I'm writing a simple C++ application in Visual Studio. It also has a setup project.
It works well on my development machine, but when I'm installing this application on user's machine it requires Visual C++ Redistributable Package. I'm wondering why does my application require C++ Redistributable? Standard C++ runtime library is shipped with Windows, isn't it?
The only version of the C runtime library which is shipped by Microsoft with most of 32 bit Windows versions is msvcrt.dll. This library provides a typical set of library functions required by C and C++ programs. These include string manipulation, memory allocation, C-style input/output calls, etc.
Visual Studio 6.0's compiler links against this library, so if you are developing in VS 6.0 you shouldn't encounter any problems on most users' machines.
However, if you are developing in VS 2005, VS 2008, VS 2010, VS 2012, VS 2013 or VS 2015, you have to distribute additional C runtime libraries along with your application. This is because their compilers link against msvcrt80.dll, msvcrt90.dll, msvcrt100.dll, msvcrt110.dll, msvcrt120.dll and msvcrt140.dll respectively, which are not shipped with Windows.
Solutions:
Possible solution is to link statically with runtime library, but it may cause a lot of problems in case you have both .exe and .dll in your application. Don't do that.
To be more specific, I'll allow myself to quote a part of this answer:
Using /MT is risky if you create DLLs as well as an EXE. You'll end up
with multiple copies of the CRT in your program. This was especially a
problem with earlier versions of VS where each CRT would get its own
heap, not so much with VS2012. But you can still have ugly runtime
problems when you have more than one "errno" variable for example.
Using /MD is highly recommended to avoid such lossage.
Another possible solution is to require an appropriate Microsoft Visual C++ Redistributable package to be installed on the user's machine.
It may be done by specifying this requirement in prerequisites property in your setup project.
Also, you can distribute the runtime dll by including in your setup project the appropriate "merge module". In this case don't forget to add the appropriate "policy merge module" to avoid errors caused by incorrect runtime version.
Finally, you can just put required DLLs in the same folder in which your application is installed.
Further reading:
"Redistributing Visual C++ Files" - Official MSDN documentation
Even though some comments said that «link statically with runtime library, but it may cause a lot of problems when you have both .exe and .dll in your application.» this is NOT TRUE. First we DON'T statically link DLLs! We statically link OBJs and LIBs. LIBs are static libraries; DLLs are dynamic libraries, and you may choose to use LIBs (static) or DLLs (dynamic). It's entirely up to you to choose. The ONLY drawback (for the DLL fans) is that if you want to update one library, you need to compile and link again. I personally deploy ALL my software static linked and because of that I earn the bonus of don't even need installers. The software I develop is 100% portable (a feature that in the pre-installer era was general procedure), and the final user is free to simple COPY from one folder to another or even from the hard drive to flash drive (or vice-versa). The error message «DLL not found.» simply doesn't exist ... NEVER.
Some folks think of statically linking as toy software: WRONG! I can write a full featured application that connects to a DBMS (Oracle, SQL Server, ...) or any other kind of application.
Related
How can I deploy my Win32 application as an EXE application so that others (who don't have VC++ installed) can use it?
I am using VC++ 2010 on Windows 7.
If you switch to "Release" mode when you compile your finished program (rather than "Debug", which you use for debugging it during development), you should get an executable that will run on a computer without Visual Studio installed.
However, that executable will still require the appropriate version of the C runtime library to be installed. For example, if you developed it in Visual C++ 2010, you will need version 10 of the CRT installed. This is a freely redistributable library, downloadable here.
So, you have several options for deployment:
Manual Deployment
Give people the bare executable file, and include the installer for the redistributable in another folder on the installation media. If they copy the executable to disk and cannot run it because they get an error message, they should install the CRT libraries from the included redistributable installer. Then the executable will run just fine.
This works great if you have relatively a computer-savvy audience, or you're deploying to a fixed range of machines (like across a school or corporation). But it doesn't work so well for general deployment to customers.
In fact, you don't even need the installer. You can just place the CRT DLLs in the same folder as your executable and it will run just fine. This is how I test apps I'm developing on clean VMs. It works like a charm. There's no need to run the CRT installer at all. You'll find these required libraries as part of your Visual Studio installation:
<Program Files folder>\Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0\VC\redist\x86
Automated Deployment
Create a setup program that automatically installs your application along with any dependencies it requires, including the CRT redistributable. This is what you see most commercial applications doing. I recommend it for anything but the most trivial of apps.
Full versions of Visual Studio 2010 (i.e., not Express versions) can create a Setup Project that you can customize as needed to work as an installer for your application. But this is no longer the recommended way to create an installer, and this functionality has been removed from the latest version of Visual Studio, 2012.
