This question already has an answer here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
How to pack multiple library archives (.a) into one archive file?
I have a situation where I must provide only a single static library (.a file) to an executable file to build it.
However, I split this lib in 2 parts because one part is common to other executable files and the other is needed only by one.
So now I have lib1 (for exe1) and lib2 (for all exes)
The problem is that I can't provide two libs, so I must merge for exe1, lib2 into lib1
I tried my compiling the lib1.o with -llib2 but even if it works, it looks like if nothing happened
Are there any other way? I'm can only think about using raw object files but I don't like this idea
There's no need for two static libraries; when a static library is used, only the functions (or variables) that are needed are copied to the executable - unlike a shared library where everything in the library is accessible to the executable.
Mechanically, the other question referenced describes what you need to do:
Extract all the object files from one library
Add them to the other library
Or:
files=$(ar t lib1.a)
ar x lib1.a
ar r lib2.a $files
rm -f $files lib1.a
You can even compile each source file, produce all .o and create two different libs by using ar.
The whole library will be produced using all .o (the ones you put in lib1.a and lib2.a together), the smaller one will use just a reduced set of .o files.
Than... a single Makefile, .o files produced once, two libraryes coming out from this job: the complete one (libaplus2.a) and the reduced one (lib1.a).
Related
add_library(target1 funtion.c target1.c )
add_library(target2 funtion.c target2.c )
add_executable(main.out main.c)
target_link_libraries(main.out target1 target2 ${LDFLAGS})
Here is my CMakeLists.txt above.
Both targets need to use the source file function.c. It is able to run though. My concern is that maybe it is not a good behavior for writing CMakeList.txt?
It's totally fine to use the same source file whatever number of times. Sometimes it's even necessary, if you want to compile the same source with different pre-processor/compiler flags.
But if you are concerned with compilation time, you could:
move funtion.c to separate static library and link target1 and target2 libraries against it.
Use object library for function.c and archive output object file to target1 and target2.
Either you have not given enough information in your question or adding function.c to target1 and target2 will not work when you will link them together with main.out because you will have duplicated symbols.
If you are sure they will be no duplicated symbols (for instance because function.c is built with different compilation flags) then your example is correct.
I was shared a static library file('.a' file). When i opened it with 7z, it included two files, one without extension and one with .o extension. What are these files. Is the .o an object file here and which one of these file is actually linked during linking process.
More info about the .a file:
Lets name the file xyz.a:
When i un compress it or view it with 7z, i can see two files:
- xyz
- abc.o
The '.a' file can contain several '.o' files added by the ar utility. It can also contain an index mapping global symbols to the '.o' files that contain them. On some systems (mostly SysV or GNU based), ar's s option is used to update the index. On other systems (mostly BSD based), the index is updated by a separate ranlib utility.
To answer your questions, the '.o' files are the object (code) files that make up the library, the other file is the index, and some subset of the '.o' files will be linked by the linker, with the assistance of the index to determine which '.o' files are needed.
With the ld linker, the option -l foo would search for a dynamic library called libfoo.so or a static library called libfoo.a. Other ld options control whether it looks for a static or dynamic library and where to look for it.
Hello Stack Overflow Community,
i am working on a c project to interleave multiple c programs into one binary, which can run the interleaved programs as treads or forks for benchmarking purposes.
Therefore i run make in each program folder of the desired programs and prelink all .o files with "ld -r" to one new .o file. After that i add a specific named function to each of these "big" .o files, which does nothing but run the main() of each program and providing the argc and argv. Then i use objcopy to localize every global Symbol except the unknown ones and the one of my specific function which shall run the main(). At last i link these manipulated .o files together with my program which runs the specific named functions as threads, or forks or after another.
Now to my Question/Problem:
I ran into a problem with static libs. I was using ffmpeg for testing, and it builds static libs such as libavcodc and libavutil and so on. Unfortunately, "ld -r" does not link .a files. So i tried to extract these libs with ar -x and then link the extracted .o files in the way mentioned above to the "big" new .o file. But i did not work because libavcodec and libavutil both include the file ff_inverse.o. That is obviously not a problem when i just build ffmpeg, which will link these static libraries. But still, both libraries include it, so there must be a machanism which makes the choice, which ff_inverse.o to use and to link. So my Question: How does this work? Where is the difference?
The way ld does it with normal linking is to prioritize the libraries. Libraries listed first in the command line are linked in first, and only if symbols still are unresolved does it move on to the next library. When linking static libraries, it ignores the name of each .o file, because the name is unnecessary, only the exported symbols are necessary. You may want to emulate that behavior, by extracting libraries in a sorted order.
Same source, all that, just want a static and shared version both. Easy to do?
Yes, it's moderately easy. Just use two "add_library" commands:
add_library(MyLib SHARED source1.c source2.c)
add_library(MyLibStatic STATIC source1.c source2.c)
Even if you have many source files, you can place the list of sources in a Cmake variable, so it's still easy to do.
On Windows you should probably give each library a different name, since there is a ".lib" file for both shared and static. But on Linux and Mac you can even give both libraries the same name (e.g. libMyLib.a and libMyLib.so):
set_target_properties(MyLibStatic PROPERTIES OUTPUT_NAME MyLib)
But I don't recommend giving both the static and dynamic versions of the library the same name. I prefer to use different names because that makes it easier to choose static vs. dynamic linkage on the compile line for tools that link to the library. Usually I choose names like libMyLib.so (shared) and libMyLib_static.a (static). (Those would be the names on linux.)
