First, some background: I'm attempting to write drivers and applications for Android on the Beagleboard-xM.
I've downloaded their android development kit, installed it, and can succesfully build everything in it using the directions at http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/TI-Android-ICS-4.0.3-DevKit-3.0.0_DevelopersGuide
I've been able to make my own skeleton kernel module following the steps in http://tldp.org/LDP/lkmpg/2.6/lkmpg.pdf without issues. I can copy the .ko file to the android device, insmod, rmmod, etc.
I got tired of the basic shell given by the default build and thought I'd add busybox. I tried following the directions at http://omappedia.org/wiki/Android_Installing_Busybox_Command_Line_Tools, but I get a compile error on standard libc header files.
After digging around quite a bit, I've determined that the pre-built cross compiler provided in the TI android development kit wasn't searching the right paths.
I confirmed this by creating my own .c file that included and tried to compile it with
arm-eabi-gcc blah.c -o blah
and was met with the same results (unable to find the header file in question)
'arm-eabi-gcc -print-prog-name=cc1' -v gives me this:
ignoring nonexistent directory
"/usr/local/google/home/android/cupcake_rel_root/usr/local/include"
ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/lib/gcc/arm-eabi/4.4.3/include"
ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/lib/gcc/arm-eabi/4.4.3/include-fixed"
ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/lib/../arm-eabi/include"
ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/google/home/android/cupcake_rel_root/usr/include"
None of these paths ever existed on my fresh install of ubuntu 10.04. My cross compiler I used is at /usr/TI-Android/prebuilt/linux-86/toolchain/arm-eabi-4.4.3/. I didn't do anything except run the bit .bin file that was the android development kit (which seemed more like simply extracting itself from the .bin file; I don't remember it doing anything else)
So, a few questions:
how the heck did everything else (i.e. android, x-loader, u-boot, the kernel) build by just putting the bin of the cross compile tool into $PATH (like the how-to documents say). I assume it (make menuconfig?) does some magic in fixing up the include paths based on the location of the executable, but...
Why doesn't busybox work the same way since it seems to be built with a similar looking infrastructure?
How do I make it so I can cross compile my own applications?
I assume I've missed a step and should have done some sort of install/configure on the pre-built cross compiler, but information is horribly scant. I appeal to you, open source gods, to point my way across this dark and stormy sea.
For posterity, it seems that the prebuilt tools included with the android development kit are only enough to build the kernel and don't include libc or other library header files. (The NDK tools are 'different' and the build environment is even more different because it has its own version of libc--bionic. That build environment might have been able to build what I wanted, but I would have had to muck with Androidy makefiles, etc.)
I ended up having to get Code Sourcery arm-none-linux-gnueabi (must get the linux-gnueabi one to have the linux system header files needed), and everything worked reasonably smoothly after that.
Related
I do have a strange behavior with a flutter package I am building. It uses FFI to integrate a custom-made c++ library.
When I run flutter run -d windows --release the code starts and I do have the window with the code running.
However, when I go to the directory where the executable is stored and I run it, the program starts but the library is not loaded. I do see also that when I run flutter test, it complains that it cannot load the library. I have checked that the dll's needed are there using dependenciesGUI.exe and it seems that everything is fine, at least on my side. I do see however that within kernel32.dll I am missing ext-ms-win-oobe-query-l1-1-0.dll.
I am using Visual Studio 2022 with the x64 configuration.
Any idea on what could be the issue? For me it is VERY puzzling to be able to run the software through flutter but not with the executable directly.
Thanks!
Yours,
Pi-r
EDIT:
I compared my package with a fresh package built with flutter. With a fresh package, the behavior is the one expected: I can have the program run normally or with flutter run.
I compared the libraries of the clean package with the ones linked in my package. They are the same (with the same missing dlls which do not seem to pose an issue).
I also checked that the exported functions I needed where present -> It is the case.
The only difference I can see is that using flutter run adds a series of libraries to the path. Has I am a Linux person, I do not know of a tool that could be used to detect what is the missing library. I am open to write a separated c++ code that would load the library if it could help me identify what is the issue... ANY tips/tricks would be greatly appreciated :)
I finally found the issue I had and it is related to a different behavior under Linux and under Windows (as you will guess, I am a Linux person).
When compiled under Linux, I can force the compiler to link multiple libraries relatively to my main library. I discovered that this is not the case under Windows. Either the dlls are in the executable folder or in the Path.
