Important: Please read the Qt Code of Conduct - https://forum.qt.io/topic/113070/qt-code-of-conduct
Using Qt creator WITHOUT Qt
Bro last edited by Bro
I don't like Qt, and don't need Qt.
However I really like Qt creator but I can't seem the be able to make it do anything without Qt.
So far here is what I did :
I Installed MinGW.
I installed Qt Creator 3.4.0 (Latest stable i guess)
Qt creator found "C:\MinGW\bin\gdb.exe" by itself and assigned it as a debugger automatically
Then I told creator that "C:\MinGW\bin\mingw32-make.exe" was a compiler. (Somehow creator didn't find the compiler by itself even though it is exactly at the same place as the debugger. It seems like Qt folks really don't want me to use MinGW's compiler...)
I tried to setup the ABI field for the compiler (Tools/Options/Build&Run/Compiler -> ABI:) but none of the combination seemed to help.
I created a kit with the above compiler and debugger. The "Qt Version" field write "none" and it will remain like that because I really don't want to bother downloading 1 gb of uselessness for windows/linux/osx (= 3gb for nothing). The kit name (in the kit list) is black but in italics so I don't know what this mean (it's not red and thus I guess it's "not invalid" ? = valid ?). Yet when I try to load a .pro file it complains there is no valid kit found.
This is really frustrating. I'm starting to think it is literally impossible to get qt creator to work without being babysitted by Qt sdk.
Does my only option is to learn how makefiles works and send everything to mingw32-make.exe myself manually and keep using qt creator to edit my codes (because it's such a good code editor that it would still be worth the hassle) ?... no wait, Qt creator cant even open the project without Qt so that doesn't even works...
...or maybe there is a very old version of Qt creator that doesn't force me to use Qt ?
Or maybe is there another IDE out there worth the title (Codeblock is unusable on osx and Eclipse is a pain on every OS) (My opinion of course).
Or maybe I'm just missing a setting in the build & run menu... but I really tried everything that made sense to me.
Thanks for the help, I really need it.
sneubert last edited by sneubert
you can of course use Qt Creator to build projects without Qt.
Instead of setting up MinGW by yourself you can use the online
installer where you have the choice to not download
any prebuild Qt binaries, but a suitable MinGW compiler together with creator.
If you even don´t want to use qmake for generating Makefiles
feel free to download a recent cMake.
btw: mingw32-make is not a compiler, try g++.exe (or similar)
cybercatalyst last edited by
The problem is that *.pro files are Qt. They're built using qmake, which is part of the application framework.
You can build non-Qt projects with QtCreator, but you would need to use another build system which is not a part of Qt. I think cmake is a good choice then. QtCreator supports multiple build systems through plugins.
However, from what I am reading you seem to be a very unexperienced developer. Most likely, you just don't understand Qt/the development value in Qt despite it's file size. You also seem to miss that the 1GB is only the development files, which is rather minimalistic for a development environment. For example, XCode or Visual Studio take up several GB just for one operating system.
It's your time, so you can do whatever you want. But I friendly suggest you dig into the Qt docs and make yourself clear what the benefits of Qt are, might save you some lifetime until you finally realize that file sizes don't matter as much as you'd expect right now.
Apollo13 last edited by
Sorry to revive this thread but your topic is exactly what we are looking for at the moment as well. We extensively use Qt for a lot of projects and just upgraded to Qt 5.12 LTS. Problem is, Visual Studio 2013 (Compiler Version 12.0) is apparently not supported anymore - I suppose due to the poor C++11 support.
Unfortunately we got a few projects (plugins for an application built with VS 2013) which still require VS 2013 itself, but do not rely on Qt. For that we'd really like to define a kit in QtCreator without any Qt set and just the VS 2013 compiler defined - but as you have said that is possible...
@Apollo13 Which build system is used for these projects? If its not Qmake, then you can probably set up a kit without Qt version and ignore the warnings.
I'd just install the minimal Qt for that compiler. should take 1-2 GB disk space, but bring no harm.