I observed that when I select a symbol in eeschema, it is not highlighted there, but the corresponding footprint in pcb is highlighted. Now, if I I select a footprint in pcb, the corresponding symbol in eeschema is highlighted. I am running 5.1.5 in stock Ubuntu 16.04, as per the information below:
Application: KiCad
Version: 5.1.5-52549c5~84~ubuntu16.04.1, release build
Libraries:
wxWidgets 3.0.4
libcurl/7.47.0 OpenSSL/1.0.2g zlib/1.2.8 libidn/1.32 librtmp/2.3
Platform: Linux 4.15.0-74-generic x86_64, 64 bit, Little endian, wxGTK
Build Info:
wxWidgets: 3.0.2 (wchar_t,wx containers,compatible with 2.8) GTK+ 2.24
Boost: 1.58.0
OpenCASCADE Community Edition: 6.8.0
Curl: 7.47.0
Compiler: GCC 5.4.0 with C++ ABI 1009
Hi I don’t have a definite reply but I am using only EEschema right now; a recent nightly build. When I select symbols or wires they do light up to indicate selection. Not sure how this plays with pcbnew. But if you are inclined to trying a recent nightly you might like the result. I know that the stable release of EEschema does NOT light up selected symbols so this is a recent development.
Current stable (version 5) has no way to highlight what is selected in eeschema. (This is a known problem that is already fixed in current development builds which will eventually become version 6)
Hmmmm, OK, thank you. If I select a footprint in pcb, the corresponding symbol does light up, though, so eeschema definitely can highlight. If I double click on a symbol in eeschema, the properties windows pops up, so eeschema definitely can select. So, we can’t eeschema highlight the selected symbol if it can select it and light it up?
Hi, Rene Do you know if there is any problem reverting to the stable release after trying a newer nightly? (I do not think there is any problem.)
Cflin: Right now I am selecting and highlighting symbols using the nightly build. I think you ought to try it. Rene indicated that this capability will be included in 6.0
Right now nightly builds are unstable, not only potentially. There will also be file format changes and then you can’t revert back at all to an earlier version. At the moment there have been small file format changes and you probably can revert back to 5.1 by making small edits manually to the text files provided that you haven’t used new features.
I used pre-5.0 and pre-5.1 versions for work but only after file formats were locked (for 5.0) and there were no big features under heavy development. I experienced crashes etc. but they have to be accepted. On the other hand the difference between a pre-release nightly build and the stable release may be only one small change, and crashes will be found even in stable releases.
Some day when the file format changes are done for 5.99 somebody will open a thread about the status and stability of nightly builds when people more and more want to try the new version before it has been released. Then it will be a bit easier to make the decision. Right now I don’t recommend it for any project which has any kind of deadline, although it still should be theoretically possible to revert back to 5.1.
On the other hand the symbol and schematic file formats won’t change at all without a warning (if you follow this forum and other channels). If somebody’s workflow is so that they draw the schematic first without going back and forth between schematic and layout they can make the schematic with 5.99 and revert back to 5.1 before starting the layout. But this doesn’t work if you if you need highlighting between schematic and layout.
Thanks, eelik. You and Rene have taught me a couple of things. Backwards compatibility and going back and forth between schematic and layout.
One easy example is putting a resistor and capacitor in series. “Which comes first” might not affect circuit operation but one option fits on the board better than the other. But invariably also I discover schematic errors or omissions while working on the layout…
I would call it iterative design. Agile is a set of rules how teams can closely interact with each other without needing a lot of documentation between them. (And yes agile uses iterative design as part of it but just because one uses iterations does not make it an agile process.)
