X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 00:19:32 +0100 From: Jan Kasprzak To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] 4-pin SPST microswitch Message-ID: <20140113231932.GA14749@fi.muni.cz> References: <20140110201835 DOT GW20344 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz> <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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140111075639.GA3281@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-Muni-Spam-TestIP: 147.251.48.3 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.7 (tirith.ics.muni.cz [147.251.4.35]); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 00:19:34 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.8 at tirith.ics.muni.cz X-Virus-Status: Clean 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 Vladimir Zhbanov wrote: : On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 12:06:43AM +0100, Jan Kasprzak wrote: : ... : > Why not connecting them? I would like to use the in-microswitch : > connection between pins 1 and 2 and between pins 3 and 4 as an "additional : > PCB layer". I.e. I need the space between those pins for other traces. : : 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". Anyway, I would like to have the "pins 1 and 2 are electrially connected to each other inside the component" property to be the property of the footprint itself, not as something I have to work around. Any other ideas? Thanks, -Yenya -- | Jan "Yenya" Kasprzak | | New GPG 4096R/A45477D5 - see http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/pgp-rollover.txt | | http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/ Journal: http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/blog/ | Please don't top post and in particular don't attach entire digests to your mail or we'll all soon be using bittorrent to read the list. --Alan Cox