QtCreator 2.0.9.5: What happened to make sis build steps for symbian device?

[aezust]

I just upgraded to Qt SDK 1.1.

In Qt SDK 1.0, the make sis build steps were found in the "projects" section for a symbian device.
It was an extra custom build step that just "showed up" for any projects that built for a symbian device.
I could also see the "make gcce" and "make sis" build steps if I expanded something.

I can't find those custom build steps anymore when I use Qt SDK 1.1. Have they moved ?
Where do I enter the path to my my .crt and .key files for self-signing now?

[epenttin]

Hi,

you do that in Run Settings part in Qt Creator for Symbian Devices.

- Eero

[forceoflight]

Okey, and what next? Do I have to press play button? I don't want to run my app in device. I just want to make a sis file.

Nokia you have screwed badly this Qt development Kit. You have way too many packages available: SDK, Frameworks, Qt Mobility, TP, Beta, Qt Creator and on the top of that you provide SDK's that can make non Ovi compatible binaries. I have been programing years for Nokia devices. How do you think someone new will understand your process? Go and setup Android development kit and see how easy their process is. I know quite a lot from mobile industry. I have been a programmer or being a manager for example to iOS, Bada, Android, J2ME, BlackBerry and WinMo product based projects. I have submitted apps to for example Android Market, Samsung Applications, App World, Play Now, Cellmania and Mobile Market. All I can say that Qt development kit is a MESS. Now, is time to think why competitors will outrun Qt and developer will move away from Nokia ecosystem.

[ltomuta]

Hmm, what can I say ... you're right about the first paragraph, but I think there is already a bug report / suggestion on this topic at http://bugreports.qt.nokia.com
It would be great if you could find it and add your comments there, with a vote in favour of returning to the good old makesis on build approach.

Then again, the Qt Creator team claims to have made the change based on developer feedback, so maybe it is only you and I that don't like the approach.

The second paragraph it is nothing but a copy paste of your statements from your other thread, please find my answer there.