For the sake of code clarity, my package uses two different libraries. Library A, which is compiled from flutter with the ffi package, called library B. First the second library was in the asset folder and with the relative linking of Linux, it was working perfectly. But it did not work under Windows until I explicitly copied the two in the same directory of the executable.
The solution was then to ensure that both libraries are copied correctly in the directory of the flutter executable. This can be done easily if you add the dependent libraries to the bundle variable in the CMakeLists.txt of the package.
However, this doesn't work when you do the testing (flutter test). As the bundle mechanism seems to be not propagated to the test function. Therefore here, the only solution is to copy the dependent libraries to the root directory of the source code :vomiting_face:
I must point out that this is only the case under Windows, for Linux, it works out of the box...
I am using Code::Blocks with wxwidgets and I have include and lib folders under Document\wxwidgets. I am very new to c++ libraries. In Code::Blocks project initialization, I entered the location for wxwidgets. Then in setting/global enviornment variables I entered in base the Document\wxwidgets again. Still, I am not able to run the app. It shows the error in the include/wx/platform.h file where it says
C:\Users\Programming coder\Documents\wxwidgets\include\wx\platform.h|148|fatal error: wx/setup.h: No such file or directory|
I am not able to solve this and would appreciate some help. Also I checked and the wx folder does not seem to be there in the location. I don't know if that is normal.
Also, I downloaded the headers(include) from the wxwidgets github repo download page, wxWidgets-3.1.1-headers.7z. Any help appreciated.
Also, I am aware some questions exist already, but their problems are in different because most are using linux. Also I am using Code::Blocks IDE.
You need to build wxWidgets itself before building the applications using it. Its build process will create the setup.h file which is currently missing.
Note that, in principle, you could also use precompiled binaries, but in this case you must use exactly the same compiler as was used for compiling them, i.e. TDM gcc.
I'd like to use open source library on Windows. (ex:Aquila, following http://aquila-dsp.org/articles/iteration-over-wave-file-data-revisited/) But I can't understand anything about "Build System"... Everyone just say like, "Unzip the tar, do configure, make, make file" at Linux, but I want to use them for Windows. There are some several questions.
i) Why do I have to "Install" for just source code? Why can't I use these header files by copying them to the working directory and throw #include ".\aquila\global.h" ??
ii) What are Configuration and Make/Make Install? I can't understand them. I just know that configuration open source with Windows need "CMake", and it is configuration tool... But what it actually does??
iii) Though I've done : cmake, mingw32-make, mingw32-make install... My compiler said "undefined references to ...". What this means and what should I do with them?
You don't need to install for sources. You do need to install for the libraries that get built from that source code and that your code is going to use.
configure is the standard name for the script that does build configuration for the software about to be built. The usual way it is run (and how you will see it mentioned) is ./configure.
make is a build management tool (as the tag here on SO will tell you). One of the most common mechanisms for building code on linux (etc.) is to use the autotools suite which uses the aforementioned configure script to generate build configuration information for use by generated makefiles which make then uses to build the software. make is also the way to run the default build target defined in a makefile (which is often the all target and which usually builds the appropriate library/binary/etc.).
make install is a specific, secondary, invocation of the make tool on the install target which (generally) installs the (in this case previously) built code into an appropriate location (in the autotools/configure universe the default location is generally under /usr/local).
cmake is, again as the SO tag says, a build system that generates configuration files for other build tools (make, VS, etc.). This allows the developers to create the build configuration once and build on multiple platforms/etc. (at least in theory).
If running cmake worked correctly then it should have generated the correct information for whatever target system you told it to use (make or VS or whatever). Assuming that was make that should have allowed mingw32-make to build the software correctly (assuming additionally that mingw32-make is not a distinct cmake target than make). If that is not working correctly then something is still missing from your system (and cmake probably should have caught that).
But to give any more detail you will need to give more detail about what errors you are actually getting and from what command.
(Oh, and on Windows, and especially if you plan on building your software with VS (or some other non-mingw32-make tool) the chances of you needing to run mingw32-make install are incredibly small).
For Windows use cmake or latest ninja.
The process is not simple or straight, but achievable. You need to write CMake configuration.
Building process is not simple and straight, that's why there exists language like Java(that's another thing though)
Rely on CMake build the library, and you will get the Open-Source library for Windows.
You can distribute this as library for Windows systems, distribute and integrate with your own software, include the Open Source library, in either cases, you would have to build it for Windows.
Writing CMake helps, it would be helpful to build for other platforms as well.
Now Question comes: Is there any other way except CMake for Windows Build
Would you love the flavor of writing directly Assembly?
