Discussion Forum

relative pathname

To add questions or replies, please log in.



Filter:

Post author:
Text in post
Post date from: to: (dd.mm.yyyy)
 
relative pathname
Hi,
Some time ago I posted this question already, but I can't find it in this forum, so I post it again:

I would be very happy to be able to specify *relative* pathnames for inserted parts in an assembly, so that when I copy (or move) a directory containing parts and assemblies of them, they keep their relation (i.e. the parts are inserted from the *current* library, that is, the copied library, and not from the original one - if I define so).

To my old post, the answer was that this is not possible, and I should be satisfied with the possibility to change the path for included parts. However, this is very time-consuming and error-prone. For example I have now copied a whole directory, containing many parts and several assemblies of them, to another place (to make a new version of the design, but also keep the old one). I will now have to manually change all the links in the assemblies. If I miss one assembly, then the parts from the *old* directory (i.e. previous version of the design) will be included, modifications to them will overwrite the old design's parts, etc, and a lot of confusion would arise.

Having the possibility to define relative pathnames (i.e. ./part1.dwb, instead of /home/barna/design/version1/part1.dwb) would make a full design (in my case a directory containig parts and assemblies) self-contained, portable.

Is there any other way to do this currently? Could it be implemented? Is there any other means to make a versioning scheme (i.e. keep and maintain a sequence of different versions)?

Thanks
Dani
relative pathname
Hi Daniel,

Your previous post is still in this forum - to see it click on the previous page with older questions.

In the current version (VariCAD 2008 3.0) you can actually change multiple links at once - you do not need to change all links manually one by one.

As to relative paths, they might cause many problems. The current way seems much more reliable.

Thanks
Marek
relative pathname
Hi Marek,
Yes, changing multiple links at once makes it much quicker. However, if I have multiple assembly files, which I do, I need to change the links in each of them.
I still believe that the possibility of defining links with relative pathnames would make things easyer, but I do know that I only see one side of the things - which is my actual problem, and it may cause problems in other cases.
So it's up to you to find the best solutions, satisfying the different user requests, so my task is to make these requests I could imagine an intermediate solutions, where links could, for example, contain %d, which would expand to the actual directory of the assembly file, where it resides. Including then a file as %d/part1.dwb would mean, that the file should be searched for in the actual directory of the assembly file. It is then the user's responsibility to use this possibility or not (by default, not). (How to implement this in the GUI, is another question...) Again, I am posting my 'brainstormings' believing that feedback is always useful (and not believing that these are the only good ways to go ahead), and it's up to you to think about it in a broader context.
Cheers
relative pathname
Hello Daniel, Hello Marek,
as w are at the moment exchanging design files between two installation, the absolute path definition is not the best solution in all cases.
As one installation is on Windows and the other on Linux, the paths are absolutely different. (And also there seems to be a problem with German umlauts in the filenames with utf-8 locale...)
So if it is possible to implement a decision option, whether to use absolute or relative links, this would be very helpful.

Thanks in advance
Stefan

1