I have a shared library (*.so) created using Real View Compiler Tools (RVCT 3.2) on windows target. Then I try to link this *.so file with my application using gcc on linux system.
What is the gcc option to link this shared library with my application linux?
My question is, is the -shared option, which is used as
gcc -shared myfile.so
..., used to create the SO file or to link the SO file? I believe it creates something like:
gcc -lmyfile.so
Is this enough? Or is there any other switch to tell the linker that it's a dynamic library (shared object)?
What worked for me was:
gcc -L. -l:myfile.so
gcc -lmyfile should be enough (provided that your library is named libmyfile.so). The linker searches for shared objects when possible and AFAIK prefers them.
Related
I don't understand the difference between the two types of libraries, and many websites say that they are the same thing, but at school we use two different commands to create them
dynamic library
$ gcc -shared -o libsample.so lib.c
$ gcc -o main main.c -ldl
to execute:
$ ./main ./libsample.so
shared library
$ gcc -shared -o libsample.so lib.c
$ gcc -o main main.c -L. -lsample
to execute:
$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ./main
Can someone help me in understanding the difference between the two "codes"?
Dynamic Linked Library (.DLL) is the terminology used by Microsoft Windows. Shared Object (.so) is the terminology used by Unix and Linux.
Other than that, conceptually they're the same.
Regarding your snippets of commands, I guess the difference (and I'm only guessing here, because you didn't show us the relevant parts) is how the library is loaded. There is "link time loading" where the library is tied to the executable by the linker¹. And there is "runtime loading", where the program sort of "ingests" the dynamic/shared library.
runtime loading is done in Windows with the LoadLibrary (there's an …A and a …W variant) function, and on Unix/Linux with dlopen (which is made available by libdl which is linked to by that -ldl library link statement).
1: The linker is the program that creates the actually executable file from the intermediary objects created by the various compiler stages.
Dynamic and shared libraries are usually the same. But in your case, it looks as if you are doing something special.
In the shared library case, you specify the shared library at compile-time. When the app is started, the operating system will load the shared library before the application starts.
In the dynamic libary case, the library is not specified at compile-time, so it's not loaded by the operating system. Instead, your application will contain some code to load the library.
The first case is the normal case. The second case is a special use and it's mainly relevant if your application support extensions such a plug-ins. The dynamic loading is required because there can be many plug-ins and they are built after your application. So their names are not available at compile-time.
I'm Linux rookie and I'm trying to move my library from windows to Linux. It is native binary (mylib.so), but it will be loaded by mono ( [DllImport()] ). I'm using a pcre (Perl Compatible Regular Expressions) in this library. When my .NET executable tries to load mylib.so it throws exception (lib not found). When I set MONO_LOG_LEVEL=debug. I says that my library is found, but pcre library is not.
I've tried to to load it dynamically (dlopen(), dlsym()). When I build executable version of my library linking it with dl (-ldl) it works fine. But when I load it from mono I got SIGSEGV.
I create this library like (for version with dl):
g++ -fPIC -c *.cpp
g++ -shared -Wl,-soname,libmylib.so.1.1 -ldl -o libmylib.so.1.1 *.o
I've create simple test program that link against mylib.so and dl (-l:libmylib.so.1.1 -ldl) and it works.
I think I need to force mylib to link with dl (or directly with pcre), but I don't know how. (I hope it's possible)
All what I want is to create library that use pcre and work under mono.
You incorrectly linked your library: if it uses libpcre you must link it, too, with the -lpcre option.
How do I convince LibTools to generate a library identical to what gcc does automatically?
This works if I do things explicitly:
gcc -o libclique.dylib -shared disc.c phylip.c Slist.c clique.c
cp libclique.dylib [JavaTestDir]/libclique.dylib
But if I do:
Makefile libclique.la (which is what automake generates)
cp .libs/libclique.1.dylib [JavaTestDir]/libclique.dylib
Java finds the library but can't find the entry point.
I read the "How to create a shared library (.so) in an automake script?" thread and it helped a lot. I got the dylib created with a -shared flag (according to the generated Makefile). But when I try to use it from Java Native Access I get a "symbol not found" error.
Looking at the libclique.la that is generated by Makefile it doesn't seem to have any critical information in it, just looks to be link overloads and moving things around for the convenience of subsequent C/C++ compiler steps (which I don't have), so I would expect libclique.1.dylib to be a functioning dynamic library.
I'm guessing that is where I'm going wrong, but, given that JNA links directly to a dylib and is not compiled with it (per the example in the discussion cited above), it seems all the subsequent compilation steps described in the LibTools manual are moot.
Note: I'm testing on a Mac, but I'm going to have to do this on Windows and Linux machines also, which is why I'm trying to put this into Automake.
Note2: I'm using Eclipse for my Java development and, yes, I did import the dylib.
Thanks
You should be building a plugin and in particular pass
libclique_la_LDFLAGS = -avoid-version -module -shared -export-dynamic
This way you tell libtool you want a dynamically loadable module rather than a shared library (which for ELF are the same thing, but for Mach-O are not.)
I want to link an existing shared library (FlashRuntimeExtensions.so) to my C-code while compiling my own shared library. But whatever I try I always get the same error; that the file is in a wrong format. Does anybody have an idea on how to solve this?
Here is my compile command:
$ g++ -Wall ane.c FlashRuntimeExtensions.so -o aneObject
FlashRuntimeExtensions.so: could not read symbols: File in wrong format
collect2: ld gaf exit-status 1 terug
Your command line tries to generate x86 code and link it to ARM code using the native g++ available in your distribution.
This will not work. Use the Android NDK available here: http://developer.android.com/tools/sdk/ndk/index.html
The NDK includes a set of cross-toolchains (compilers, linkers, etc..) that can generate native ARM binaries on Linux, OS X, and Windows (with Cygwin) platforms.
In general .so will be linked using -l.
for example, pthread -lpthread we use.
gcc sample.c -o myoutput -lpthread
But as per #chill's statement, what you are doing in command is correct only.
I suggest you to refer the following link.
C++ Linker Error SDL Image - could not read symbols
It should be an architecture mismatch. I faced this problem once, I have solved it by building the libs in same target platform and it is obvious. If you are using linux or Unix like OS you can see that by file command and if you are using windows you can see that using Dependency Walker. You need to make sure that all the libs matches architecture.
I've known that I should use -l option for liking objects using GCC.
that is gcc -o test test.c -L./ -lmy
But I found that "gcc -o test2 test.c libmy.so" is working, too.
When I use readelf for those two executable I can't find any difference.
Then why people use -l option for linking objects? Does it have any advantage?
Because you may have either a static or a shared version of the library in your library directory, e. g. libmy.a and libmy.so, or both of them. This is more relevant to system libraries: if you link to libraries in your local build tree, you know which version you build, static or shared, but you may not know other systems' configuration and libraries mix.
In addition to that, some platforms may have different suffixes. So it's better to specify it in a canonical way.
The main reason is, -lname will search for libname.a (or libname.so, etc.) on the library search list. You can add directories to the library search list with the -L option. It's a convenience built into the compiler driver program, making it easier to find libraries that have been installed in standard places on the system.