ftp.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; |
d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; | |
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to | |
:content-type; | |
bh=4GgYWvMhiEeHV7kvyv4odCBUHIV4w2XOcTiwpHgP9xE=; | |
b=dfvpm79bBmD9/HdFOpgCwqqJ9eayDaMF22RWBkqpdZIfwvbyu5GeU3YoaAa/tSy79N | |
W99yi3pvh9QESUUUxyllTN3XkFjyeOyJiROaW774p084/1GN7SFs+kCenDWPBA34bvGS | |
L2NhOjMbWLRvsN4ITM4sUnMZ3eh15K7LRwQvIalnKj8ni9IpUCOxiPvSHkLRPbKJOM+7 | |
wc7ZAd9ncOHseplAD15lZkgoGzKBG5hV3G1TY29VC4qirPwseDsxAHFuyWxibjGptx3G | |
GPFadsGKSMbFbXEx92GmDlhZH7XGeL02mQxSYnQHJ8GAVFh/DNLOqv89IE27AFHkRr7Y | |
dJfA== | |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
X-Received: | by 10.202.169.138 with SMTP id s132mr25494619oie.101.1451164924282; |
Sat, 26 Dec 2015 13:22:04 -0800 (PST) | |
In-Reply-To: | <001a1134f920c49e910527d3a068@google.com> |
References: | <CAJXU7q-STU6GSxZSoes5DozwVVZunXCzWt8QVhU8iAXWwSt=dA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> |
<001a1134f920c49e910527d3a068 AT google DOT com> | |
Date: | Sat, 26 Dec 2015 15:22:04 -0600 |
Message-ID: | <CAJXU7q-N=dNaK=3pV8t14pxDNFROqW4u4MjAc8EEWODmOYVYbA@mail.gmail.com> |
Subject: | [geda-user] Re: Delivery Status Notification (Failure) |
From: | "Peter Clifton (petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> |
To: | gEDA User Mailing List <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> |
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 |
Focus on within-layer clearances for now. Any more complex design rules (such as dielectric breakdown through the layer stack) requires more data than we have in PCB's data-model, and may actually belong in a separate calculation utility that would calculate out a geometric design rule that can be applied in PCB. Peter On 26 December 2015 at 15:19, Mail Delivery Subsystem <mailer-daemon AT googlemail DOT com> wrote: > Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently: > > geda-user AT delorie DOT com > > Technical details of permanent failure: > Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the relay smtp.clifton-electronics.co.uk by smtp.clifton-electronics.co.uk. [208.91.198.143]. > > The error that the other server returned was: > 553 5.7.1 <Peter DOT Clifton AT clifton-electronics DOT co DOT uk>: Sender address rejected: not owned by user sendonly AT clifton-electronics DOT co DOT uk > > > ----- Original message ----- > > MIME-Version: 1.0 > X-Received: by 10.202.201.77 with SMTP id z74mr26576651oif.24.1451164771839; > Sat, 26 Dec 2015 13:19:31 -0800 (PST) > Received: by 10.60.51.168 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Dec 2015 13:19:31 -0800 (PST) > In-Reply-To: <20151226214713 DOT 61c9396af946d08bcdbac081 AT gmail DOT com> > References: <CAC4O8c9zz3X9K-E4fAwjKEdLjNiSLo6FTObDo7vbCm+0yb6ipg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> > <20151226214713 DOT 61c9396af946d08bcdbac081 AT gmail DOT com> > Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 15:19:31 -0600 > X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAJXU7q-STU6GSxZSoes5DozwVVZunXCzWt8QVhU8iAXWwSt=dA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> > Message-ID: <CAJXU7q-STU6GSxZSoes5DozwVVZunXCzWt8QVhU8iAXWwSt=dA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> > Subject: Re: [geda-user] using DRC for other clearance values -- probably a > bad idea > From: Peter Clifton <Peter DOT Clifton AT clifton-electronics DOT co DOT uk> > To: gEDA User Mailing List <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Focus on within-layer clearances for now. > > Any more complex design rules (such as dielectric breakdown through > the layer stack) requires more data than we have in PCB's data-model, > and may actually belong in a separate calculation utility that would > calculate out a geometric design rule that can be applied in PCB. > > > Peter > > On 26 December 2015 at 14:47, Nicklas Karlsson > (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] > <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote: >>> I previously said existing DRC could be used for this. Unfortunately I >>> guess that for cases where larger clearances are desired, it's often >>> because of electromagnetic considerations, which means that it's probably >>> really an inter-layer requirement, which means existing DRC code would not >>> be useful. Sorry. >>> >>> Britton >> >> Are they allowed to come close to each other on different layers? Or not? >> >> >> Nicklas Karlsson
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |