I have just begun reading the book Advanced Programming in Unix Environment and try to compile the first example code, just the same as in this question.
Although the problem for the compilation is solved using the command,
gcc -o myls myls.c -I SCADDRESS/include/ -L SCADDRESS/lib/ -lapue
I looked it up in the GCC manual, but what does the GCC option -lxxx mean? Where xxx stands for the base name of a header file (in this case, it's apue.h). According to the manual, xxx should be some library files, either end with .so for shared object files, or with .a for static libraries.
This is documented in ยง2.13 "Options for Linking" in the GCC manual:
-llibrary
Search the library named library when linking.
It makes a difference where in the command you write this option; the
linker searches processes libraries and object files in the order they
are specified. Thus, `foo.o -lz bar.o' searches library `z'
after file `foo.o' but before `bar.o'. If `bar.o' refers
to functions in `z', those functions may not be loaded.
The linker searches a standard list of directories for the library,
which is actually a file named `liblibrary.a'. The linker then uses this file as if it had been specified precisely by name.
The directories searched include several standard system directories
plus any that you specify with `-L'.
Normally the files found this way are library files--archive files
whose members are object files. The linker handles an archive file by
scanning through it for members which define symbols that have so far
been referenced but not defined. But if the file that is found is an
ordinary object file, it is linked in the usual fashion. The only
difference between using an `-l' option and specifying a file name is that `-l' surrounds library with `lib' and `.a'
and searches several directories.
The -l option tells GCC to link in the specified library. In this case, the library is apue, and that it happens to line up with the name of a header file is just how the apue coders designed their project.
In reality, the -l option has nothing to do with header files. Like cas says in the comments, read the man page; it'll give you much more information.
Related
I'm experimenting a bit with building DLLs on windows using MINGW.
A very good summary (in my opinion) can be found at:
https://www.transmissionzero.co.uk/computing/building-dlls-with-mingw/
There is even a basic project which can be used for the purpose of this discussion:
https://github.com/TransmissionZero/MinGW-DLL-Example/releases/tag/rel%2Fv1.1
Note there is a cosmetic mistake in this project which will make it fail out of the box: the Makefile does not create an "obj" directory - Either adjust the Makefile or create it manually.
So here is the real question.
How to change the Windows DLL name so it differs from the actual DLL file name ??
Essentially I'm trying to achieve on Windows, the effect which is very well described here on Linux:
https://www.man7.org/conf/lca2006/shared_libraries/slide4b.html
Initially I tried changing "InternalName" and ""OriginalFilename" in the resource file used to create the DLL but that does not work.
In a second step, I tried adding "-Wl,-soname,SoName.dll" on the command that performs the final link, to change the Windows DLL name.
However, that does not seem to have the expected effect (I'm using MingW 7.3.0, x86_64-posix-seh-rev0).
Two things makes me say that:
1/ The test executable still works (I would expect it to fail, because it tries to locate SoName.dll but can't find it).
2/ "pexports.exe AddLib.dll" produces the output below, where the library name hasn't changed:
LIBRARY "AddLib.dll"
EXPORTS
Add
bar DATA
foo DATA
Am I doing anything wrong ? Are my expectations wrong perhaps ?
Thanks for your help !
David
First of all, I would like to say it's important to use either a .def file for specifying the exported symbols or use __declspec(dllexport) / __declspec(dllimport), but never mix these two methods. There is also another method using the -Wl,--export-all-symbols linker flag, but I think that's ugly and should only be used when quick and dirty is what you want.
It is possible to tell MinGW to use a DLL filename that does not match the library name. In the link step use -o to specify the DLL and use -Wl,--out-implib, to specify the library file.
Let me illustrate by showing how to build chebyshev as a both static and shared library. Its sources consist of only only 2 files: chebyshev.h and chebyshev.c.
