X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: 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;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references
	:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to
	:user-agent;
	bh=Lkzho9PE+MHJywfDfCz7AMAYDsmBLk7NMsIfG4voniw=;
	b=X/qvicipd43lmJGSwbvop6TFxcoxcEgiP5WNGvHAbXOD8Qwta2/IfczBPVzXdiVZmZ
	ubeneQi7m67PxMKkpPy5JAWEy3krr11JGDqqACqWpnjN88eAW9VaAKRvBCbYgw7l0RP4
	tj7P9DLN1nhnA806KWHokWRZ8aso4YW6zUCPLZkfCfzGG8Exv7PeWk4CbFZxDR/027hW
	7KyeecAvmEahx8jOgJ2SLJm646ymunm+oAvn/S0DcSpPYiaHG8QI878Oe+YduEwPLTPP
	rUi+R7ZMJbsq4Y7anAlY2Lv0e7o44XW7WBvLVnJ7VuTQ3LGUyRbwm1PshU8Lvl41y4Q6
	qwwQ==
X-Received:	by 10.152.4.74 with SMTP id i10mr39330lai.58.1389685494773;
	Mon, 13 Jan 2014 23:44:54 -0800 (PST)
Date:	Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:44:51 +0400
From:	Vladimir Zhbanov <vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] 4-pin SPST microswitch
Message-ID:	<20140114074451.GD23401@localhost.localdomain>
Mail-Followup-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<20140110201835 DOT GW20344 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz>
	<CAOFvGD5F9on0v+7ug-9qR77f-9OHg5jRLPqQR6wq=-zK4w772Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20140110220844 DOT GZ20344 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz>
	<1389393738 DOT 2083 DOT 33 DOT camel AT AMD64X2 DOT fritz DOT box>
	<20140110230643 DOT GA7128 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz>
	<20140111075639 DOT GA3281 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<20140113231932 DOT GA14749 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz>
	<20140114070940 DOT GA23401 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<20140114072048 DOT GD18632 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20140114072048.GD18632@fi.muni.cz>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
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

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 08:20:48AM +0100, Jan Kasprzak wrote:
> Vladimir Zhbanov wrote:
> : On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:19:32AM +0100, Jan Kasprzak wrote:
> : ...
> : > : Why not just add "an additional PCB layer", connect the pins there, and
> : > : then make the layer invisible for further routing?
> : > 
> : > 	I have tried that, but it is necessary to add it to the
> : > "component side" group in order to have the pins of the microswitch
> : > connected. And as soon as I do it, the connections on that new layer
> : > start to conflict with the regular connections in the "top" layer".
> : Why is it necessary? I supposed the new layer must be in a separate
> : group. If so, its lines shouldn't interfere with another layers while
> : the connections through pins should reach them. Am I wrong?
> 
> 	It would be true for through-hole pins, but as far as I have tried,
> it does not work for pads of SMD-mounted components.

Sorry, I did not see your footprint and the word "pin" confused me.

- Raw text -