For an application I would like to store a collection of files together, and have them appear in the filesystem as a single file so its easy to manage. I am currently storing everything in a folder.
I would like to keep things accessible so you can manually edit the inside contents if neccesary.
One way to do this would be to create a zip archive and give it a custom extension other then .zip. Then it appears as a filetype and if needed you can unpack and access the content, but for normal use keep it hidden.
I can't seem to find a convenient way to do this. Boost and zlib can do the compression but don't work with archives. I found libzip but I have a hard time understanding how to use it and to me it seems that it only reads/writes zip archives without doing the actual compression.
Is there a more convenient way to tackle this?
Can you call system functions for creating an archive on OSX from c++ / Carbon?
Is there another way to make a folder appear as a single file?
In OSX, you can create Document Packages (similar to application bundles) which are treated as a single file in the Finder, but are really just directories with some internal structure.
Apple does not zip these packages, but they do provide the functionality you describe and they can be created and accessed through CoreFoundation by using CFBundleRef .
From the documentation:
... The important thing to remember about creating a document package is that it is just a directory. As long as the type of the document package is registered (as described in “Registering Your Document Type”), all you have to do is create a directory with the appropriate filename extension. (The Finder uses the filename extension as its cue to treat the directory as a package.) You can create the directory (and create any files you want to put inside that directory) using the standard BSD file system routines ...
As 1st step, simple rename the folder and add the extension .bundle, e.g. Myappdir.bundle
That's will show the whole folder as one file with a lego-like bundle icon.
The next step is you must create one Info.plist file inside.
Related
This may sound like I'm just looking for a .exe file, but I'm not all that familiar with windows. I have been using pyinstaller to turn my apps into binaries. My app relies on a lot data directories and third party binaries that I package within the same directory as the executable binary. For Mac, this makes things easy because the user only has to click on MyApp.app inside the applications directory which is like a link to MyApp.app/Contents/MacOs/MyApp. This way MyApp never has to be touched and is all bundled together with the data directories (also loaded inside of MyApp.app/Contents/MacOs/).
However, I can't really find a windows equivalent. While Pyinstaller can create a directory with my data directories and executable inside of it, if the user ever moves the .exe file inside the directory, the app will never work (because it loses its relative location to the data directories). Is there such a thing that can package this directory like on MacOS so the user just has to click on a single .exe file that links to the .exe inside the directory packaged within it? That way we can just pass around one directory. Like a Mac.app?
Win32 apps store data within the executable file as resources, which allows the single file solution, but they can't be accessed using normal file APIs, there are a separate set of functions for resource handling. (This implies that resources aren't so useful for things that absolutely have to be files, like images of helper executables.)
Win32 also has alternate data streams, which are more similar to what you're used to with .app packages, separating a local identifier from the actual filename by $DATA:. But those only work on NTFS, get lost by many file management applications, never have been very popular, and are now effectively deprecated by Microsoft (by preventing access from Windows Store apps).
I have a folder which contains an executable file (Exec.exe) and a lot of files that Exec.exe needs to run. Currently, it's pretty ugly having all of those files there when I only need to run the one executable. Is there any way to bundle them all into another executable that runs Exec.exe and also contains all of the files Exec.exe needs to run? Thanks for any help!
Yes, but I would recommend you only do it if you need to.
You can achieve this by adding your files as resources in your exe project, so they are added into the exe's binary at compile time. You can then access the files directly from your exe at runtime by using LoadResource and related functions. I'd recommend reading up on the Portable Executable (PE) file format if you're considering this route.
This is the way to do it if you, and again I stress, need to have only a single binary where you can still access your files. There are obvious downsides to doing this, such as it's much more coding to access the data as it's embedded in your application binary, and you can't easily update the files (check out resource hacker tool) without re-compiling your binary to include the new data.
If the only reason you want to do this is because it's "pretty ugly" seeing the additional files in the same directory as your exe, consider moving them into another directory, for example,
from:
MyExeDir
--myExe.exe
--myFile1.txt
--myFile2.dll
--myFile3.dat
to:
MyExeDir
--myExe.exe
--dat
----myFile1.txt
----myFile2.png
----myFile3.dat
or:
MyExeDir
--bin
----myExe.exe
--dat
----myFile1.txt
----myFile2.png
----myFile3.dat
So all the "ugly" looking files are out of the way.
Why don't you create a shortcut of "Exec.exe" and keep it somewhere handy ? If whats that you want ?
Or if you want to distribute your app, you can use Winrar/Winzip (winrar is the best) to create a compressed .exe of your entire folder, making "Exec.exe" as your startup app. Use the SFX option in winrar.
