Sensor_Temperature: S5.1 and S5.2 errors

[antoniovazquezblanco]

KLC Rules:
http://kicad-pcb.org/libraries/klc/S5.1/
http://kicad-pcb.org/libraries/klc/S5.2/

Splitting issue #28 I have found the following violations:

Checking symbol 'KTY85':
  Violating S5.1
    For components with a single default footprint, footprint field is filled with valid footprint
    filename
    Footprint filter 'SOD80*' does not match the footprint 'Diode_SMD:D_MiniMELF' set for this symbol.
     - could not match 'D_MiniMELF' against filter 'SOD80*'
     - could not match 'Diode_SMD:D_MiniMELF' against filter 'SOD80*'
Checking symbol 'LMT84DCK':
  Violating S5.1
    For components with a single default footprint, footprint field is filled with valid footprint
    filename
    Footprint filter 'SC-70-*' does not match the footprint 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' set for this symbol.
     - could not match 'SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-*'
     - could not match 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-*'
checking ruleS5.2
checking ruleS5.1
Checking symbol 'LMT85DCK':
  Violating S5.1
    For components with a single default footprint, footprint field is filled with valid footprint
    filename
    Footprint filter 'SC-70-*' does not match the footprint 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' set for this symbol.
     - could not match 'SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-*'
     - could not match 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-*'
checking ruleS5.2
checking ruleS5.1
Checking symbol 'LMT86DCK':
  Violating S5.1
    For components with a single default footprint, footprint field is filled with valid footprint
    filename
    Footprint filter 'SC-70-*' does not match the footprint 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' set for this symbol.
     - could not match 'SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-*'
     - could not match 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-*'
checking ruleS5.2
checking ruleS5.1
Checking symbol 'LMT87DCK':
  Violating S5.1
    For components with a single default footprint, footprint field is filled with valid footprint
    filename
    Footprint filter 'SC-70-*' does not match the footprint 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' set for this symbol.
     - could not match 'SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-*'
     - could not match 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-*'
Checking symbol 'MCP9700AT-ELT':
  Violating S5.1
    For components with a single default footprint, footprint field is filled with valid footprint
    filename
    Footprint filter 'SC-70-5*' does not match the footprint 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' set for this symbol.
     - could not match 'SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-5*'
     - could not match 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC-70-5*'
Checking symbol 'Si7050-A20':
  Violating S5.1
    For components with a single default footprint, footprint field is filled with valid footprint
    filename
    Specified footprint does not exist
     - Footprint file Package_DFN_QFN:DFN-6-1EP_3x3mm_P1mm_EP1.65x2.55mm was not found
checking ruleS5.2
checking ruleS5.1
Checking symbol 'TMP20AIDCK':
  Violating S5.1
    For components with a single default footprint, footprint field is filled with valid footprint
    filename
    Footprint filter 'SC?70*' does not match the footprint 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' set for this symbol.
     - could not match 'SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC?70*'
     - could not match 'Package_TO_SOT_SMD:SOT-353_SC-70-5' against filter 'SC?70*'
Checking symbol 'TSIC206-TO92':
  Violating S5.1
    For components with a single default footprint, footprint field is filled with valid footprint
    filename
    Footprint filter 'TO?92*Inline*Narrow*Oval*' does not match the footprint 'Package_TO_SOT_THT:TO-92_Inline' set for this symbol.
     - could not match 'TO-92_Inline' against filter 'TO?92*Inline*Narrow*Oval*'
     - could not match 'Package_TO_SOT_THT:TO-92_Inline' against filter 'TO?92*Inline*Narrow*Oval*'

[aewallin]

maybe the KLC-check scripts should be re-run on the entire library, because it's been a while since September 2018 when this issue was created?