gEDA vs KiCad: Differences, advantages and disadvantages? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: timofonic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2015, 03:01:03 pm
content: Hello.I currently use Eagle, but I would like to switch to Open Source EDA software.I tried KiCad and I find the interface very weird and difficult to use for me. KiCad still has an awful library manager too, I hope it improves someday.I was unable to use gEDA again, I might give it another try.I would like to know the differences, advantages and disadvantages of each other.Thanks in advance!

author: jsquaredz
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2015, 03:17:17 pm
content: Quote from: Circuiteromalaguito on June 08, 2015, 03:01:03 pmI'm pretty sure the future of open source EDA software is KiCAD. The software is being pretty heavily developed right now. Just to give you a quick idea of whats going on, the Dev team had to do a lot of plumbing changes to make a lot of the UI /library management items possible to implement. That said I think most of that is done and there is a new release coming in the next month or two. After that they will start to tackle the usability issues to turn it into best in class EDA. In CERN's mission for this effort they claim they will make KiCAD an open source package that is equivalent to the best Professional tools.If you are downloading the stable build today it is basically software released in 2012 with some bug fixes along the way, but all the interesting stuff has been happening in the development branch.There are multiple easy ways to install the current version of KiCAD.Windowshttp://www2.futureware.at/~nickoe/MAC OS Xhttp://downloads.kicad-pcb.org/osx/Ubunutu Linuxhttps://code.launchpad.net/~js-reynaud/+archive/ubuntu/ppa-kicadAll this info is here.http://www.kicad-pcb.org/display/KICAD/Installing+KiCad

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2015, 04:49:38 pm
content: Quote from: Circuiteromalaguito on June 08, 2015, 03:01:03 pmWhat version of Kicad were you using, and what did you find to be "awful" about it?QuotegEDA was a horrible clusterfuck with an incomprehensible library system and creating parts involved using m4 macros which was just obtuse. Plus, it never built properly on OS X due to a dependency whose maintainer was openly hostile to the Mac. Has it been improved in the several years since I looked at it? Dunno. But Kicad (especially bleeding-edge builds) works and you can make boards with it without much fuss.-a

author: timofonic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2015, 02:22:22 pm
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on June 08, 2015, 04:49:38 pmI built it a month ago using AUR, it took ages to built. I find the interface too frustrating to use, I was able to replicate a simple 741 exercise from class in "just" a few hours. It was difficult to move objects and place lines, the lack of back annotation made my n00b mistakes even more frustrating than it already is and made me insa e. I yet have to find about creating parts in KiCad. in Eagle and I'm an awful drawer that prefer to use some standard symbols than put my GREAT drawing talent just to do a shit after tons of times later. It's hard to explain, I find it like an application for CAD nerds (I'm unable to use AutoCAD too). Maybe I'm too stupid for this smart software, it's very possible.Many essential components weren't available on the library, but I understand they don't have tons of followers and Ultra Librarian doesn't support KiCad (the software seems outdated and bloated crap, but it does it's job well). And the library manager is a total mess, even worse than Eagle but not worse than DipTrace (nice software, but that shitty library manager makes it useless). Where's advanced taxonomy and tagging like when finding something in Octopart? That's the way to go, and "favorites" and "recent" tags too.They need to go the LibreOffice way: Get funds to make a foundation, electronic small/medium companies and education institutions could invest on it. While that would happens, some nice nerdy devs would provide improvements for more marginal stuff but no less interesting for certain people

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2015, 02:37:53 pm
content: Drawing symbols occasionally is part of using any EDA package. Nobody is asking you to be an artist, but if you can't hack out a symbol for a transistor you probably can't lay out a PCB either...(Also note that the foundations for all the basic devices are there, you shouldn't have to draw your own from scratch.)

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2015, 03:56:19 am
content: Ok I am a gEDA user. I have been for over 10 years now. I don't question that kicad might be more user friendly because of how gEDA is designed to have a user defined workflow. This makes it easier to automate, something few EDA packages really do as well IMHO. It was geared around people calling all of it's different utilities from the command line, scripts or makefiles. That said there is a gui just for people who only want to take a schematic and make a board from it. It also has hierarchical design.Bassman 59 describe the M4 system as a "cluster fuck." Please understand you don't have to use that. The M4 option is there so that you can have programatically defined properties in your footprints. For example some people like being able to change SMT pad lengths for hand assembly on prototypes and then shrink them back down automatically for reflow assembled boards.For any EDA package you have to track what symbols and footprints you use with model number components.Looking to see what gEDA library looks like now? It is available here. No need to install anything.http://www.gedasymbols.org/Yes CERN has pumped some coding time into kicad that has added some PCB layout features which I am a little jealous of however kicad seems to have more reliability issues. gEDA is *very* reliable. I am currently on both developer mailing lists because both communities are working to create a more common code base. We are all tired of duplicating work.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 19, 2015, 05:32:25 am
content: I interviewed gEDA's main (only?) PCB module developer, DJ Delorie:I got the impression that gEDA was basically a personal play thing compared to KiCAD, but that was 4 years ago.I don't really know anyone who uses gEDA, but KiCAD is common and gaining big momemtum and has CERN behind it, that alone says probably all you need to know.

