X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-help-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-help 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:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=w06wT80pl1btY0zKt846jQv0DHq5ypzWB/KIqE9H0ag=; b=dZrlkev13TCbPoZJldVSrBsuk9hYNqHaSdVsrkqvr+SOf10AagfGbGLa2zSajrSGQD ViPsdeI6odAveuhL3ntR4tPAWQK4ajsb5E+5tNprgkzitCDUeYfzxSR3Atz/dU1wYV6r GL3qyv58oJIXVg+2VK1P4XUnJpG63Lrx1pFZrGVFBTasZBEule+DhnfWvgpEShC4U96G tsiPAhc9YAbnys3FDmo6GfLrGKLYZndGhzzFHurCmR7lOIaOO/hniAHYCrR9jtXF995F TwWpy0KeY4q9ySU5gaQZrFBqIVVQMmTsOsowT1ugy607mQLKR6GTjuwayHM15nWOX2vP UV/Q== X-Received: by 10.112.167.202 with SMTP id zq10mr17783951lbb.118.1435650551060; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:49:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 10:49:08 +0300 From: "Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com)" To: geda-help AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-help] Double file inclusion with spice-sdb backend Message-ID: <20150630074908.GA13239@localhost.localdomain> Mail-Followup-To: geda-help AT delorie DOT com References: <20150628111548 DOT GA23984 AT localhost DOT localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150628111548.GA23984@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Reply-To: geda-help AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-help AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 02:15:48PM +0300, Vladimir Zhbanov wrote: > On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 10:38:07AM +0200, Andrea D'Amore (and DOT damore AT gmail DOT com) wrote: > > Hello, > > including a file that contains a .model directive using a > > spice-include symbol in gschem and then exporting the netlist using > > gnetlist's spice-sdb backend results in a netlist where the included > > file is present twice. > > > > Is this an intended behavior or a bug? If the former, what's the > > rationale for that? > > > > Here's a SSCCE to reproduce the issue, include-test.sch: > > > > v 20130925 2 > > C 45200 52200 1 0 0 spice-directive-1.sym > > { > > T 45300 52500 5 10 0 1 0 0 1 > > device=directive BTW, the directive device is not intended to contain models in it. It's for plain SPICE directives, such as, e.g., TC=something and so on. For models you should use SPICE model or include devices. Cheers, Vladimir