Unable to debug Android App (Windows + Qt Creator 12 + LLDB)
-
so since Android SDK with API 31 EMPLOYS Java class version 61 objects for its components this IMPLIES a requirements for JDK version 17.
QT ... kindly update your docs?
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 13:48 last edited bythat's WRONG... Android API 31 components (SDK) REQUIRES (seemingly JAVA SE version 17) since its components use object version 61 NOT 55.
-
that's WRONG... Android API 31 components (SDK) REQUIRES (seemingly JAVA SE version 17) since its components use object version 61 NOT 55.
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 13:48 last edited bylet's keep trying... shall we...
-
@CodesInChaoss Maybe try to do it on Linux and it could be easier. The executable is same.
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 13:55 last edited by@JoeCFD you say?
-
@JoeCFD you say?
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 14:03 last edited bybut windows is on the list..but sure.. if it's to help out... we are are up for ANYTHING
-
but windows is on the list..but sure.. if it's to help out... we are are up for ANYTHING
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 14:07 last edited by@CodesInChaoss
Fetching Ubuntu 20.04 LTS already -
@CodesInChaoss
Fetching Ubuntu 20.04 LTS alreadywrote on 24 Feb 2024, 14:14 last edited byThis post is deleted! -
@JoeCFD you say?
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 19:09 last edited by CodesInChaossThe exact version of UBUNTU as advised by QT documentation....
Now,' hilarious' is not a word which would do justice, or is it..
-
The exact version of UBUNTU as advised by QT documentation....
Now,' hilarious' is not a word which would do justice, or is it..
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 19:10 last edited by CodesInChaossThe above is shown... On a fresh Ubuntu installation... on default 5.15.16 settings...... online installer...
after the installation is finished and when attempting to launch Creator 12
-
The above is shown... On a fresh Ubuntu installation... on default 5.15.16 settings...... online installer...
after the installation is finished and when attempting to launch Creator 12
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 19:34 last edited by JoeCFD@CodesInChaoss Install Qt 5.15.2 and use Qt Creator which comes with Qt 5.15.2 on Ubuntu 22.04 That is what I did with my project for Android. No issues with debugging. I will have a shot at Qt 6.6.2 with Qt Creator 12 for Android on Monday. I know it is messy and too many settings.
-
@CodesInChaoss Install Qt 5.15.2 and use Qt Creator which comes with Qt 5.15.2 on Ubuntu 22.04 That is what I did with my project for Android. No issues with debugging. I will have a shot at Qt 6.6.2 with Qt Creator 12 for Android on Monday. I know it is messy and too many settings.
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 21:18 last edited byThank you kindly for your reply, so few people here willing to give a helpful hand.
Yet, since we decided to pay for QT to in order to avoid the inherent bogs of open source (which we've been using years) we rather stick to QT creator which is compatible with QT 5.15.16 (and the prior version which you suggested is not).
Follow instructions above.
Would be nice for Qt team to improve installer as they state no additional libraries would be needed on this very Ubuntu.
Follow steps above to install missing libs.
-
Thank you kindly for your reply, so few people here willing to give a helpful hand.
Yet, since we decided to pay for QT to in order to avoid the inherent bogs of open source (which we've been using years) we rather stick to QT creator which is compatible with QT 5.15.16 (and the prior version which you suggested is not).
Follow instructions above.
Would be nice for Qt team to improve installer as they state no additional libraries would be needed on this very Ubuntu.
Follow steps above to install missing libs.
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 21:47 last edited by -
The exact version of UBUNTU as advised by QT documentation....
Now,' hilarious' is not a word which would do justice, or is it..
wrote on 24 Feb 2024, 22:06 last edited by@CodesInChaoss Ubuntu 22.04 may be better. Ubuntu 20.04 is kind of old. At home I installed 23.04.
-
@CodesInChaoss Ubuntu 22.04 may be better. Ubuntu 20.04 is kind of old. At home I installed 23.04.
wrote on 25 Feb 2024, 09:09 last edited bywell we know very well BUT that's what QT recommends for 5.15.16, and we want simply to be able to debug above anything else.
-
well we know very well BUT that's what QT recommends for 5.15.16, and we want simply to be able to debug above anything else.
wrote on 25 Feb 2024, 09:14 last edited byWe've now compiled OpenSSL 1.1.1 from sources , installed fired up QT Creator 12, the Android SDK autonomous installation process now commenced fine.. let us hope for the best.
Fingers crossed.
-
We've now compiled OpenSSL 1.1.1 from sources , installed fired up QT Creator 12, the Android SDK autonomous installation process now commenced fine.. let us hope for the best.
Fingers crossed.
wrote on 25 Feb 2024, 09:14 last edited by -
wrote on 25 Feb 2024, 09:15 last edited by
-
wrote on 25 Feb 2024, 09:19 last edited by
-
wrote on 25 Feb 2024, 09:21 last edited by
Restarting QT Creator help for the kits to properly initialize:
now the only warning is that a device is missing.. well because it's missing as of now
-
Restarting QT Creator help for the kits to properly initialize:
now the only warning is that a device is missing.. well because it's missing as of now
wrote on 25 Feb 2024, 09:24 last edited by
We've got a single Multi-Abi kit, let's look inside
same settings as on Windows.
we would switch compiler to aarch64, which we believe should be by default by now. Few 32 bit devices around.
Now the question.. on Linux... we should be after LLDB correct? not gdb
it's the freedom oriented realm where all the Linux level latest goodies are expected to shine, right?
Let the Microsoft burdens be upon us no more.
Fingers crossed.
let's try to debug.
-
We've got a single Multi-Abi kit, let's look inside
same settings as on Windows.
we would switch compiler to aarch64, which we believe should be by default by now. Few 32 bit devices around.
Now the question.. on Linux... we should be after LLDB correct? not gdb
it's the freedom oriented realm where all the Linux level latest goodies are expected to shine, right?
Let the Microsoft burdens be upon us no more.
Fingers crossed.
let's try to debug.
wrote on 25 Feb 2024, 09:38 last edited byeh.. it's been long since I've seen password field neither encrypted nor 'asterixed'...
95/169