If obviously answer is no, you would have to write CMake and generate sln for MSVC and other compilers.
Just fix some of the errors comes, read the FAQ, Documentation before building an Open Source library. And fix the errors as they lurk through.
It is like handling burning iron, but it pays if you're working on something meaningful. Most of the server libraries are Open Source(e.g. age old Apache httpd). So, think before what you're doing.
There are also not many useful Open Source libraries which you could use in your project, but it's the way to Use the Open Source libraries.
I'm working on a project focusing on the MIPS32 arch (little endian). The vendor gave me a GNU toolchain to compile my project targeting their embedded Linux version and everything works just fine. It's a GCC+Linux+uClibc toolchain.
However, recently I've needed to add some features to my uClibc build, so I've tried to replicate the vendor's toolchain in my own box.
Everything worked fine with the help of crosstool-ng, but when I try to compile my project, I get strange linker warnings all over the place:
warning: linking abicalls files with non-abicalls files
From what I researched, these are pretty serious warnings. Analyzing my object files with readelf will give me almost identical output. There are no .abicall section anywhere in those files. This holds true for both my project's object files to my toolchain's ones.
What could be wrong here? I don't even know where to start debugging this.
I can't stand XCode, but really love OpenFrameworks, and I know it works on Linux+Win32 so I don't see why it should be XCode dependent. If I need to have XCode installed that's fine, I just don't want to use it at all.
Xcode internally uses gcc/llvm. in fact from the command line you can cd into a directory that contains an openFrameworks project and just type xcodebuild. but this won't allow you to edit the project file and add new source code, etc.
the Linux makefiles could be adapted to work on OSX as well. they already contain a lot of the information necessary about finding the correct source files, library paths etc. however Linux allows us to install many more components as shared system libraries, while on OSX we link most of the libs statically, so a number of extra library paths would need to be added. probably the biggest gotcha is that everything has to be compiled 32 bit, which means passing -arch i386 everywhere, so you can't just install dependant libs using Homebrew or MacPorts. we are in the process of transitioning to 64 bit but there are still some QuickTime calls that require us to stick with 32 bit, mainly around accessing legacy video capture devices that a lot of us still use for computer vision.
like #cdelacroix points out, we only maintain Xcode project files on OSX. this is mainly due to the lack of a decent alternative. there is a version of Code::Blocks for OSX but it is not very well supported, has some issues with native gui rendering and tends to lag behind the other platforms. Xcode is also the easiest way to install a toolchain on OSX so for most users installing Xcode is necessary.
if you do get a makefile based build system working, and would be interested in maintaining it medium to long term, please consider contributing it to the GitHub repository, it would be gladly accepted.
As of March 2013, openFrameworks has official makefile support for compiling the library itself. However, at the time of this writing, the changes haven't yet been merged into the stable release. You'll need to clone the Git repository and switch to the development branch.
git clone https://github.com/openframeworks/openFrameworks
cd openFrameworks && git checkout develop
cd libs/openFrameworksCompiled/project
make
As far as I can tell, we still need to use the unofficial solutions for compiling apps against the library.
You need Xcode, or at least a set of compilers (more information is available here), but otherwise, no, you can edit/work with the code in whatever editor or environment you want.
Here's a link to a makefile which will compile an OpenFrameworks application on OsX:
https://gist.github.com/labe-me/1190981
Place the makefile in the apps' directory and run make. Tested on OsX 10.6, but haven't tried with addons yet.
As #mipadi said, there is no requirement to actually use Xcode, you can do pretty much everything you do in Xcode with make or cake or any of your build system of choice. All you have to do is find the right set of command line options to pass to the usual tools (compiler, linker, strip, etc.), and sometimes the easier way is to... look in the Xcode build window how it is doing stuff (expand the lines with the small button on the right of each line).
For example you can link with your framework of choice with ld -framework Framework -FPathToFramework foo.o or your dynamic library with ld -lLib -LPathToDylib foo.o. You might have to learn about #rpath, #loader_path and install_name_tool to ship a self-contained packaged application.
As for OpenFrameworks, the "requirement" for Xcode is that the authors decided to maintain only Xcode project files. I just looked at how they do it, they ship source code and Xcode project files that build static libraries, so it will be even more simple for you (although you will need to link the library dependencies by hand). You will have to choose between compiling everything from source in your build system (if you want more customization power without touching Xcode), or just produce the 2 static libraries (openFrameworks.a and openFrameworksDebug.a) with Xcode once, then use them in your build system (recommended until you really need continuous customization).