EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
Electronics => PCB/EDA/CAD => Topic started by: Ghydda on March 30, 2016, 08:09:51 pm
-
I wonder who might also be using gEDA. Anyone at all?
*sound of crickets*
I use it for my own hobby projects. Not very much, but every so often.
I kinda like the way it is put together. But also some things frustrate me |O
It would be nice to get a few heads up on some of its quirks.
Cheers!
/Ghydda
-
Why do you use gEDA and not KiCad? Really interested in your answer.
-
Well, the story is that nine years ago I jumped ship and abandoned Windows entirely in my household and squatted on some flavour of GNU/Linux instead.
During the transition I found that gEDA was more appealing in than KiCad.
Not that I did a thorough side-by-side investigation on the subject matter mind you. KiCad seemed terrible back then, gEDA not so much. Ergo gEDA won.
And once invested, I do not want to switch tools - the reason being I will not invest the time to maintain two sets of software-tools and the data they generate.
To quote Eddie Hitler: "I mean, I found the bloody lager Matie, and I couldn't be f*cked to move."
I'm inherently lazy it would seem.
Did you yourself consider gEDA prior to choosing KiCad?
/A big fan of the E. Hitler character
-
I considered both, but gEDA development looked like it was dying so KiCad was the answer.
-
I used to spend hours watching that TV show!
I considered gEDA before Eagle, subsequently I switched to KiCAD from Eagle, as well as using other packages for commercial designs, I did use gEDA, can't remember it now, but went with Eagle, KiCAD back when I was considering Eagle and others was just not that well developed for my liking, much like gEDA and Eagle quite happily tuns under mr penguin.
Nowadays, I would advise anyone to give KiCAD a go, the only "feature" I have no clue about wrt KiCAD is the autorouter function, I think it uses an external tool, but don't quote me on it, I never use it.
Most of my designs are simple, but I would not worry doing more complex designs, I did run some diff pairs for USB and some length matching on LCD data lines, not required, but wanted to play with the new features and a few quirky bits aside, it works fine!
-
I used gEDA for a number of boards before switching to KICAD recently. I like in both tools that the end result of schematic capture or PCB design are text files and work nice and easy with git.
I switched because KICAD CvPCB is a better tool for me than gEDAs PCB:
- Layer transparancy. Multiple layers can be active and you can still makes sense of what is going on because you can see through them.
- Routing support. gEDAs PCB trace routing always felt a bit like mspaint to me. KICAD PCB lets you route quickly, and traces can be moved after the fact.
- Slightly better UI. E.g. Changing the thermal relief on a via in gEDA PCB was key 'o', with multiple keypresses looping through the possibilities. With KICAD you can right-click a via and get a dialog where you can change relief, hole and annulus sizes in one go.
I got the impression that there were simply more developers improving KICAD and more users using KICAD. While looking for inspiration on the web I see more KICAD projects (with all source freely available) than gEDA projects. These help when there is a new micro that needs a schematic symbol, it is nice to take someone elses and only have to do a little cleanup.
HTH
-
I use gEDA a lot. I posted a lot about it on here but when they split the areas for geda and kicad the stuff i did staid in kicad for some stupid reason.
In the earlier days KiCAD was not as functional as gEDA. It has caught up and in some ways passed gEDA. That said there are still good reasons for using it. My work is converting over to gEDA from a mix of CAD programs actually.
-
I use gEDA for both professional and personal projects and find it very convenient. I won't dig into many details, here are a few I like to comment on.
What I like in gEDA is the ease of use when moving components around: click and drag, middle click to rotate (when placing). I'm not too much fond of the two-key in sequence but I recon it has its uses given how keyboard-centric the gEDA suite is. And this is precisely the power of the software, you have to get through it to master it. I've tried Kicad once or twice and I find its tool suite much more consistent and smoothly integrated.
One little quirk that makes me laugh: if you place vias while the "Skinny" track shortcut is selected, they get flagged by the DRC tool because the annular ring is too small :palm:.
There are only two features I hate in gEDA:- Zooms and Moves are part of the undo/redo buffer in schematics and that is atrocious when you really have to navigate the undo/redo chain. More often than not do I realize an attribute was zapped or left over while replaying the undo/redo buffer, for instance. As a consequence I try to use it... not.