There are plenty of questions and answers about how to ignore the __MACOSX/.DS_Store files created by Mac OS X...
I would like to know how to go the other way, and include the __MACOSX/.DS_Store files, specifically when working with zip files created on another platform. Simply zipping up the file structure is not enough; it seems that there is some kind of hidden flag in the zip file that is marking that part of the file structure in the zip as the mac resource fork.
Creating the resource fork on the other platform isn't the issue, I'm specifically trying to generate a zip file that properly includes already existing resources. Any thoughts? Will I need to create my own zip tool?
My application is to be written using wxWidgets, but the question may be related to using gettext in general.
For the application named app, some sources suggest I sould create <lang>/ subdirectory, create the app.po file inside with the translation, and convert it to the distributed app.mo file in the subdir.
Another approach is to create app.pot (i.e. the template from the sources via xgettext), and to msginit and msgmerge it to the <lang>.po for the language.
For the first approach, more .mo files can be put inside the <lang>/ subdirectory. Also the wxLocale::AddCatalog() gets the domain name (where the domain can naturally be app, wxstd, etc.). On the other hand, the <lang>.po file name is descriptive on itself -- wherever it is located.
What are the pros and cons of the two approaches? Is there any text that explains the path to be chosen?
Thanks for your time and experience,
Petr
The Unix convention is to use app.mo for binary catalogs, see the contents of /usr/share/locale directory. Sometimes lang.po is however used for the source ones, as done in wxWidgets itself (see its locale subdirectory), but they're still installed into language-specific subdirectory using the app-dependent name.
I am using Xcode as part of my build for OS X, but since it is not the only IDE used, files may be added from the file system directly.
As far as I can tell, there are two ways of adding folders:
Folder reference picks up all the changes on the file system but does not register any of the files as sources.
Recursive copy allows for the files to be built but I need to constantly maintain the file structure
I am wondering if there was a way to setup Xcode to build all of the files that are a part of the folder reference or failing that, if there is a quick script to automagically fix file system discrepancies.
I came up with proof-of-concept solution that works, but will require some work to use in production. Basically, I set up a new "External Target", which compiles all source files in a given directory into a static library. Then the static library is linked into the Main Application.
In detail:
Create a directory (lets call it 'Code') inside your project directory and put some source code in it.
Create a Makefile in the Code directory to compile the source into a static library. Mine looks like this.*****
Create an External Target (lets call it 'ExternalCode') and point it to the Code directory where your source and Makefile reside.
Build the ExternalCode and create a reference to the compiled static library (ExternalCode.a) in the Products area of your project. Get Info on the reference and change the Path Type to "Relative to Built Product".
Make sure ExternalCode.a is in the "Link With Binary Libraries" section of your main target.
Add the ExternalCode target as a dependency of your main target
Add the Code directory to your "User Header Search Paths" of your main target.
Now when you drop some source files into 'Code', Xcode should recompile everything. I created a demo project as a proof of concept. To see it work in, copy B.h/m from the 'tmp' directory into the 'Codes' directory.
*Caveats: The Makefile I provided is oversimplified. If you want to use it in a real project, you'll need to spend some time getting all the build flags correct. You'll have to decide whether it's worth it to manually manage the build process instead of letting Xcode handle most of the details for you. And watch out for paths with whitespace in them; Make does not handle them very well.
Xcode's AppleScript dictionary has the nouns and verbs required to do these tasks. Assuming your other IDE's build scripts know what files are added/deleted, you could write very simple AppleScripts to act as the glue. For example a script could take a parameter specifying a file to add to the current open project in Xcode. Another script could take a parameter to remove a file from the current project. Then your other IDE could just call these scripts like any other command line tool in your build script.
I'm not aware of any built-in functionality to accomplish this. If you need it to be automatic, your best option may be to write a Folder Action AppleScript and attach it to your project folder.
In all likelihood it would be a rather difficult (and probably fairly brittle) solution, though.
It's not pretty, and I think it only solves half your problem but... If you recursively copy, then quit xcode. Then you delete the folders, and replace them with simlinks to the original folders, you at least have files that are seen as code, and they are in the same files as the other IDE is looking at... You still will need to manually add and remove files.
I sort of doubt that there's a better way to do this without some form of scripting (like folder actions) because xcode allows you to have multiple targets in one project, so it's not going to know that you want to automatically include all of the files in any particular target. So, you're going to have to manually add each file to the current target each time anyway...
One way to import another file from add/existing file:
and set your customization for new file that added .
see this