X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] gshem 1.8.2 Bug? Slotting fails for a custom BPX85
 photo-transistor array
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <7b205135-7b91-e8f0-a5d8-efc4cb0b787d AT zen DOT co DOT uk>
 <s6nk214cc70 DOT fsf AT falbala DOT ieap DOT uni-kiel DOT de>
From: "Barry Jackson (zen25000 AT zen DOT co DOT uk) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Message-ID: <01968e6b-14de-7e0e-bcbd-93b35a17a6c7@zen.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:38:49 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <s6nk214cc70.fsf@falbala.ieap.uni-kiel.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from Quoted-Printable to 8bit by delorie.com id v8CDcqC8028704
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
Precedence: bulk

On 12/09/17 13:51, Stephan Böttcher wrote:
> "Barry Jackson (zen25000 AT zen DOT co DOT uk) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]"
> <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> writes:
> 
>> I have created BPX85.sym and BPX85.fp for a narrow DIL package that
>> holds 5 two terminal photo-transistors for which I used slotting.
>> I guess it would be a DIL10-200 (if there is such an item)
>>
>> I adopted the conventional pin numbering for a DIL package but
>> slotting fails as the pins for each internal device are not
>> sequential, but across the package.
>>
>> The slotdefs are:
>> 1:1,10
>> 2:2,9
>> 3:3,8
>> 4:4,7
>> 5:5,6
>>
>> Pins 1..5 are slotted correctly, however pins 6..10 are ignored and
>> left at the default of 10 as in the symbol.
>>
>> I spoke to agaran on irc #geda who suggested that this is a bug in gschem.
>>
>> I am attaching the symbol and footprint files in the hope that these
>> will assist in debugging.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Barry
>>
>> v 20130925 2
>> L 600 800 600 200 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 900 800 600 500 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 600 500 900 200 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 800 400 900 200 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 700 300 900 200 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 300 600 500 600 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 300 400 500 400 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 400 700 500 600 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 400 500 500 600 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 400 500 500 400 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> L 500 400 400 300 3 0 0 0 -1 -1
>> P 900 0 900 200 1 0 0
>> {
>> T 1000 -200 5 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> pinseq=1
>> T 1000 -400 5 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> pintype=oe
>> T 600 0 5 10 1 1 0 0 1
>> pinnumber=1
>> T 1000 0 5 10 1 1 0 0 1
>> pinlabel=e
>> }
>> T 100 1600 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> device=BPX85
>> T 200 -200 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> refdes=Q?
>> T 0 500 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> numslots=5
>> T 500 100 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> slotdef=1:1,10
>> T 500 -200 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> slotdef=2:2,9
>> T 600 295 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> slotdef=3:3,8
>> T 600 95 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> slotdef=4:4,7
>> T 600 -105 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> slotdef=5:5,6
>> T 255 300 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> description=opto transistor array
>> T 1200 600 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> slot=1
>> P 900 1000 900 800 1 0 0
>> {
>> T 900 1000 5 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> pintype=oc
>> T 955 1000 5 10 1 1 180 6 1
>> pinlabel=c
>> T 805 1050 5 10 1 1 180 0 1
>> pinnumber=10
>> T 900 1000 5 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> pinseq=10
> 
> pinseq=2
> 
>> }
>> T 300 -5 8 10 0 1 0 0 1
>> footprint=BPX85.fp
>>
> 

Thanks for your reply, but why?

I have read all the docs I can find and yet pinseq seems to be poorly 
documented.
An understandable explanation would be much appreciated, as I have spent 
the last two days trying to resolve this.

Barry