Mail Archives: geda-user/2013/01/18/11:30:40

X-Authentication-Warning: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113;
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id g7mr4662708wiz.29.1358526583884;
Fri, 18 Jan 2013 08:29:43 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <CACNnPRkowensyyy0pneO0VJeDaMpaMqms-74wCwM=Rtd-bDQHg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
<644026BD-F6E6-4533-B450-A91CAF83937A AT noqsi DOT com>
<CACNnPRnyahDE8Hhhyc6+UFE6=55zmWVP1f8m=E-p4CJWOb=2=g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
<6C1F8807-DFAD-4256-8F70-BD4AF4EF3A3E AT noqsi DOT com>
<CACNnPRmn1rLA8enjo6epUhyb2OTzoyzYzrj7S4qxHsHdfAeh-g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
<CABE3E91-466B-4769-99A5-85ACDE7E6A5C AT noqsi DOT com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 21:59:43 +0530
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] gnetlist hierarchy uref order setting
From: Abhijit Kshirsagar <abhijit86k AT gmail DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
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

Oh ok. Yes I agree with the spice commands being in a separate file,
but I can't write the makefile by hand- simply because I (will) have
too many symbols each with a schematic. So I think i'll have to try to
write a makefile generator...


On 1/17/13, John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com> wrote:
> On Jan 16, 2013, at 11:21 PM, Abhijit Kshirsagar wrote:
>>> Interesting. Stuart seems not to have implemented refdes "munging" for
>>> all of the components he lists at
>> So does that count as a bug?
> I think so. Mismatch between code and documentation always counts as a bug
> as far as I'm concerned.
>>> Put (hierarchy-traversal "disabled") in your gnetlistrc. Then I netlist
>>> subcircuits separately and
>>> let SPICE do the hierarchy expansion. See
>> I've looked through this - and it seems to be the same as the RF
>> example that ships with the gEDA distribution.
>> As i understand, I need to generate the cir files from the
>> sub-schematics first, then netlist the top level schematics.
> Yes. The spice-sdb back end normally does the inclusion of model files for
> you. Even if you turn this off with -I, it inspects model files to figure
> out whether they are macro models (.SUBCKT) or primitive model parameters
> (.MODEL). Thus, all model files that a schematic page uses must exist prior
> to invoking the netlister. I consider this a misfeature.
> Since SPICE has no scoping of subcircuit or model names, it is useless to
> include the same model file repeatedly in different contexts, but that's
> what spice-sdb does, unfortunately. I prefer to have a Makefile use "cat" to
> assemble the final netlist from the individual subcircuit netlists.
>> Do most people use something like a makefile, when systems become
>> large? Is there a makefile generator out there?
> I just write a Makefile. No generator.
>> I was hoping to have everything (including the SPICE simulation
>> commands) in schematics only - so the end user only needs to keep
>> gSCHEM open and navigate the hierarchy to see the entire design.
> Well, it makes more sense to me to edit things like .CONTROL sections in a
> text editor rather than a graphics editor. And, as noted above, I prefer to
> assemble the simulation file with "cat" rather than gnetlist: this gives me
> much better control. Also, I often have very large test stimulus files,
> megabytes of PWL commands, generated by separate scripts. It's not practical
> to put *those* in a schematic. But if you want, you can put your extra stuff
> in spice-directive symbols. You can even put multi-line code into the value=
> attribute by editing the attribute as text ("ex" rather than "ee").
> John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
> jpd AT noqsi DOT com


- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019