So I recommend using something else, even if you have an older version of VS where the Setup Project is available. No point in wasting time creating something you'll just have to update later. My personal favorite choices for creating setup programs are WiX and Inno Setup. Both are free, and extensive documentation is available online.
Creating simple setups that don't have to do very much is really quite straightforward—this is likely the case for you, as all you need to do is install the CRT redistributable if it is not already there. I'd be willing to bet money you can find a walkthrough or example online for how to do this in either WiX or Inno Setup.
If you need to do more complicated stuff, both of these setup packages support it. They are extensively customizable and very powerful, it just takes more work to get it all going.
Static Linking
If you absolutely need to be able to distribute a bare executable that is guaranteed to simply work when double-clicked, you will need to switch your project to statically link in the required runtime libraries. This means that all of the CRT code is actually embedded by the linker directly into your executable, and means that you don't have to redistribute the CRT libraries separately.
The disadvantage of this approach is that the only way to benefit from improvements, bug fixes, and security patches released for the CRT is to recompile and redistribute your application. If you dynamically link (the default), your app will automatically benefit from enhancements to the installed version of the CRT libraries. Microsoft strongly recommends against static linking.
To switch between these modes in Visual Studio, follow these steps:
Right-click on your project in the Solution Explorer and select "Properties".
Ensure that the "Release" configuration is selected in the drop-down box at the top of the dialog.
Expand the "C/C++" item in the TreeView, and select "Code Generation".
Change the setting of the "Runtime Library" option to "Multi-threaded (/MT)".
A further description on what these cryptic compiler switches mean and which ones you should use when is given in my answer here.
Final Note: The "Debug" versions of the CRT libraries are not redistributable, but that doesn't matter because you should always distribute the "Release" build of your app anyway, never the "Debug" build.
In general, the odds are pretty good your EXE file will run on any version of Windows you built it on or higher.
All bets off, for example, if you built using Visual Studio 2012 Professional on Windows 7, and you try to run it on Windows 95. But otherwise, you're probably safe :)
The best way to test if you have any dependencies is to install and run on a "clean machine".
The best way to get (and reuse) a "clean machine" is with a VM.
I recommend VMWare. But Virtual Box and Windows Virtual PC are also viable choices.
As far as an installer, I'd strongly encourage you to look at InnoSetup
I hope that helps!
Make sure you build in release mode. As Floris Velleman said, you're using unneeded libraries for standalone executable.
For more information, you can check Compiler Options (MSDN).
I have a DLL generated from Visual Studio 2010, but I need to link it to a 2008 project that needs to remain 2008 for various other reasons. Anyone run into similar trouble or have advice?
VS2010 is .NET 4.0
VS2008 is .NET 3.5
So the answer for your question is NO because if the dll is making use of any of the specific .NET 4 features, it wont get executed in your 3.5 environment. Also it may happen that the assembly mapping is different in both the .NET version and that may become one of the reason for the 4.0 dll not getting executed in 3.5 env.
I am not sure, but you may look at COM Interop features. May be it can help you in achieving what you want. But it would be too messy !!
Dynamic-Link libraries (DLL) are an integrated part of the Windows platform from its very beginning. DLLs allow encapsulation of a piece of functionality in a standalone module with an explicit list of C functions that are available for external users. In 1980’s, when Windows DLLs were introduced to the world, the only viable option to speak to broad development audience was C language. So, naturally, Windows DLLs exposed their functionality as C functions and data. Internally, a DLL may be implemented in any language, but in order to be used from other languages and environments, a DLL interface should fall back to the lowest common denominator – the C language.
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/28969/HowTo-Export-C-classes-from-a-DLL
Standardized C style interface, should be ok, though that pertains only to non managed C++.
The requirements listed in the 3ds Max SDK state that plug-ins for 3ds Max 2011 must be built with Visual C++ 9.0 (Visual Studio 2008).
If I create a DLL with a different version of Visual C++, won't the binary be identical? Is this simply a matter of choosing the right compiler settings?
What problems will I run into if I try to build a plug-in using Visual C++ 2010 (Visual Studio 2010)?
I don't know specifically for 3ds Max, but the usual reason is the C Runtime library. If the host application uses the DLL version of the CRT, then plugins will also need to use the same version.
Otherwise, imagine the case where your plugin creates some memory using malloc(), and passes it to the host application, which uses it and then calls free(). If your plugin and the host application are using different CRTs, the host's call to free() will fail or crash because it wasn't the host's CRT that malloc()ed that block of memory.
The binary won't be identical but the binary interfaces should be, which is what you need.
The reason you can't use VS2010 is because it is not yet production quality. They think you should wait for VS2010 SP1 at a minimum.