author: mark03
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2015, 04:28:04 pm
content: Biggest one for me: gEDA lets you sprinkle vias anywhere you like, whereas KiCAD thinks that vias are only used on traces, forcing you to create fake traces when stitching planes, etc. If you do it wrong, the trace and its vias get zapped and you have to start over. So frustrating.

author: timofonic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2015, 08:35:10 am
content: Quote from: ScribblesOnNapkins on June 19, 2015, 03:56:19 amI didn't know about it before!Could you please provide more info about this? Are there some planning about it?Those are really good news! I'm very happy to know it! Joining in common goals is very needed for OSS projects.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2015, 01:19:51 am
content: @Dave, as much as I hate to say this compared to altium, orcad or protel all opensource EDA is really a personal play thing because of user base. KiCAD has some disadvantages that to me are kind of glaring but I am more interested in adding things than starting/being in a flame ware. The UI experience of gEDA might feel like a toy if you are new to the *nix way of thinking about things but after you get used to it there are things you realize are possible that would be very hard if no impossible to do in a "modern" integrated GUI. Keep in mind I started out as an electronics hobbyist who took up Linux way later on.@Circuiteromalaguito there was a meeting this year at FOSDEM in Belgium. The videos are for some reason not posted on their website yet but you can find them here.https://video.fosdem.org/2015/The project is supposed to be hosted herehttp://edacore.org/You can see the gEDA half of the dialogue herehttp://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.cad.geda.user/45312The KiCAD part is on a mailing list you have to join yahoo us access herehttps://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/kicad-users/infoThe folks who do circuit simulation where there (icarus, gnucap, ng-spice and etc) as were the EDA people from QUCS, KiCAD and gEDA. One person proposed EDAcore and started a dialogue that has span both the gEDA, KiCAD and newly minted EDAcore mailing lists. It has ebbed and flowed since then. I get the impression a number of us are quietly hacking away at things but no group work has kicked off so far.I really like the gEDA devs but they have their ideas of how things should go. They have not included a lot of contributions of the years because they were not in the same language as their other code or did not meet their coding standards. To be fair even some of DJ's stuff never got included. This has limited the functionality of the gEDA suite with out these 3rd party widgets. It has however made the suite run very reliably. The PCB tool has had it's issues but with extensive testing it passes. I am hoping that PCB getting doxygen documentation will help speed things along.There has been talk of incorporating some of CERN's contributions to KiCAD as they were written to be portable between suites. However most people who have looked at the PCB tool that is paired with gEDA will tell you the source is a mess. gEDA and the PCB tool have different origins and PCB's architecture was never so carefully controlled. The gEDA source code I can read the PCB source just confuses the heck out of me. Eventually DJ or one of the Peters pointed out to me that it has no unified concept of what a PCB is. I get the impression from people that KiCAD's PCB tool has architectural issues of it's own though possibly less seriously. I get the impression that basically both groups want to flush out the mess their current code has them in before combining forces.My *personal* hope in the short term is that we work on compatibility with non-free software formats because right now.OrCAD - gEDA has this in a limited way (I have never used it). It should get cleaned up and moved to EDAcore so KiCAD can use it.EagleCAD - CERN is writing import for this into KiCAD but we could move that to EDAcore and add export which would help entice more of the open hardware community to migrateProtel - The published their file format spec but no one has written a library to interpret it.Altium - Unlike the others they keep their format closed so we are all waiting on this I guess.http://hackaday.com/2014/10/15/reverse-engineering-altium-files/PS: The QUCS talk was really good. Even if you don't care about gEDA or KiCAD you might want to watch it.PPS: In case you think I am just waiting for others to do the work keep in mind I have been quietly working on something for a little while. I will release it when I feel ready. It should ultimately change openocd, gEDA and KiCAD but in a more minor way.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2015, 01:24:39 am
content: When I started with gEDA it was 2004. KiCAD in those days was terrible in comparison and it was almost all in French. Even the names they used in the code and the comments. Apparently the KiCAD people spent a lot of time migrating to English. If you watch the FOSDEM video the developer jokes about this.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2015, 01:27:00 am
content: One thing that keeps getting forgotten in the EDAcore discussion is the QUCS people. QUCS is getting damn impressive and not talking to those guys is a glaring and bizarre oversight to say the least.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2015, 01:32:08 am
content: Netlist portability is something that is likely to happen. KiCAD uses simulators that were traditionally associated with gEDA.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2015, 01:41:14 am
content: @Mark03 No arbitrary vias?! To be fair making a hole in gEDA/PCB means drawing a via and then removing the copper after.There are a lot of plugins like this that are really cool never get rolled into the mainline.http://www.sandpiper-inc.com/stipple/html/http://www.delorie.com/pcb/teardrops/http://www.delorie.com/electronics/sdram/

