On 27 Jan 2014, at 09:15, Ziller Eike <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> On Jan 24, 2014, at 7:12 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> At the risk of asking a naive, but well-intentioned question, I wonder if we 
>> aren't looking at this the wrong way.
>> 
>> Anyone is free to rebuild QT Creator from source on any environment they 
>> want. The impediment going forward is that QT Creator will start relying on 
>> C++11 features. The problem isn't that OSX 10.6 is no longer supported.The 
>> problem is that the last "official" compilers for OSX 10.6 don't support 
>> C++11.
>> 
>> Which begs the question: why can't people who need QT Creator on OSX 10.6 
>> bring up a more recent version of the GCC/Binutils toolchain or a more 
>> recent version of CLang and build QT Creator for themselves?
> 
> They probably can. But it would not be anything the Qt Project or Qt Creator 
> team would support. Also, deploying such an application would probably get 
> more complicated, since the non-standard libraries that this would end up 
> using need to be bundled and shipped as well.

Yes, the main problem in supporting 10.6 is that libc++ (required for C++11) is 
not available with 10.6.
One can compile libc++ on 10.6 and ship it, but it has to either
1) do not link any system library that links libstdcpp
or
2) ensure that the core compiled libc++ is binary compatible with the libstdcpp 
shipped by apple   (note that some types std:string are still incompatible, but 
that is not an issue for qt/qtcreator, and at least things like exceptions 
work).

creator links system libraries that link libstdc++, so option 1 is not feasible.

With 10.7 apples ships libstdc++ and libc++ that fulfil 2.
For 10.6 one should carefully look at the differences between libstdc++ of 10.6 
and 10.7.
Maybe it is easy and one can simply use clang and selfcompiled libc++ of 10.7, 
but I found nobody that actually checked this...

So shap you see that supporting it is not so trivial.

Fawzi

> 
> The same goes for non-Apple-provided lldb on Mac OS 10.6.
> 
> Br, Eike
> 
>> When an application developer commits to support a vendor-unsupported 
>> release, this sort of thing is part of the cost.
>> 
>> Adam: I think you should look into bringing up one of those compilers as a 
>> fall-back solution. I also think your company needs to consider the wisdom 
>> of committing their entire development team to an unsupported OS. If I were 
>> one of your customers, knowing about that would make me very nervous.
>> 
>> 
>> shap
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Michael Jackson <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> I am going to chime in here a bit on the OS X 10.6.8 thing. I mainly create 
>> software for scientists located at Govt/Enterprise/Academic installations 
>> where getting new computers can be a problem or even just getting them 
>> updated to newer operating systems is a problem. So I compile my software on 
>> 10.6.8 using Apple's Xcode for that system. I run OS X 10.6.8 SERVER in a 
>> Parallels VM to do the builds. Note that this is ALLOWED under the EULA for 
>> OS X 10.6.8 SERVER but not Client. SERVER is $20 from the Apple Store. You 
>> need to call them to get it.
>>  For my normal development I use 10.8.5 with QtCreator 3.0 for my everyday 
>> work. When I need to do a release I have to warp back in time to the 10.6.8 
>> VM and compile/fix compile errors there. Note that this does stop me from 
>> using C++11 features that I would like to use. The situation may rectify 
>> itself in the coming year as those last few machines finally get updated to 
>> something newer.
>> 
>> All that said, I'll throw my vote to keep QtCreator moving forward and if 
>> that means dropping support for 10.6.8 then I'll just have to move on. I can 
>> still use Xcode in a pinch if I need to under 10.6.8. And it isn't like 
>> QtCreator 3.0 is suddenly going to stop working when the next QtCreator 
>> comes out.
>> 
>> Mike Jackson
>> 
>> On Jan 24, 2014, at 7:10 AM, Steve Atkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jan 24, 2014, at 3:46 AM, Nikos Chantziaras <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Creator doesn't build software. It's not a compiler. So you are not
>>>> depending on it to build anything, actually.
>>> 
>>> If you’re targeting 10.6, you need to be able to debug code on 10.6 - if
>>> your IDE won’t run there, you’re stuck with using a commandline debugger
>>> and you lose a large chunk of the benefits of using an IDE.
>>> 
>>> (This doesn’t affect me, as I follow Apples lead and don’t really support
>>> any version of OS X more than one major version older than current.)
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Steve
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> It would seem to be that someone in your company is confused about
>>>> compilers :-)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 23/01/14 20:16, Adam Light wrote:
>>>>> All but one developer at my (smallish) company is still using OSX 10.6.8
>>>>> because we need 10.6 to be able to build the current shipping version of
>>>>> our main product. We all use Qt Creator, so a Creator 3.2 that would not
>>>>> work on 10.6 would be a problem for us.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Adam
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:29 AM, Daniel Teske <[email protected]
>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Let's make this:
>>>>>> Qt Creator 3.2:
>>>>>> - drop support for compiling & running Qt Creator on 10.6
>>>>> 
>>>>>> We want to start using C++11 also in Qt Creator, and 10.6 is the
>>>>>  only thing
>>>>>> preventing that. Since 10.6 is deployment target only for Qt, we
>>>>>  don’t
>>>>>> necessarily need to keep “its IDE” running there (yes, that’s a
>>>>>  Qt-centric
>>>>>> way of looking at Qt Creator).
>>>>> 
>>>>>  a actual independant proposal (since it doesn't really depend on what qt
>>>>>  supports) and cross post it to qt-creator for some wider exposure.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  Actually using C++11 would also mean bumping the minimum supported
>>>>>  compiler
>>>>>  for *compiling* Qt Creator. That's somewhat separate, but I would
>>>>>  assume we
>>>>>  would require at least lamba and auto support for compiling Qt
>>>>>  Creator 3.2.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  That means MSVC 2010, clang 3.1 or g++ 4.5 if I remember correctly.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  daniel
>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>  Qt-creator mailing list
>>>>>  [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>  http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Qt-creator mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Qt-creator mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Qt-creator mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qt-creator mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qt-creator mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
> 
> -- 
> Eike Ziller, Senior Software Engineer - Digia, Qt
> 
> Digia Germany GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin
> Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Tuula Haataja
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, 
> HRB 144331 B
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qt-creator mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator

_______________________________________________
Qt-creator mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator

Reply via email to