 | | Re: Should pattern be like we -think- they should be?
|
|
(...) Personally I prefer parts to look as they look not as they "should" look. Sometimes you can even use these imperfections to achieve good effects. Tim (20 years ago, 15-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Should pattern be like we -think- they should be?
|
|
I got a hold vote some time ago to the part: (URL) do not agree with Steffen. I think we should try to be realistic. What is your opinion? And what is the opinion of the admins? cu MikeHeide (20 years ago, 15-Jan-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Still Missing primitives
|
|
(...) The other day I started from scratch, installed 027, then the latest official release, and then all the unofficial parts. I did not run into any missing primatives. Previously I had had problems with some full width liftarms and axleholes. (...) (20 years ago, 14-Dec-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Still Missing primitives
|
|
(...) The other day I started from scratch, installed 027, then the latest official release, and then all the unofficial parts. I did not run into any missing primatives. Previously I had had problems with some full width liftarms and axleholes. (...) (20 years ago, 14-Dec-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Missing primitives after part update.
|
|
(...) Is there a "scan parts" command somewhere in the mlcad file menu? Maybe that'll fix it. Otherwise, you might get a better answer for this in the mlcad newsgroup, so I'm sending you there. (20 years ago, 14-Dec-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
