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=LrNG5Oe20PZfsFHhXzWIvT6Xparrop6bbeT8Ia8V8eY=; b=AFHXFV2OTMibKT4r3ZJq7K1cns6Jc85QZYBlB1rj4EotfmQjYoGxLMECGCwiHPCJ0E f4Pw9VhSlvzuWuPgHf3P30rzflbxKmSJLyleGt0eu0LAw+aSumDjbhUKVrWXO3nL8vw4 2AnjHuEhfbrxfnWOfSB6+CBZLHiJuR78FjtZwbB9lPIRbFGKbVUNqFN8rpO8XbxD25vQ A5tvFEvFswjGoAqwyegnMWvfKypKKj2S/UAeW81fawUWPgvNvsZB0NjD09eBj73bMFIS ZtS7PzxorsjU5e0FU9s1dYV+HXrngK5DAut4XDxfiTjF+kxX5dBRyVwDHRw4AuESZVaS Y47w== Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 00:22:51 +0400 From: Vladimir Zhbanov To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] Re: crash connecting to nets Message-ID: <20120503202251.GB2144@localhost.localdomain> Mail-Followup-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 Precedence: bulk On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 08:28:12AM -0400, Nathan Stewart wrote: > Ok, not sure if this is a bug so much as an ungraceful failure. I was > trying to use it incorrectly. > > I couldn't recreate the problem initially either, when I set out to > create the simplest possible test case. It turns out that I had used > subcomponents in my symbol, made them graphical, but had hooked them > up with nets (which I also attempted to mark as graphical at the same > time - not sure if nets can be graphical) > > The problem occurs when connecting to a NET in a symbol. In my test > case, I created a sub component, added a net to one of the pins. In > this case, connecting to either end of the NET blows up. Then I > disconnected the NET from the PIN, but left it in. Now I can connect > to the PIN. I could also connect to one end of the NET, but not the > other. > > Also interesting when the debugger stops here is that j,k are > optimized out, even though the code path is going to attempt to index > using them into the null pointer, but I try not to read too much into > what the debugger thinks the optimizer has done. (Arguing with the > compiler is like arguing with your wife. You're rarely right, but even > when you are, it doesn't matter - you're not getting anywhere until > you make it happy.) > > I tried this and found that it happens exactly as you said. This is really a bug. And would be nice if you'd send a bug report of it. The issue is that symbols and schematics are essentially the same (I mean their file structure). However, nets in symbols are intended only to leave a possibility to create and add to your design a beforehand created part of schematic using "Include component as individual objects" from "Select Component..." dialog. (See http://wiki.geda-project.org/geda:faq-gschem#can_my_local_library_cover_frequently_needed_sub_circuits). Otherwise your symbol (representing a component or a subcircuit) should not contain nets (if you're using subcircuits their symbols cannot contain nets, only their sub schematics should contain them, see http://wiki.geda-project.org/geda:file_format_spec#net). Anyway, in a case of an error (as in your case) a segfault should not happen. An error message should pop up instead. Therefore it is a reason to file a bug report. -- A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right. Q: Why should I start my reply below the quoted text? A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: The lost context. Q: What makes top-posted replies harder to read than bottom-posted? A: Yes. Q: Should I trim down the quoted part of an email to which I'm replying? http://www.idallen.com/topposting.html -- VZh http://vzhbanov.byethost33.com