independent footprint instantiation systems -- M4
and files. This I thought was totally confusing.
I am used to dealing with footprint files from other EDA programs.
Also, I find editing footprint files conceptually more straightforward
than trying to hack an obscure macro language. Therefore, I settled
on using footprints from files for myself, and recommended this path
in my document.
I was sort of hoping that the whole M4 footprint mechanism would be
stripped out from PCB. However, this hasn't happened, and I haven't
tried to do it myself. Also, there are plenty of footprints available
only as M4 macros (i.e. nobody has created a file version yet).
Therefore, M4 and file footprints still co-exist in PCB, but the
document says the M4 footprints are deprecated. I still think using
file footprints exclusively are the best path forward for PCB, but I
haven't done the necessary work to make it happen.
Stuart
- Raw text -