author: mark03
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2015, 04:46:39 pm
content: Quote from: ScribblesOnNapkins on June 22, 2015, 01:41:14 amYeah but most boards only have a handful of holes. Better for them to be the exception

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 24, 2015, 01:47:56 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on June 19, 2015, 05:32:25 am@DaveI just noticed this above the video. While I have never contributed to PCB and DJ has in major ways he is not the only developer. Here is a list of themhttp://git.geda-project.org/geda-gaf/tree/AUTHORSand you can see who is currently active by looking at the commits here.http://git.geda-project.org/pcb/There was a time when DJ became known as the PCB guy and people were approaching him to add x feature they wanted. I don't want to speak for him but I believe it got frustrating.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 24, 2015, 01:54:24 pm
content: I use gEDA for work. You can see some of what I do here. Sadly the two biggest projects are not stuff I can post.http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/

author: Godzil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2015, 10:44:38 am
content: *for me* the only tool where gEDA is better than KiCad is the Gerber viewer, kicad's one is really basic and nearly useless, gEDA one which is not perfect, provide at least some useful tool, allow layers to be reordered, etc...http://gerbv.geda-project.org/gerbv:vsKicad's:(yes I know it's an old version in this picture, but it haven't changed a lot with the latest changes)Kicad is at least missing the possibility to change the layer order, do some measurement (if there an option it's absolutely not obvious)The "rendering" options that gerbv have are really useful (especially the semi transparent one)Also with kicad you lost the name of the file you used for each layer, some time it's obvious what is what, but sometime it take too much time to understand which layer is what.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2015, 04:51:30 pm
content: IMHO almost everything is better than Geda + PCB (yes I have used it for a project). Regarding viewing gerbers: you can download Viewmate from Pentalogix for free. Works like a charm. I never use a Gerber viewer which is built into a CAD package.

author: timofonic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2015, 10:25:51 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 23, 2015, 04:51:30 pmWhat are the differences between them? Why is gEDA's gerbv better than KiCad's GerbView?But they aren't Open Source, and that matters to some ideologists like meThese days there are electronics geeks using Linux since many years, I'm one of them. And OSHW is making electronics on Linux a lot more popular too.The reliability of using Wine is limited on applications and is only usable in some of them, specially if developers fix their applications to have good compatibility ( such as LTSpice). And this isn't a possibility if you use "exotic" platforms such as ARM (there are going to be many very powerful ones in the main future), MIPS and even PowerPC (not so used in desktop platforms other than very alternative ones such as MorphOS and AmigaOS 4).I try to use FOSS all time, because propietary software is a trap in too many ways. They do all kinds of nasty tricks for vendor lock-in, like using propietary formats or making you too used to their very different interface to attach to their software.Of course, sometimes you have to deal with it and be a "sinner", unless you are a defiant developer with a few of free time to develop your own it improve an existing FOSS solution. Unfortunately that isn't so common, it's extremely difficult to be an EE or advanced electronics hobbyist and a good software developer and even be so activist to have that attitude.I really hope FOSS electronics software becomes more popular and a lot better then these days. I really happen this is possible . I think to make this happen, it requires lots of efforts in good quality organized collaborative development and making strong organizations to have full time paid developers in these projects.

author: HackedFridgeMagnet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2015, 12:14:51 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 23, 2015, 04:51:30 pmThat sounds like a wise choice.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2015, 12:58:40 am
content: Quote from: Circuiteromalaguito on August 23, 2015, 10:25:51 pmWine just doesn't work so just forget about it. Get Virtualbox (free) and run Windows in a Virtual machine for the few pieces of software for which no Linux alternative exists or you just like to use. Problem solved. Comparing a CAD package based on the third party software they include is not very useful IMHO. Actually it is better to use a different piece of software so you make sure there aren't any issues with the Gerber file the author of the software is unaware of.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2015, 05:50:44 pm
content: Quote from: HackedFridgeMagnet on August 24, 2015, 12:14:51 amIndeed. Not to cast aspersions on the Kicad guys, but I like the idea of not validating incorrect assumptions with incorrect assumptions!The MCN Gerber viewer is decent and cross-platform.