- Less annoying is the lack of consistency with keyboard and mouse usage between both software: e.g. middle button drag (schematics) vs left button drag (pcb). It gets me sometimes and is annoying both ways because middle button drags an item in pcb and left button in schematics pops up a menu from which you may quickly select a destructive item.
What I like in gEDA very much is you can build up a component using an generic symbol and a footprint. For instance, no need to list all the variants of PNP transistors; just pick up a generic PNP transistor and set its case footprint. In some cases you might need to define proper slotting to match the case pinout but you don't need to create new symbols and/or footprints for that. All right, you have to know your components but I for one consider it's a must.
But... the absolute killer feature (compared with other proprietary software, mostly): documents are text files! Man, nothing can beat that. I only recently had to modify hundreds of vias because the annular ring was too small according to Eurocircuit. Even if there is a console command, I just quickly edited the PCB in a text editor and checked the vias. Then I changed the vias thickness with GNU sed. In most cases you'd need awk or gawk to make sure you change the proper field.
And this is only one example why text files are useful. Another example is GIT to manage versions and revisions of your boards. And GIT, while it can manage binary files, is at its best with text.
-
Sure the text files are easy to work with but in the other (professional) CAD packages I have worked with you have a pad stack definition for a certain kind of via so making the change is a matter of adjusting the properties of that particular via type.
I have made 2 projects with Geda and PCB but I have found them more cumbersome to use than -shudder- Altium and I'm not a fan of that either. I also know someone who made a 6 layer SoC design using Geda and PCB but I don't know how many hours he spend on that. And then there was the problem with the bill of materials which caused a 3mA leakage current somewhere because the wrong resistor value was entered in the Excel file.
However the biggest problem with PCB is that it doesn't attach the net name to a trace so it is very easy to get it all mixed up due to the automatic net attachement it uses. Sure DRC helps to avoid that but sometimes you just need to move some trace around and in PCB that gets messy quickly.
-
However the biggest problem with PCB is that it doesn't attach the net name to a trace so it is very easy to get it all mixed up due to the automatic net attachement it uses. Sure DRC helps to avoid that but sometimes you just need to move some trace around and in PCB that gets messy quickly.
It's not become the biggest problem to me yet but I recon that is annoying. Usually I track the trace until I find pins or pads — my PCBs still are of reasonable size so I can afford to so far. I believe Kicad writes net names in tracks although I still have to try and see it for myself.
-
There are only two features I hate in gEDA:- Zooms and Moves are part of the undo/redo buffer in schematics and that is atrocious when you really have to navigate the undo/redo chain. More often than not do I realize an attribute was zapped or left over while replaying the undo/redo buffer, for instance. As a consequence I try to use it... not.
- Less annoying is the lack of consistency with keyboard and mouse usage between both software: e.g. middle button drag (schematics) vs left button drag (pcb). It gets me sometimes and is annoying both ways because middle button drags an item in pcb and left button in schematics pops up a menu from which you may quickly select a destructive item.
These can be remedied by placing following expressions in the config file:
For problem #1:
( undo-panzoom "disabled" )
For problem #2:
( third-button "mousepan" )
Please note: while #2 makes the right mouse button behave like in pcb, the context menu becomes unavailable. I don't think it's a big deal, since all functions are still accessible via hotkeys.
-
I use gEDA too. Why? Because It's more "clear" for me. No "candies and sweeties" in UI,which makes UX even worse than "clearer" version in gEDA. Git version of gEDA & PCB adds more and more things. What's more,if you have Debian or *buntu distro of Linux,you can install plugins from PPA,like rest of the gEDA Project.Plugins are: Toporouter,Smart disperse,polystich,polycombine etc. gEDA PCB have "minuses" too,like no trace length matching,trace impedance calculating inside PCB program or 3D models of components ( fundamentals of this exists).
Community of gEDA is very kind and you can find very useful scripts,e.x to "panelize" board to send to manufacturer in sites of people who write the code etc.
-
gEDA has matched trace length autorouting. DJ coded that a long time ago.
http://www.delorie.com/electronics/sdram/ (http://www.delorie.com/electronics/sdram/)
Tracelength is also in there i think.
We are close to having a lot more features soon (in PCB).
