PDA

View Full Version : Qt 4.2.2 Cleanlooks debug vs. release (Windows XP)



Byngl
29th November 2006, 19:15
I've just upgraded to 4.2.2 and have noticed some odd behaviour between the release and debug version when using the Cleanlooks style. They should be the same, right? Also, the percent bar in the debug version is being drawn beyond the boundary of its box.

Can anyone else verify or refute this?

Edit:
I've mislabelled the images. So it appears that the release version is the one that is messed up.

wysota
29th November 2006, 21:45
4.2.2? AFAIK the latest release is 4.2.1...

Byngl
29th November 2006, 22:09
Qt 4.2.2, the latest maintenance release to the Qt 4.2 series, is now available. Qtopia Core 4.2.2 has also been released to Qtopia Core customers.

Qt 4.2.2 includes a wide range of bug fixes and optimizations. For detailed information about these changes, please consult the changes-4.2.2 file found in the package, or visit http://www.trolltech.com/developer/notes/changes/changes-4.2.2.

Byngl
30th November 2006, 04:44
I should have also mentioned that I am using the VC60 version... :o

I am able to duplicate the erroneous look when I run the example supplied (in examples\widgets\styles), so I have submitted a bug report to the Trolls.

Brandybuck
30th November 2006, 05:56
4.2.2 is not currently available in Open Source version, but commercial license holders can see it in their distribution directory. I received an "early adopter" email about about it earlier this week. I expect the official announcement and open version any day now.

Byngl
4th December 2006, 19:02
In case anyone else is experiencing this issue, there is now a task-tracker (http://www.trolltech.com/developer/task-tracker/index_html?method=entry&id=141909) for it.

jens
25th January 2007, 12:56
I've just upgraded to 4.2.2 and have noticed some odd behaviour between the release and debug version when using the Cleanlooks style. They should be the same, right? Also, the percent bar in the debug version is being drawn beyond the boundary of its box.

Can anyone else verify or refute this?


I'm suspecting a possible compiler bug here. Could you try to compile in release without compiler optimizations?