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2015, 05:56:05 pm
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on August 24, 2015, 05:50:44 pmIf any KiCad guys take offense to that, they are twits!Always, always always always, validate your Gerbers withanotherpackage. The devs who wrote the export code in the layout software should not be the same ones who wrote the import code in the Gerber viewer. They'll make the same exact dumb mistakes.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2015, 03:14:03 am
content: QuoteCome one guys. I am solidly in the gEDA camp but I have to admit they deserve *respect*. gEDA and KiCAD are two different philosophies about how to solve this problem. gEDA uses the unix mentality of multiple single function tools the users decides to combined for different work flows. KiCAD is more monolithic for people who want everything in one integrated tool.Yes you should validate your gerbers. That is why gEDA users call the companion program gerbv after making gerbers in PCB.To the person who asked "What are the differences between them? Why is gEDA's gerbv better than KiCad's GerbView?" <- it isn't they I am pretty sure KiCad just wraps there stuff around gerbv.

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2015, 03:28:13 am
content: Who said they don't deserve respect?Okay, if they're offended by testing Gerbers in another package, they don't. I've not met any that stupid.Quote from: ScribblesOnNapkins on August 25, 2015, 03:14:03 amIt does not.

author: codeboy2k
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2015, 04:27:14 pm
content: Quote from: ScribblesOnNapkins on August 25, 2015, 03:14:03 am... and then validate again with another viewer, for exactly the reasons c4757p says.Quote from: Bassman59 on August 24, 2015, 05:50:44 pmHaving never heard of it, I had high hopes for testing a new linux gerber viewer, but it seems to be Mac only.Here's an interesting web-based 3d gerber viewer :http://mayhewlabs.com/3dpcbI found that is fun to play with but can't be taken seriously because it has severe drawing anomolies (cracked or crooked drawing, anti-aliasing, high-angle views of the board puts bends in the traces where there are none, and the damn acceleration and deceleration when you move the board.. grrrr)

author: timofonic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2015, 09:48:12 pm
content: Excuse me, I reformatted your message to make a structured reply.Quote from: ScribblesOnNapkins on August 25, 2015, 03:14:03 amI agree about it. That kind of mentality seems obsolete by a major number of people, that's why things like systemd. I'm not sure what one is better than other, but I'm more comfortable with one of them depending on the task.Anyway, I have been using 20+ Operating Systems as a OCD hobby (I'm usually an apprentice of everything, master of nothing), but I like command line and streamlined GUIs without ribbons on top, maybe a mix would be nice (I like the Eagle cli, despite it's very limited).Modern GUIs influenced from other Operating Systems are morphing the UNIX world into something different, with a mix of both monolithic and modular approachs.The big problem of gEDA is stagnation, because different reasons:- There are highly skilled people in the gEDA community that is able to develop their own forks for their own needs. Unfortunately, most of them don't care at all about merging code to mainline, they are mostly quite conservative.- The project is considered mature and "good enough". There's little interest in innovation, but fortunately some rebels want to change that.- They use Lisp a over there (Guile). Despite it can be cool, it's a dead language for mostly all programmers. These days is C, C++, Java (don't enter into this trap owned by Oracle), .NET/C# (another trap), Python, Lua.- It's practically not multiplatform, Guile has portability issues on Windows at least.- Instead investing their efforts in development and merging back forks or improve stuff in a constructive way, they just do their own stuff or waste it on massive flamewars.* They make endless discussions about what to do and unable to make agreements, even resulting in not polite attitudes to others.* They even critic about other projects such as KiCad.- Delorie seems to not have a strong leadership in this project to make it progress. I'm not sure why, but he finally wasn't able to manage the situation in a way to have a sane community.Quote from: ScribblesOnNapkins on August 25, 2015, 03:14:03 amYou are right, but there are other interesting stuff about this project:- They are a multiplatform project, so more users and developers could be more interested in it.- They are a more open project to contributions, novice users and innovation.* They don't act in an elitist way, despite some past flaws. These days they reply all questions and encourage the submitting of patches and bugfixes.* The contributions from CERN are revitalizing the project and improved the interest in the project.* OSHW community, "makers" and students are getting interested in KiCad as an alternative to Eagle.* Their community is more friendly to novices and new developers,- They even have a new and better website.* I miss a news section on the main page.- Differential pair, 32 layers support and PNS routing are very interesting stuff that got added.* They have more stuff they want to improve after the upcoming release:** User Interface improvements** File format interoperability.** Back annotation.** Better integration between Eeschema and NewPCB, changing many parts of the current application design.** They plan to use by default their new and better OpenGL/Cairo graphics backend as default (GAL).*** Currently some features are only available in GAL and others in the "legacy" backbend. They plan to improve this and have the possibility to use a nice Hardware accelerated graphics environment.** Better Python scripting: There's some stuff already done, but they need to improve things.*** I hope they are able to archive the flexibility and diversity of Eagle's ULP, but providing a centralized scripting repository.To me, it's a lot more than the UNIX vs Integrated approach:- One project has better management and a sane community.- The other project have lots of flamewars and against innovations.It's a shame the EdaCore initiative didn't get enough momentum: it's a brilliant idea to share source code and component libraries between Open Source EDA tools.