-
There are only two features I hate in gEDA:- Zooms and Moves are part of the undo/redo buffer in schematics and that is atrocious when you really have to navigate the undo/redo chain. More often than not do I realize an attribute was zapped or left over while replaying the undo/redo buffer, for instance. As a consequence I try to use it... not.
- Less annoying is the lack of consistency with keyboard and mouse usage between both software: e.g. middle button drag (schematics) vs left button drag (pcb). It gets me sometimes and is annoying both ways because middle button drags an item in pcb and left button in schematics pops up a menu from which you may quickly select a destructive item.
These can be remedied by placing following expressions in the config file:
For problem #1:
( undo-panzoom "disabled" )
For problem #2:
( third-button "mousepan" )
Please note: while #2 makes the right mouse button behave like in pcb, the context menu becomes unavailable. I don't think it's a big deal, since all functions are still accessible via hotkeys.
Aaah! Exactly what I need, thanks a lot! As for disabling the context menu in gschem, no big deal, I never use it, just the keyboard.
-
gEDA has matched trace length autorouting. DJ coded that a long time ago.
http://www.delorie.com/electronics/sdram/ (http://www.delorie.com/electronics/sdram/)
Tracelength is also in there i think.
We are close to having a lot more features soon (in PCB).
Mayby yes,but running script in middle of routing is not the most convinient way. Not better to integrate it or be possible to run any scripts from PCB itself,e.x from command-line,not only .cmd stuff?
BTW - I found nice piece of software for RF designing for Linux => Transcalc. Now integrate It,like differential pairs routing plugin to PCB(It's on git and on mail group) and fix DRC/improve to interactive routing and we have a really good PCB design tool.
-
Nowadays, I would advise anyone to give KiCAD a go, the only "feature" I have no clue about wrt KiCAD is the autorouter function, I think it uses an external tool, but don't quote me on it, I never use it.
A new feature in KiCad is the Shove Router, (from CERN?) and that catapults them into the higher end CAD class.
Altium and Mentor should be worried.
Trialing it, the Shove engine looks solid and responsive.
A few areas need polish, but they are in the control and code-merge areas, not in the fundamental Shove Engine.
KiCad SCH is simple, and improving, but already it has far more export choices than much more costly CAD SCH choices.
It can output Postscript/PDF/SVG/DXF/HPGL, as well as plot to clipboard for quick .PNG emails...
-
Nowadays, I would advise anyone to give KiCAD a go, the only "feature" I have no clue about wrt KiCAD is the autorouter function, I think it uses an external tool, but don't quote me on it, I never use it.
A new feature in KiCad is the Shove Router, (from CERN?) and that catapults them into the higher end CAD class.
Altium and Mentor should be worried.
Trialing it, the Shove engine looks solid and responsive.
A few areas need polish, but they are in the control and code-merge areas, not in the fundamental Shove Engine.
KiCad SCH is simple, and improving, but already it has far more export choices than much more costly CAD SCH choices.
It can output Postscript/PDF/SVG/DXF/HPGL, as well as plot to clipboard for quick .PNG emails...
The script is for verilog testing which to a point you would want automated. One of the things that I hate about commercial tools is all the pointing and clicking it takes to repeat tests. You get a graph back and are then troubled by the fear of "hold it is this the test i meant to run?" vs make test or what ever you wrote the makefile and associated scripts to check.
-
I personally can't stand the visual clutter of kicad; on a 2 layer board it is way too difficult to hide the bottom layer for example, since you have to individually hide bottom, bottom soldermask, bottom silk, etc. Even with all other layers hidden it is still not as easy to see things clearly compared to geda. That and the grid is useless (it changes grid interval depending on the zoom level, meaning there is no way to get a feel of the dimensions involved).
I don't know if it's simply because I started with geda, but no matter how long i try learning kicad i'm still nowhere near as productive using kicad compared to geda. I also find it much harder to spot mistakes, meaning I have no confidence in the designs I produce in kicad.
-
I use geda regularly for reverse engineering industrial electronics. I'm only interested in creating schematics for troubleshooting, but may get into the pcb layout side in the future.
-
I wonder who might also be using gEDA. Anyone at all?
Me :)
I've used gEDA every day since about 1997 ( coming from PADS and Orcad for DOS) when I went to Linux full time but I use gEDA on FreeBSD these days.
I think my old 'lightning detector' schematic and pcb may still be included the gEDA 'examples' package.
Cheers,
Terry