I would like to create a symbol definition table to be used in a separate application during linking. ARM's armlink linker has the following flag but I'm using arm-eabi:
--symdefs=filename
The GNU objcopy utility has an option --extract-symbol that may do what you want. It generates an object file with only symbol data - no actual code or data.
It is specifically intended to generate a .sym file for use in the VxWorks RTOS which has a command shell and dynamic linker/loader that uses this information. It is also used by the VxWorks host shell and source-level debugger.
The binutils nm utility on the other hand generates output very similar to armlink's --symdefs which you might easily post-process into exactly the form you need.
-Wl,-Map -Wl,mapfile -Wl,--cref
added to the final gcc (link) command line should do the trick.
This the correct answer from arm gnu launchpad:
Do you intend to load the symdef file with the GNU toolchain or with armcc one? If the former I think using nm on the object file and then linking with -R <filename> would work. So you would do arm-none-eabi-nm -D ./prog > ./prog.defsym after linking prog and then arm-none-eabi-gcc -Wl,-R,./prog.defsym when you want to use this.
Related
In gcc we have -x option that use to specify how to treat source file.
For example suppose we have a csourcecode file without any extension like .c.
In gcc simply using -x c before express csourcecode force compiler to use it as valid c source code.
gcc -x c csourcecode -o out
Is there any similar option for gfortran?
From the helpful gcc manual: [Note 1]
You can specify the input language explicitly with the -x option:
-x language
Specify explicitly the language for the following input files
(rather than letting the compiler choose a default based on the
file name suffix). This option applies to all following input
files until the next -x option. Possible values for language
are:
(snip)
f77 f77-cpp-input f95 f95-cpp-input
If you're using a Unix-y system and you took the precaution of installing the gcc documentation package (apt-get install gcc-doc on debian/ubuntu-like systems), then you could have found that information directly by typing
info gcc --index-search=x
because the GCC info files are index by option name. Most of the time you don't need to type --index-search=; info gcc x would suffice.
Notes:
In case it's not obvious, gfortran is just another front-end for the Gnu compiler collection ("gcc" for short), and accepts any options that would be accepted by the gcc command.
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 ??
I had list of objects in a text file. Now i want to link these objects using ld.exe command in gcc. Is there some option/logic that allows me to do so? Thanks in advance.
Now i want to link these objects using ld.exe command in gcc.
You should ~never use ld directly.
ld is not part of GCC, but rather a separate program (part of binutils).
Yes: gcc accepts response files, and you can link your objects like so:
gcc -o foo #your_list.txt ...list required libraries here...
I want to know when i should use ld linker instead off gcc. I just wrote a simply hello world in c++, of course i include iostream library. If i want make a binary file with gcc i just use:
g++ hello hello.cpp
and i've got my binary file.
Later i try to use ld linker. To get object file i use:
g++ -c hello.cpp. Ok that was easy, but the link command was horrible long:
ld -o hello.out hello.o \
-L /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.8.4/ \
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.8.4/crtbegin.o \
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.8.4/crtend.o \
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/crti.o \
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/crtn.o \
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/crt1.o \
-dynamic-linker /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 -lstdc++ -lc
I know fact that gcc uses the ld.
Using gcc is better in all cases or just in most cases? Please, tell me somethink about cases where ld linker has advantage.
As you mentioned, gcc merely acts as a front-end to ld at link time; it passes all the linker directives (options, default/system libraries, etc..), and makes sure everything fits together nicely by taking care of all these toolchain-specific details for you.
I believe it's best to consider the GNU toolchain as a whole, tightly integrated environment (as anyone with an experience of building toolchains for some exotic embedded platforms with, say, dietlibc integration will probably agree).
Unless you have some very specific platform integration requirements, or have reasons not to use gcc, I can hardly think of any advantage of invoking ld directly for linking. Any extra linker-specific option you may require could easily be specified with the -Wl, prefix on the gcc command line (if not already available as a plain gcc option).
It is mostly a matter of taste: you would use ld directly when the command-lines are simpler than using gcc. That would be when you are just using the linker to manipulate a small number of shared objects, e.g., to create a shared library with few dependencies.
Because you can pass options to ld via the -Wl option, often people will recommend just using gcc to manage the command-line.
I have seen makefiles use the -DLINUX flag but can't find any documentation on it.
Is there a place to find information on tools like 'gcc' that are more up-to-date than
the officially released manuals?
It just defines the LINUX symbol for the C preprocessor.
Probably there are pieces of the code that look like:
#ifdef LINUX
//Linux-specific code
#elif defined WINDOWS
//Windows-specific code
#endif
It's the -D option controlling the preprocessor. It defines the LINUX macro, that you can then use with #ifdef.
According to man gcc:
-D name
Predefine name as a macro, with definition 1.
Hence, it let define a constant from the compilation command line.
It defines a preprocessor macro named LINUX. That's it. The macro itself, LINUX, is not a predefined one, it's probably used for a cross-platform codebase where specific sections of code are enabled for a Linux target. For this purpose, one could actually have re-used the predefined linux or __linux__ ones (see the output of gcc -dP -E - < /dev/null to get all the predefined macros on your system).
See http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.8.2/gcc/ for the standard documentation on gcc (that's obviously for GCC 4.8.2). To my knowledge, that's the best place to look for if this documentation is not already installed (or up-to-date) on your system.