You think they are just being obstinate and stubborn, eh? Ruining all your fun. They have reasons. Good ones.
Because of bugs like this:
https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/565959
I use both visual studio 2008 and 2010 for plugin development.
Only difference I've seen is that the user need the vs c++ runtime version for 2010\2008.
But there might be pitfalls - but I have not encountered any problems with it yet.
C++ doesn't have a standardised binary interface. The compiler "mangles" each symbol name (i.e. each function or static data) to include information about namespaces and signature, so that namespaces, argument overloading, &c. can work. Each compiler is free to decide how to do this. Different MSVS compiler versions do name mangling in different ways, so in general you can't link a C++ library compiled with 2005 and a library compiled with 2008 together: this includes loading a 2008 DLL from a 2005 executable (for example). You can do this if the interface between the libraries is C, as long as the relevant functions are marked with extern "C" to prevent name mangling. And in practice the differences are not always that great: for example, I never had trouble using VS2005 SP1 to compile a library for 3ds Max 9, which supposedly requires VS2005 with no service pack.
Microsoft is trying to fix this incompatibility, so in VS2010 they introduced an option, so VS2010 can produce binaries compatible with VS2005 programs or VS2008 programs (maybe some earlier versions too, I forget). If you have to create a plugin to work with multiple 3ds Max versions, and you don't get caught out by any VS2010 bugs, this is probably a good option. Also, the Intel C++ compiler has a mode where it produces binaries that are compatible with an MSVS version of your choice, which might be a better option for you if it's for hobby use or you can afford the slightly expensive price tag. (They achieve this by copying the way MSVS does name mangling.)
I need to create a basic app to check the availability of components and if necessary download them to any computer running Windows XP or above. Which language (preferably free or VS 2010) should I use to create such an application which can run without requiring any frameworks installed beforehand?
could you please elaborate? By static library, do you mean a dll that should reside alongside the exe? or do you refer to available dlls in windows/system32? Also, will programs compiled using this method require the 'Visual C++ Redistributable'?
When C++ executable links to a static library, then the linker includes the library's object code in the same file as the EXE. The result is a single *.exe file, and the library does not need to be shipped as a separate *.dll.
The DLLs in windows/system32 are typically O/S files. They're O/S-specific. You may/must/do not ship/redistribute these files (Microsoft does). Your EXE (or e.g. the C run-time library to which you have statically linked) depends on (requires) some of the functions which are exported from these DLLs. These O/S DLLs tend to be backward-comptible, so that if you target the O/S API which exists on XP, your code will also run on Vista.
I'm guessing that by 'Visual C++ Redistributable' you mean "the Visual C run-time library", whose DLL filename is something like msvcrt80.dll. This is what I talked about in my first paragraph: if you choose the build option (available under project/properties) to statically link to the C run-time library, then the code you require is statically linked into your EXE and you don't require (don't run-time link to) this DLL.
Visual C++ 6 with MFC. If you use a later version of Visual C++ then your Windows XP targets will need libraries for them.
Edit: Comments pointed out that the CRT and MFC library can be linked staticly even in later versions. That is right and I forgot.
While not specifically designed for this, I recommend InnoSetup for setup bootstrappers. It doesn't require any libraries, provides functionality for common setup requirements and has PascalScript to extend it. There are a lot of plugins available, and you can do anything left with a custom script (basically like Delphi). PascalScript can import API functions, so you can really do anything. With InnoCallback, you can even get callbacks from the API - I used this to bootstrap a lot of MSI setups into a single package using the MSI API.
If you download it, get the QuickStart Pack, which includes a good editor and the InnoSetup preprocessor.
I work on C/C++ using Visual Studio 2008. I believe that I am not concerned about which runtime libraries are being used by my code as I have the developer setup. But when the executable is shipped, the runtime libraries being used need to be shipped alongwith. Am I right?
If yes, how can I identify which shared libraries are actually getting used? Or are there any libraries that we can ship without having to know this?
You're correct, you need to ship a version of the C runtime libraries that matches the version you linked your application against. If you're compiling with Visual Studio 2008, then you want to use the Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 Redistributable Package. As other folks mentioned, you can inspect your application's manifest file to see exactly which version of the C runtime libraries it's linked against.
Before shipping, it's always best to install your product on a clean (i.e., non-developer) virtual machine and run Microsoft's Dependency Walker utility to verify that your application uses the correct C runtime libraries.
you need to ship dll files with you.
you can guess most of them and for the rest you can use a program "Dependency Walker" which shows you dependencies of the executable.
Look at the generated manifest file to see which version of the CRT you need to ship with. It's possible to change which version of the CRT you link to as seen here but it doesn't seem to be recommended.