[Qt-creator] Some issues concerning dlls in the qt sdk

[Andre Poenitz]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:21:09PM +0800, Yue Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Adam Higerd <ahigerd at timeips.com> wrote:
> > Actually, that's not true at all. The debug symbols are very useful even
> > for normal non-Nokia developers. I know I've traced through Qt code
> > before in the process of debugging my own applications. Sometimes it's
> > vital to understand the control flow that invokes your functions. By all
> > means the SDK should absolutely ship with debug builds.
> 
> OK, then we just need to ship one copy, not two.

Creator is built using MSVC, and the SDK uses MinGW. So there have to
be two copies.

> > The first load of the application is definitely going to take a while
> > because it has to load all of the debugging symbols. There's a "Fast
> > Debugger Start" option in the Debug menu you can use to help with that,
> > and I hear that Creator 1.1 will be including an option to restart an
> > already-loaded instance in the debugger rather than requiring it to be
> > reloaded with every run.
> 
> But I just need a option to link debug apps to release libs.
> (and many other people need this too)
> I have no problem doing this on my FreeBSD and Linux systems.
> But I am not able to do this in windows.

The library concepts of Windows and Unix are quite different. Whatever
"works" on one system does not necessarily do so on the other. Mixing
debug and release builds is one of the items on that list.

> (The only way I can do is to remove Qtxxd.dll, and copy Qtxx.dll to Qtxxd.dll)

Does that work?

> > As far as compiling Qt applications statically, that requires REAL
> > static libraries; Creator can do this if you point it to a
> > statically-compiled installation of Qt.
> 
> Can we ship static libraries?
> So users don't need to compile them.

This would certainly possible, but didn't the thread start with "we ship
too much"?

Andre'