kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

Adam,

Is this going to break anything for users who compile from source?  It
looks as though it might.  If so, you might want to have both paths in
the search list just in case.  AFAIK, the search path code removes all
non-existent paths from the list.

Wayne

On 11/18/2015 3:57 PM, Adam Wolf wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I'm trying to wrap up all the OS X packaging related bugs ASAP before
> 4.0.0 drops shortly.  I got a nasty one where we weren't actually
> supporting 10.8, but as of this morning I fixed that! (It wasn't a KiCad
> code change.)
> 
> However!
> 
> For OS X, we put packages3d next to modules, rather than inside of it. 
> I think we had a pretty long discussion on this before, but basically OS
> X users are trained to use installers where they drag and drop
> directories into destination directories.  We have a Kicad Extras dmg
> where we put the offline footprints and other "extras", and if we put
> the packages3d inside of the stock modules/ directory, when they drag
> and drop the extras ones into the directory, it'll clobber them, so we
> store them parallel.  I kinda mangled the explanation there, so if
> someone wants clarification, I can write one up.
> 
> A user reported that the default packages3d path doesn't match what we
> package for OS X. (https://bugs.launchpad.net/kicad/+bug/1496214)
> 
> I wrote a small patch to fix this, and it appears to work.  The changes
> are gated for OS X, but I'd appreciate another eye on this.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Adam Wolf
> Cofounder and Engineer
> W&L
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>