| ID: | 3249 |
| From: | ge...@igor2.repo.hu |
| Date: | Wed, 7 Aug 2019 09:45:57 +0200 (CEST) |
| Subject: | Re: [pcb-rnd] default doc layer missing |
| in-reply-to: | 3247 from pc...@cuvoodoo.info |
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019, pcb-rnd@cuvoodoo.info wrote: >I was able to create a top doc layer, and the subc got placed without error or warning. >but then it merged both subc layers (top-assembly and top-courtyard, both of type top and doc), without warning. >only when I manually created and renamed the layer to top-assembly and top-courtyard did it display the information/shapes as intended/wished. Yes, that's by design: pcb-rnd tries to find the best match for binding subcircuit layers to board layers. But you have full manual control over this, and you can override the automatic decision any time. So either create the layers in a way that the automatic method finds the right binding (e.g. if you start using a specific layer convention in your footprints, stick to the same convention in your board layers) or do the binding manually. > >one solution would be to automatically create missing layers type (layer type combination present in the subc but not board), >but then you still have the problem of merging layers of the same type combination (without warning). Sorry, that is not an option. That would remove flexibility on using rich footprints on limited boards. And I do want to keep support for 1 layer hobby boards. >it could also automatically create the individuals layer (not just the missing layer type), but since there is no convention on subc layers, that could rapidly create dozens of new layers by subc from different sources using different conventions. >there does not seem to be a trivial solution. There is a trivial solution, and it is already implemented. It is called layer binding, and you can use it to change what subc layer end up on what board layer. Regards, Igor2
Reply subtree:
3249 Re: [pcb-rnd] default doc layer missing from ge...@igor2.repo.hu