[09:15] <r14> I created app in ubuntu 16.04 using qt shared library and when i run this on my virtual box using ubuntu it gives error  " no version information available "
[09:16] <r14> appdevs
[09:18] <r14>  I created app in ubuntu 16.04 using qt shared library and when i run this on my virtual box using ubuntu it gives error  " no version information available "
[09:19] <adroit_machine> Hi, I have juset finished a course in core and advance java(J2EE), I was wondering if I can contribute to the development of ubuntu in any way?
[09:25] <r14> adroit_machine: you can create application(system) or application for ubuntu store which si used by users.
[12:20] <adroit_machine> Hi everyone, I have just completed a course in advance and core java(J2EE), I was  wondering if I can contribute to the development of ubuntu?
[12:57] <maxed> adddevs, I'm still stuck with implementing payments in my game for Ubuntu Touch. In short, I need to show Qt-based pay ui from non-Qt-based OpenGL application. I filled a bug about lack of API for non-Qt apps, but for now, I'd be happy with any kind of a hack. I guess I need to start a Qt application FROM my app, communicate with using some form of IPC to get information about available...
[12:57] <maxed> ...puchases etc., then somehow show its window over MY app's windo for payment process, then come back. Any ideas how to do any of that? Or am I thinking in the wrong direction?
[13:40] <JanC> maxed: I think you meant "appdevs", not "adddevs"?  :)
[13:40] <maxed> JanC, oh, yeah :)
[16:23] <maxed> Another new interesting problem :) If I try to link my app with Qt, I get error saying  undefined reference to symbol '_ZNSaIcEC2Ev@@GLIBCXX_3.4' in one of my files (but if I don't link with Qt, everything compiles)
[16:24] <maxed> However, if I compile a separate Qt-using app, again, the error does not surface...
[16:28] <maxed> "The kit UbuntuSDK for device-armhf (GCC armhf-ubuntu-sdk-15.04) has configuration issues which might be the root cause for this problem."
[16:29] <maxed> Yes, IDE shows this kit with a warning sign, and warning include "Device type is not supported by Qt version".
[16:30] <maxed> Yet, I see that Qt version in kit is Qt 5.4.1 (device-armhf)
[16:30] <maxed> What is even broken here... Is it IDE (reporting problems with kit which actually aren't problems), or kit, or something else?
[16:33] <maxed> Maybe I should just re-install the whole development package...
[16:36] <maxed> But how to do that properly... Which packages to remove... Questions, questions, and no answers in sight :(
[16:36] <JanC> I think bzoltan is the person who might be able to help with the SDK/IDE
[16:37] <JanC> but not sure he's around right now (it's Saturday evening, after all)
[16:37] <maxed> What better time to mess around with your PC?! :)
[16:38] <maxed> OK, brb, rebooting...
[16:50] <maxed> Actually, the first problem I get (after updating to 4.1 version of SDK) is that sometimes after I change CMakeLists.txt, "Run CMake" breaks. It starts giving error message "Qt Creator needs a CMake Tool set up to build. Configure a CMake Tool in the kit options."
[16:50] <maxed> Even though CMake IS configured, and was working just a minute ago...
[16:59] <maxed> The more I dig, the more things seem completely broken.
[17:00] <maxed> It seems I lost the ability to specify CMake parameters. In theroy, SDK 4.1 provides a nice dialog to set them up instead of just command line specification that was used before.
[17:00] <maxed> In practice, it seems that whatever I set there is NOT passed to CMake.
[17:02] <maxed> Either the new SDK release is beyond broken, or my system is totally misconfigured (possibly after the update). I believe this channel isn't a proper place to discuss this in depth. But I don't want to file bugs, because I'm not sure it's not my fault...
[17:10] <DanChapman> maxed: hey! bzoltan or zbenjamin would be the guys to talk to about SDK issues. I know some others have had similar issues. They might not be around until monday though :-(
[17:11] <maxed> DanChapman, I'll try emailing bzlotan, I think. This might be a lenghty discussion which is better suited to e-mail than to IRC anyway.