Re: [sv-ec] Question on editing for Mantis 641

From: Arturo Salz <Arturo.Salz_at_.....>
Date: Tue May 03 2005 - 10:54:58 PDT
Stu is correct.

The proposal for issue 641 should have included the removal
of the line defining the formula for Bp.
Leaving the formula there is not incorrect just superfluous and
unnecessary. Mehdi, can you please add a note to amend 
issue 641 to instruct removal of the formula defining Bp.

    Arturo

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Mehdi Mohtashemi 
To: stuart@sutherland-hdl.com ; sv-ec@eda.org 
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 10:30 PM
Subject: RE: [sv-ec] Question on editing for Mantis 641


Stu,
I believe the line should be removed since we have
removed the cross-auto-bin-max item.  We will review and let you 
know by tomorrow, by the bug-note.
thanks,
- Mehdi



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stuart Sutherland [mailto:stuart@sutherland-hdl.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 12:48 PM
To: sv-ec@eda.org
Subject: [sv-ec] Question on editing for Mantis 641




I have implemented the changes described in the attachment to Mantis item 641.  I think there might be an error to this instructions, however.  The changes eliminate the use of Bp, but leave in the line defining the formula for Bp.  Should that line be removed, as well?


If so, please add a bug-note to make that correction, and advise me of the bug-note.

Stu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Stuart Sutherland
stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
+1-503-692-0898
  
Received on Tue May 3 10:55:19 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 03 2005 - 10:55:27 PDT