author: codeboy2k
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 26, 2015, 12:49:32 am
content: QuoteI like the look of the OpenGL or Cairo renderers more than the default renderer, but on my system the default renderer is about 2 to 3 times faster then either OpenGL or Cairo. It just gets really slow whenever I switch, so I think that I have some specific 3D graphics issue here with KiCad and it's using emulated OpenGL calls instead of the real hardware. My graphic card is aAMD ATI HD7870 GHz Editionwhich is really fast (and does do WebGL and OpenGL demos fine even when KiCad is slow)

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 26, 2015, 12:55:14 am
content: Interesting. There are definitely variants in speed, and it goes both ways. On my machine, theoldrenderer is unusably slow.There is a distinct emphasis on speed in the design of the GL renderer, it's rather a priority. Hopefully we can get hold of one of the problem configurations to try to fix that.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 26, 2015, 01:42:44 am
content: Quote from: Circuiteromalaguito on August 25, 2015, 09:48:12 pmPCB/gEDA already has opengl/ cairo rendering with optional other front ends.One of the things that came after Peter's talk on EDA Core was a push (in no small part driven by me) to do a new release.Yes gEDA did hit a level of maturity and more or less stop development in some aspects. Unix mentality each program should only have one clearly defined function. Why would your schematic editor be constantly in need of development. The gEDA part of GAF (geda and friends) is solid, stable, tested and all the functions it promises actually work. Yes they only work on Linux, Unix, Solaris and *nix's but these days even Xilinx supports Linux as a development environment so why needs windows? I only use it these days when someone sends me something in orcad or altium.I pushed people a bit and we are headed too moving away from Lisp and scheme as our primary scripting languages for plugins.Ok yes we do have some long running debates and there is some hostility mostly directed at one guy. The thing is I think he is right. The other flamewars are just people being silly (my VCS is better than yours, my language is better, vi vs emacs, and etc.) A month ago someone was saying we should all adopt PL/I, you did not think that was serious did you? We are not against innovation, it is just that people keep joining and trying to change one fundamental thing integration. We accomplish the automation part of EDA via scripting (makefiles) that call the tools in an almost infinite number of possible flows. This only works because of the Unix mentality of one function per tool, break that and you break automation. Our most rejected idea is integration because it means bluing the PCB tool into the schematic editor and etc. Everyone who joins will be welcome as long as they don't try to force a change on this or move us off of C.We have plenty of newbies who join the list and are welcomed. We just don't like folks trying to force us to code what they want. Sorry but part of being new has to be accepting that not every idea you have is gold.Why is DJ supposed to lead the project? I like him but he is more interested in being an engineer than a leader. Look around the open source world, he has many other things going on. Most of us do.gEDA's partner project PCB supports n layers by default it only loads with 6.gEDA's file format was well planned from the start so adding hierarchy and etc have only required one format change in like 10 years. (PCB is mid overhaul and has a different history)This is not a competition. We are all interested in one thing, building open tools.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 26, 2015, 02:11:42 am
content: Quote from: Godzil on August 19, 2015, 10:44:38 amIt really works better for demos if you turn off fast rendering and go to quality. OpenGL and antialiasing really make everything look pretty.

author: ScribblesOnNapkins
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 26, 2015, 02:13:27 am
content: Quote from: c4757p on August 25, 2015, 03:28:13 amYea I took another look at the code. Foot in mouth.

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 26, 2015, 02:21:12 am
content: Quote from: ScribblesOnNapkins on August 26, 2015, 02:11:42 amIndeed. gerbv renders are sexy. I use gerbv whenever I want to make a good-looking render of a PCB.