X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=w+gRvh0zzFcpLOtgmRxZ3N/R6zXvqODM1D2mSmARsJ8=;
	b=kMGKUouMOovkCo5k3v93Y62myhtqNyfOfbW9KaBi0s75oRQWg2YSH2zLzT4KrI5QsN
	39U4XT0wq3/50h7aRjKkIHCbVpiq5tL8mQNPrkCC4pvVxleYGtLb0z6NPVJfrflwcP+0
	2TbK/r+zd0rYvJuHt7ch7mZVeZrCyMoAsNmYaWEo+ekSMfAvZWwlSZE66xyyFql7Qn/w
	nAH8pc3p275LVHT+PgxnMe9FXjEvvdrU3FTHGQbNSm33dnPESMUXbus2ca0LbB5hzjKc
	Jicf8ZyAC+SqQrZO0rtAP8gw43r7RF2dvBN7wcvm7QVlO36k6aURdeJRjnTqzNIZCmTL
	v6AA==
X-Received:	by 10.28.184.134 with SMTP id i128mr22829531wmf.12.1449499106827;
	Mon, 07 Dec 2015 06:38:26 -0800 (PST)
Date:	Mon, 7 Dec 2015 15:38:21 +0100
From:	"Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] gsch2pcb after refdes-renum? (If implemented
	syncronization detail)
Message-Id:	<20151207153821.c2ac19e6f24b1776a3595e4a@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:	<CALT8Ef4=tMf=WmjYmp-2B3rN0SBmoqF5RkCoWZEm=+2hTBTENA@mail.gmail.com>
References:	<56658683 DOT 401 AT envinsci DOT co DOT uk>
	<CALT8Ef4=tMf=WmjYmp-2B3rN0SBmoqF5RkCoWZEm=+2hTBTENA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
X-Mailer:	Sylpheed 3.5.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

I guess it should not be to hard to implement this way: Differences RefdesOld-->RefdesNew are stored in a file although it have the small annoying problem it have to be executed exactly once.

It should only be a problem for the refdes since this is used as an object identifier. For others it should be possible to apply a set function several times with the same result. I have seen update produce a list of ChangePinName(...) functions although the name may be a little bit confusing it set the pin name to a value regardless of which value it had earlier so it should no be a problem to apply more than once.

Do anybody have a simple solution how to check update of refdes have been done exactly once? Or have this already been dealt with?

One possibility is file deleted immediately then update have been done. Another solution is some kind of changes are made to file so change of refdes is executed only once. There is always the small annoying problem to get stuck in the middle.


Nicklas Karlsson



> They won't be updated in place. You'll have to relocate them. More
> importantly, if something has it's number changed to a pre-existing
> number without a change in footprint, it won't be moved / removed at
> all.
> 
> Shashank
> 
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Matt Rhys-Roberts
> (matt DOT rhys-roberts AT envinsci DOT co DOT uk) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]
> <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> > Hello, I'm about to renumber a large amount of schematic components, to
> > modify an existing pcb design.
> >
> > Not got time to experiment, so could anyone please tell me if renumbered
> > components are updated in-place, or will they require relocating from the
> > stack of revised components that piles up at the origin?

- Raw text -