I have a .dll I want to statically link to my C++ exe. I have created a header I believe to contain accurate function signatures, so I need to build a lib file from my dll. I use dumpbin to get the names of the functions in the dll, but most functions are nameless and have only ordinals. What should I put in my .def file then?
I have managed to find few batch scripts that create lib file from dll but they just ommit those nameless functions.
An in depth tutorial on lib, def, obj files and linking that goes to the bottom of the matter and is easy to follow would be greatly appreciated from many people I think, although I will be happy to just solve my problem aswell.
I am using Visual C++ Express 2010.
If the functions are only exported by ordinal (that is each export is decorated with NONAME) then the name doesn't matter you can assign whatever name you like. Of course you better know what each ordinal is supposed to be.
Related
Below is an excerpt from link1.
Microsoft introduced __export in the 16-bit compiler version of Visual
C++ to allow the compiler to generate the export names automatically
and place them in a .lib file. This .lib file can then be used just
like a static .lib to link with a DLL. In newer compiler versions, you
can export data, functions, classes, or class member functions from a
DLL using the __declspec(dllexport) keyword. __declspec(dllexport)
adds the export directive to the object file so you do not need to use
a .def file.
I understand the above paragraph to an extent but not very well.
Below is an excerpt from link2.
When building the DLL, the linker uses the .def file to create an
export (.exp) file and an import library (.lib) file. The linker then
uses the export file to build the DLL file. Executables that
implicitly link to the DLL link to the import library when they are
built.
Now, this makes me confused and made me ask the below questions:
Could anybody, in simple words, tell me what the term exporting
really means? I believe this is making an object accessible from one
piece of the code to other - but hey !!
When building projects with old libraries, I see .def file in majority
of them. But the latest compilers automatically exports objects. Would
the presence of the .def file cause any conflict when converting a older
version visual studio project to the newer one?
What is the use of the .lib(the so called import file) after the generation
of the .dll. Can it be safely deleted?
ARRGGGH !! What is the difference between a static library(.lib) and import library(.lib)? Blunder, huh? But still !!
Is the windows specific phenomenon? I believe it is not. What is the Linux counterpart of the so called import file?
Please feel free to rephrase the question if it is not already lucid.
tell me what the term exporting really means?
It simply means telling the linker that it needs to put an entry into the DLL's export table. The operating system loader uses it later to glue code in different modules together at runtime.
I see .def file in majority of them
Could be very old projects. Or it was just never started as a project that was meant to create a separate module. Like a static library so the source code doesn't have the __declspec attributes. Cross-platform libraries are pretty likely to fit that bill. The C and C++ language specifications still don't have a way to create modules in a standardized way. Everybody does it, nobody does it the same way. Massive time drain.
What is the use of the .lib(the so called import file)
It is necessary in the project that uses the DLL. The linker needs to know that the identifier lives in another building and can't be resolved at link time. It puts an entry in another table that the operating system loader uses, the import table. It is a very simple file, it just list the names of the exported identifiers. Theoretically the DLL itself could be used by the linker to figure this out. Practically that doesn't work because the exported name doesn't have to match the actual name.
What is the difference between a static library(.lib) and import library(.lib)
A static library contains code that is linked into the project that uses the library. An import library does not contain code, just a hint that the code is available elsewhere.
Is the windows specific phenomenon?
Roughly, yes. The Unixes have the same concept but implement it very differently.
I know it's impossible to reverse a dll into a c++ code so I would like to collect as much as possible details from it.
It's not my dll, so I don't have the source code of course. Which program should I use?
Well, if you are skilled you can disassemble the DLL and understand all of its functions. This takes a substantial amount of time, but if you do that you can reverse it back to source by hand.
Otherwise, you can start by using a tool like Dependency Walker to get the DLLs and functions it depends on, and the functions it exports. From there you can find functions that interest you, and use a disassembler like IDA to see what they do.
You can see the list of exported functions by using the dumpbin tool. If C++ functions are exported, you might be able to infer parameters by the name mangling.
You can extract all the resources from the DLL by just "opening" it as a file for resource viewing in Visual Studio. If the DLL is a COM based DLL, there's a small chance the Type Library is embedded as a resource inside it. And if you have the Type Library, you can #import it to reconstruct the header files for the public interfaces.
That's about as good as it gets.
You need a PE file viewer. This will tell you the exports from the DLL and you can get the data in the .text section to see the machine code.
I don't know how to do the following:
I'm using MS Visual C++ 6.0
I have a Win32 DLL project which is compilable.
