Not being able to set the thermals is not the result of pcb enforcing = any kind of DRC, but most likely because the engine that decides what you c= licked on is unable to select the object that is "underneath". On= e option, if your footprint happens to be symmetric, might be to put one of= them on the "front side" and one of them on the "back side&= quot;. I'm not sure if that will work, but there are some places in the= code where it checks the "shown" side first before the "opp= osite" side. That might allow you access to both footprints, just by f= lipping the board.

I frequently use objects that h= ave funny shapes, like trapazoids rotated 30 degrees or something, and I ha= ve been frustrated by the inability to select things that are underneath th= e bounding boxes of other things. This is an issue I really need to deal wi= th...

I was about to say that the DRC doesn&#= 39;t actually check to see if holes are overlapping or too close to an edge= or anything. *However*, as I type this, I am reminded of a clause in the v= ia code that checks when you create a via to see if there is already a via = at that location which would have an overlapping hole and removes one of th= em. ::sigh:: The Gordian Knot grows larger.

So, in= light of that, I can't say that pcb isn't mucking with something, = but I'm _fairly_ sure that it doesn't do this kind of check when yo= u're placing or moving footprints.

= On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 9:16 AM Richard Rasker (rasker AT linetec DOT nl) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

Hello Gene,

Op 26-10-20 om 12:21 schreef gene glick (geneglick AT optonline DOT net) [via
geda-user AT delori= e.com]:
> Richard,
> Yes, that makes sense. Once overlaying the parts, it won't allow <= br> > setting the thermals - so your approach of setting the thermals first,=
> and then overlapping the parts surely should work.
>
> I sort of think the DRC warning is because the holes for the header > and the display are not 100% the same size. One of the parts drill > size is 0.045 while the other is 0.040. Both have annulus of 0.015

The difference in drill size on its own can't cause the warning -- I just tested that (35 mil hole for the display, and 45 mil for the
header). And it isn't the annulus overlap either that is deemed to smal= l.

Does the warning disappear when you give all holes equal dimensions? So selecting the holes from both the header and the display together, and
then command

:ChangeDrillSize(Selected, 40, mil) and

:ChangeSize(Selected, 70, mil)

(You may want to turn off all layers and elements except pins and pads
to prevent resizing other objects, especially with the last command.)

Regards,

Richard

--000000000000ba33b505b2930235--