On 30 October 2013 20:36, André Pönitz <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 07:27:57PM +0000, Mateusz Loskot wrote: >> On 30 October 2013 19:19, André Pönitz >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 09:38:12PM +0000, Mateusz Loskot wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> I'm using Qt Creator 3.0.81 (Qt 5.2.0 64-bit) on Linux, >> > >> > [As a side note: 'master' is usually unattended between about >> > a week before beta releases and the release candidate, it's >> > really not recommended to use, even for 'bleeding edge' cases >> > during that time] >> >> The documentation [1] does not say which branch to build from, >> so I thought it assumes the master as default, if one builds from Git. >> The README [2] says "Check out Qt Creator (master branch" >> >> [1] >> http://doc-snapshot.qt-project.org/qtcreator-extending/getting-and-building.html >> [2] >> https://qt.gitorious.org/qt-creator/qt-creator/source/0ddb6cac29628425b7c2490a20df944f062ce50c:README > > This covers the common feature development situation pretty well, i.e. > the phase that's not between Beta and RC when most people are busy with > stabilizing and release preparations.
Understood. >> >[..] >> > This pretty much looks like an unclean build. >> >> What part of the build you suspect to be unclean, Qt or Qt Creator or >> the plugin(s)? > > The Qt Creator build, which covers all Creator plugins. The mapping > between address and file/line seems wrong, usually meaning that the > parts contributing to overall debug information are out-of-sync. Right, that could be it indeed. (I'm a bit used to Visual Studio warning me about source out of sync ;)) I'm building the branch 3.0 now and will see how it goes. Thanks! -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