I have another project, this time a Win32 Console project which uses
the DLL by including it's header file and linking the .lib file of
the DLL.
Now I want to have another project, similar to the second BUT without using the header file and the lib file.
Is that possible? Everywhere I read you need either dll+lib+h or dll+h. If thought if you know the interfaces, a DLL file is sufficient?
Btw, by "using a DLL" I mean, using the Classes and Functions defined in the DLL.
It is possible if you just have plain "extern C" functions. If this is the case the approach could be loading the dll with LoadLibrary, and then import each function with GetProcAddress, of course you need to know the function signature to create a properly declared function pointer. Using classes per contrary is almost impossible.
If your DLL contains classes, there are good chances that it is a COM component.
If this is the case, the #import directive (that you use like #include) builds some temporary include files containing the interface details. You should use COM to access your objects.
Otherwise, if you have a 'plain' DLL with C++ classes, you could access the exported symbols using linker: instruct it to dump the map (see here), to know the mangled names. But I don't think that's possible to build manually the interface...
This is interview question.
Is it possible to link lib dynamically like a DLL ?
For example, for DLL, we use LoadLibrary and call exported functions.
Is it possible to use lib file in same manner?
No. .lib library are statically linked, and that is the purpose they're created for, to resolve the name symbols at link-time by Linker, and link-time occurs before runtime. They're often referred to as "static libraries" (that is why I added this tag in your question!). That is the brief story of lib.
However, you can create a DLL wrapper, if you really want to link at runtime.
No. Create a DLL instead or, if you do not have the source, wrap the functionality in the .lib with own DLL interface.
No. It's not possible. A DLL is module with a PE32 header with all information to load it into a process. A LIB is only a archive of OBJ files.
And despite others say it's easy to wrap a DLL around it, this can be quite difficult. The reason is, that a .LIB not only resolves some dependencies but can also have unresolved externals.
As long as these unresolved externals require only the compiler's runtime library wrapping in a DLL might work. You can check this when you create a DLL project, probably with a minimal C++ source, and try to compile. Than you see, if further externals must be resolved with other libraries.
One important problem may arise with memory management. When yo link statically with a .LIB you will use all the same definitions. If your library comes with own implementation, let's say of malloc-stlye functions, this will not be linked to your application as long as you add all these symbols to the EXPORT list. Finding the list of public symbols that should be included in the EXPORT table may be a pain.
Yes - not directly, but with a very small amount of work.
Create a new .DLL project, link the .lib, define which functions you want to export in a .DEF file then compile.
It's pointed out by this answer:
Failed to link mysql5.1.39\bin\libmySQL.dll
But I don't understand why,.dll is essentially the same as .lib except for there is only one copy of it used by different processes.
Does it have anything to do with the IDE?I'm using visual c++ 2008 express
UPDATE
Anyone know a free tool to convert .dll into .lib in windows?
You are wrong on two counts. Firstly, DLLs and LIBs (static libraries) are very different beasts. The LIB you are talking about (I think) is the export library, which is simply a list of names in the DLL. This library is typically produced when the DLL is compiled and is shipped with the DLL if the DLL is intended to be linked to by other developers.
To use a DLL with a modern IDE (I don't use VS) you typically include the matching .LIB (export library) in the project. At run-time you must make sure the DLL is available to your program - the simplest way to do this is to put the DLL in the same directory as the executable.
And secondly, DLLs can be used with C++.
DLL are specific windows executables which load on runtime. Their equivalent in Linux is the *.so .
If you want to understand what's the difference between a DLL and a static lib see here.
Main reason has probably something to do with dll-file being an output of the linker (link.exe). This command line utility doesnt know how to read dlls, only how to write them.
Actually sometimes .lib-files contain more than a list of functions. For example libpng.lib works as a standalone file, without any dll file.
In order to use a DLL in C/C++ you need to link with what is called an import lib. This is a small .lib that contains the names/ordinals the DLL exports in a format that the linker understands. Once this has been linked in, the resulting binary will be able to use the DLL. If you do not have the appropriate import lib, your C/C++ compiler should come with a tool to generate one from the DLL.
You can use the following analogy to understand the difference between a dll and a lib file.
the dll is like the source .cpp file while the lib is the header .h file.
While this is not exactly true, the DLL holds the executable code while the LIB file tells the linker how to glue the code together.
It is also possible (in some cases) to generate the lib from the dll. Basically, all you need to know to call a function is the function entry point in the dll, the number of parameters and the size of each parameters. Sending relevant information is then your own problem.