Compile
gcc -c -o chebyshev.o chebyshev.c -I. -O3
Create static library
ar cr libchebyshev.a chebyshev.o
Create a .def file (as it wasn't supplied and __declspec(dllexport) / __declspec(dllimport) wasn't used either). Note that this file doesn't contain a line with LIBRARY allowing the linker to specify the DLL filename later.
There are several ways to do this if the .def file wasn't supplied by the project:
3.1. Get the symbols from the .h file(s). This may be hard as sometimes you need to distinguish for example between type definitions (like typedef, enum, struct) and actual functions and variables that need to be exported;
echo "EXPORTS" > chebyshev.def
sed -n -e "s/^.* \**\(chebyshev_.*\) *(.*$/\1/p" chebyshev.h >> chebyshev.def
3.2. Use nm to list symbols in the library file and filter out the type of symbols you need.
echo "EXPORTS" > chebyshev.def
nm -f posix --defined-only -p libchebyshev.a | sed -n -e "s/^_*\([^ ]*\) T .*$/\1/p" >> chebyshev.def
Link the static library into the shared library.
gcc -shared -s -mwindows -def chebyshev.def -o chebyshev-0.dll -Wl,--out-implib,libchebyshev.dll.a libchebyshev.a
If you have a project that uses __declspec(dllexport) / __declspec(dllimport) things are a lot easier. And you can even have the link step generate a .def file using the -Wl,--output-def, linker flag like this:
gcc -shared -s -mwindows -o myproject.dll -Wl,--out-implib,myproject.dll.a -Wl,--output-def,myproject.def myproject.o
This answer is based on my experiences with C. For C++ you really should use __declspec(dllexport) / __declspec(dllimport).
I believe I have found one mechanism to achieve on Windows, the effect described for Linux in https://www.man7.org/conf/lca2006/shared_libraries/slide4b.html
This involves dll_tool
In the example Makefile there was originally this line:
gcc -o AddLib.dll obj/add.o obj/resource.o -shared -s -Wl,--subsystem,windows,--out-implib,libaddlib.a
I simply replaced it with the 2 lines below instead:
dlltool -e obj/exports.o --dllname soname.dll -l libAddLib.a obj/resource.o obj/add.o
gcc -o AddLib.dll obj/resource.o obj/add.o obj/exports.o -shared -s -Wl,--subsystem,windows
Really, the key seems to be the creation with dlltool of an exports file in conjunction with dllname. This exports file is linked with the object files that make up the body of the DLL and it handles the interface between the DLL and the outside world. Note that dlltool also creates the "import library" at the same time
Now I get the expected effect, and I can see that the "Internal DLL name" (not sure what the correct terminology is) has changed:
First evidence:
>> dlltool.exe -I libAddLib.a
soname.dll
Second evidence:
>> pexports.exe AddLib.dll
LIBRARY "soname.dll"
EXPORTS
Add
bar DATA
foo DATA
Third evidence:
>> AddTest.exe
Error: the code execution cannot proceed because soname.dll was not found.
Although the desired effect is achieved, this still seems to be some sort of workaround. My understanding (but I could well be wrong) is that the gcc option "-Wl,-soname" should achieve exactly the same thing. At least it does on Linux, but is this broken on Windows perhaps ??
Here are a couple of ways to use functions from a static library, built with ar (i.e. libSOMTEHING.a):
ld -o result myapp.o -Lpath/to/library -lname
ld -o result myapp.o path/to/library/libname.a
Since we omit any dynamic libraries from the command line, this should build a static executable.
What are the differences? For example, are the whole libraries linked in the executable, or just the needed functions? In the second example, does switching the places of the lib and the object file matter?
(PS: some non-GNU ld linkers require all options like -o to be before the first non-option filename, in which case they'd only accept -L... -lname before myapp.o)
In the first line, a search for a dynamic library (libname.so) occurs before the static library (libname.a) within a directory. Also, the standard lib path is also searched for libname.*, not just /path/to/library.
From "man ld"
On systems which support shared libraries, ld may also search for
files other than libnamespec.a. Specifically, on ELF and SunOS
systems, ld will search a directory for a library called
libnamespec.so before searching for one called libnamespec.a. (By
convention, a ".so" extension indicates a shared library.)