Since CMake version 2.8.8, you can use "object libraries" to avoid the duplicated compilation of the object files. Using Christopher Bruns' example of a library with two source files:
# list of source files
set(libsrc source1.c source2.c)
# this is the "object library" target: compiles the sources only once
add_library(objlib OBJECT ${libsrc})
# shared libraries need PIC
set_property(TARGET objlib PROPERTY POSITION_INDEPENDENT_CODE 1)
# shared and static libraries built from the same object files
add_library(MyLib_shared SHARED $<TARGET_OBJECTS:objlib>)
add_library(MyLib_static STATIC $<TARGET_OBJECTS:objlib>)
From the CMake docs:
An object library compiles source files but does not archive or link
their object files into a library. Instead other targets created by
add_library() or add_executable() may reference the objects using an
expression of the form $<TARGET_OBJECTS:objlib> as a source, where
objlib is the object library name.
Simply put, the add_library(objlib OBJECT ${libsrc}) command instructs CMake to compile the source files to *.o object files. This collection of *.o files is then referred to as $<TARGET_OBJECT:objlib> in the two add_library(...) commands that invoke the appropriate library creation commands that build the shared and static libraries from the same set of object files. If you have lots of source files, then compiling the *.o files can take quite long; with object libraries you compile them only once.
The price you pay is that the object files must be built as position-independent code because shared libraries need this (static libs don't care). Note that position-independent code may be less efficient, so if you aim for maximal performance then you'd go for static libraries. Furthermore, it is easier to distribute statically linked executables.
There is generally no need to duplicate ADD_LIBRARY calls for your purpose. Just make use of
$> man cmake | grep -A6 '^ *BUILD_SHARED_LIBS$'
BUILD_SHARED_LIBS
Global flag to cause add_library to create shared libraries if on.
If present and true, this will cause all libraries to be built shared unless the library was
explicitly added as a static library. This variable is often added to projects as an OPTION
so that each user of a project can decide if they want to build the project using shared or
static libraries.
while building, first (in one out-of-source directory) with -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS:BOOL=ON, and with OFF in the other.
Please be aware that previous answers won't work with MSVC:
add_library(test SHARED ${SOURCES})
add_library(testStatic STATIC ${SOURCES})
set_target_properties(testStatic PROPERTIES OUTPUT_NAME test)
CMake will create test.dll together with test.lib and test.exp for shared target. Than it will create test.lib in the same directory for static target and replace previous one. If you will try to link some executable with shared target it will fail with error like:
error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __impl_*.`.
Please use ARCHIVE_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY and use some unique output directory for static target:
add_library(test SHARED ${SOURCES})
add_library(testStatic STATIC ${SOURCES})
set_target_properties(
testStatic PROPERTIES
OUTPUT_NAME test
ARCHIVE_OUTPUT_DIRECTORY testStatic
)
test.lib will be created in testStatic directory and won't override test.lib from test target. It works perfect with MSVC.
It's possible to pack eveything in the same compilation breath, as suggested in the previous answers, but I would advise against it, because in the end it's a hack that works only for simple projects. For example, you may need at some point different flags for different versions of the library (esp. on Windows where flags are typically used to switch between exporting symbols or not). Or as mentionned above, you may want to put .lib files into different directories depending on whether they correspond to static or shared libraries. Each of those hurdles will require a new hack.
It may be obvious, but one alternative that has not been mentionned previously is to make the type of the library a parameter:
set( ${PROJECT_NAME}_LIBTYPE CACHE STRING "library type" )
set_property( CACHE ${PROJECT_NAME}_LIBTYPE PROPERTY STRINGS "SHARED;STATIC" )
add_library( ${PROJECT_NAME} ${PROJECT_NAME}_LIBTYPE ${SOURCE_FILES} )
Having shared and static versions of the library in two different binary trees makes it easier to handle different compilation options. I don't see any serious drawback in keeping compilation trees distinct, especially if your compilations are automated.
Note that even if you intend to mutualize compilations using an intermediate OBJECT library (with the caveats mentionned above, so you need a compelling reason to do so), you could still have end libraries put in two different projects.
I don't really understand what ar utility does on Unix systems.
I know it can be somehow used for creating c libraries, but all that man page tells me is that it is used to make archives from files, which sounds similar to, for example, tar....
The primary purpose is to take individual object files (*.o) and bundle them together into a static library file (*.a). The .a file contains an index that allows the linker to quickly locate symbols in the library.
Tar doesn't create files that linkers understand.
ar is a general purpose archiver, just like tar. It just "happens" to be used mostly for creating static library archives, one of its traditional uses, but you can still use it for general purpose archiving, though tar would probably be a better choice. ar is also used for Debian .deb packages.
Exactly, ar is an archiver. It simply takes a set of object files (*.o) and put them in an archive that you call a static library.
It takes code in the form of object files (.obj, .o, etc) and makes a static library (archive). The library can then be included when linking with ld to include the object code into your executable.
Take a look at the example usage in the Wikipedia article.
You might want to run man ar to get the full picture. Here's a copy of that on the web.
To quote:
The GNU ar program creates, modifies, and extracts from archives. An
archive is a single file holding a collection of other files in a
structure that makes it possible to retrieve the original individual
files (called members of the archive).
ar is considered a binary utility because archives of this sort are
most often used as libraries holding commonly needed subroutines.
ar is specifically for archives (or libraries) of object code; tar is for archives of arbitrary files. Anybody's guess why GNU refers to these as 'archives', in other environments this utility is called the 'librarian', and the resulting files just libraries.