The second line forces the linker to use the static library at path/to/lib.
If there is no dynamic library built (libname.so), and the only library available is path/to/library/libname.a, then the two lines will produce the same "result" binary.
If I have this line in the make file:\
libpqxx_Libs = -L/share/home/cb -lpqxx-2.6.9 -lpq
Does this indicate the compiler to use the lpqxx-2.6.9.so shared object file or does this indciate the compiler to use all the .so in the foler lpqxx-2.6.9? Or is this something else altogether?
Thanks for the help!
-L in this context is an argument to the linker, that adds the specified directory to the list of directories that the linker will search for necessary libraries, e.g. libraries that you've specified using -l.
It isn't a makefile command, even though it's usually seen in makefiles for C projects.
The -L is actually not a makefile command (as you state it in the title of your question).
What actually happens in this line is an assignment of a value to the variable libpqxx_Libs -- nothing more and nothing less. You will have to search in your makefile where that variable is used via $(libpqxx_Libs) or ${libpqxx_Libs}. That is most likely as a argument in a link command, or a compile command that includes linking.
In that context, the meaning of -L and -l can be found in, for example, the gcc man pages, which state that
-llibrary
Use the library named library when linking.
The linker searches a standard list of directories for the li-
brary, which is actually a file named `liblibrary.a'. The linker
then uses this file as if it had been specified precisely by
name.
The directories searched include several standard system direc-
tories plus any that you specify with `-L'.
What is the purpose of those command line options? Please help to decipher the meaning of the following command line:
-Wl,--start-group -lmy_lib -lyour_lib -lhis_lib -Wl,--end-group -ltheir_lib
Apparently it has something to do with linking, but the GNU manual is quiet what exactly grouping means.
It is for resolving circular dependences between several libraries (listed between -( and -)).
Citing Why does the order in which libraries are linked sometimes cause errors in GCC? or man ld http://linux.die.net/man/1/ld
-( archives -) or --start-group archives --end-group
The archives should be a list of archive files. They may be either explicit file names, or -l options.
The specified archives are searched repeatedly until no new undefined references are created. Normally, an archive is searched only once in the order that it is specified on the command line. If a symbol in that archive is needed to resolve an undefined symbol referred to by an object in an archive that appears later on the command line, the linker would not be able to resolve that reference. By grouping the archives, they all be searched repeatedly until all possible references are resolved.
Using this option has a significant performance cost. It is best to use it only when there are unavoidable circular references between two or more archives.
So, libraries inside the group can be searched for new symbols several time, and you need no ugly constructs like -llib1 -llib2 -llib1
PS archive means basically a static library (*.a files)
I'd be curious to understand if there's any substantial difference in specifying libraries (both shared and static) to gcc/g++ in the two following ways (CC can be g++ or gcc)
CC -o output_executable /path/to/my/libstatic.a /path/to/my/libshared.so source1.cpp source2.cpp ... sourceN.cpp
vs
CC -o output_executable -L/path/to/my/libs -lstatic -lshared source1.cpp source2.cpp ... sourceN.cpp
I can only see a major difference being that passing directly the fully-specified library name would make for a greater control in choosing static or dynamic versions, but I suspect there's something else going on that can have side effects on how the executable is built or will behave at runtime, am I right?
Andrea.
Ok, I can answer myself basing on some experiments and a deeper reading of gcc documentation:
From gcc documentation: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Link-Options.html
[...] The linker handles an archive file by scanning through it for members which define symbols that have so far been referenced but not defined. But if the file that is found is an ordinary object file, it is linked in the usual fashion. The only difference between using an -l option and specifying a file name is that -l surrounds library with lib' and.a' and searches several directories
This actually answers also to the related doubt about the 3rd option of directly specifying object files on the gcc command line (i.e. in that case all the code in the object files will become part of the final executable, while using archives, only the object files that are really needed will be pulled in).