I'm new to C++ because I need to use a package called Buddy. I'm not quite familiar with the compiling and the library things but I'm trying to learn. The thing is that the package is a bit old and all the instructions are based on Linux/g++, while I'm using Win10/VS2017. The installation instructions mention that:
Edit the file 'config' to specify your compiler and install option
Type make to make the binary
Type make install to copy the BDD files to their appropriate directories
Could you please help me with where I should do with the mentioned instructions? Or is it not possible to use this kind of package within VS2017?
Thank you very much for your time and help.
Related
I've used C++ for several courses in university but the libraries we used in these courses were quite simple to install. When we came across libraries which required a bit more complex installation, our teachers always provided detailed instructions.
This time I'm doing a project on my own. I have downloaded libraries for my own projects in the past. Sometimes the install was easier, sometimes I had to search for hours to do things most people here would do in 5 minutes.
I did some studying to remember some stuff about the compiling process, what dynamic and static libraries are, etc. I feel I understand the most part but it didn't really help me with my efforts to install some libraries. Some people in Github provide instructions for newbies like me, but others, understandably, don't.
I'm saying a lot so I'll get to the point. I will provide links for the library I'm trying to install but in case I'm not allowed to, please let me know so I can rewrite this in a way that is allowed.
I'm trying to install libccd so I can then install fcl. In the instructions 3 ways are mentioned:
Using Makefile
Using autotools
Using Cmake
In all 3 methods, I see specific commands like this :
First of all, where am I supposed to write these commands?
I don't even know how to search this. So, I tried installing with methods I've previously used.
Here are the steps I took:
Downloaded the whole repository.
Made a solution for Visual Studio with Cmake-gui (that's all I know how to do with Cmake,unfortunately it usually was enough so I never learnt more)
Compiled the code in Release mode, which should give me a lib file.
Now,in my own project, I added the relevant include directories of the repository I downloaded and the library directory for the lib file which was produced.
I'm not sure about my last step. I'm pretty sure if I did the installation as proposed in the link(and as required by fcl), I would have a new folder for the library including just an include folder and a lib folder. Now I'm just searching for the correct include files and the lib file in subfolders of subfolders hoping I include the right ones. I'm a bit lost.
I'd really like some general steps(if there are) to installing a library. I know each library has its own ways but I assume the general idea with Cmake or Makefile should be the same. I have tried searching online but I didn't come across a good or detailed enough tutorial. I really don't wanna waste any more days trying to install libraries and I don't want to end up asking here again.
UPDATE:
It looks like there is no standard way to install libraries. Since I'm getting 'close votes' I'll include a specific question:
Are the steps I took correct? What should I do next?
I'm trying to install libccd so I can then install fcl. In the instructions 3 ways are mentioned:
Using Makefile
Using autotools
Using Cmake
In all 3 methods, I see specific commands like this :
First of all, where am I supposed to write these commands?
These instructions are for a UNIX-like system. Makefiles, autotools... these are UNIX things. You'd typically write those build commands into a console window on something like Linux or a Mac.
CMake is a bit more cross-platform. You can find out how to invoke CMake on other SO questions.
You can get Makefiles and such to work on Windows, using projects like Cygwin and MSYS. I'd generally recommend you avoid that unless you really need it.
I'm not sure about my last step. I'm pretty sure if I did the installation as proposed in the link(and as required by fcl), I would have a new folder for the library including just an include folder and a lib folder. Now I'm just searching for the correct include files and the lib file in subfolders of subfolders hoping I include the right ones. I'm a bit lost.
This is where no "general" advice exists. Different authors put their output in different places. If their instructions didn't include this information, you're already doing the right thing. If you get really stuck, you can always just ask them.
I'd really like some general steps(if there are) to installing a library.
No such thing exists, but where these industry-standard tools are involved, you can usually go on general documentation for those tools, or from memory.
I also suggest you shop around for a general book on programming, as general principles should be covered in any good one of those.
I have a package I want to install. I would like the files to end up in a different directory than the installation wizard choses for them.
For example, my Sitecore copy is running at C:\SiteCore\website
The module added files to C:\SiteCore\website\Console
I would like the files to ultimately live at C:\SiteCore\website\sitecore_modules\Console
I am using Sitecore 6.5 rev 111230, but we are planning to upgrade very soon. I would like for my installed packages to migrate seamlessly once we have upgraded. For reference, the package I want to install at the moment is the Sitecore Powershell Extensions. Although, I would prefer to apply a similar method to any future packages that I install.
Is there a secret switch in the package installation process to allow me to do this? Can I do it from the package installation wizard? Is there another way to install packages?
I'm assuming I can't just change the package path and expect everything to keep working. Do I have to update a configuration somewhere (a file or inside the Sitecore CMS GUI) to make the package recognize the new file locations?
The module creator defines where files exist. If you move them you run the risk of something not working. The best idea is to ask the creator on the Marketplace page of the module.
There is no turn-key way to change this.
I guess you cand take the code from MarketPlace and you can modify it.
I don't know how exactly is the licenses with MarketPlace modules, but I think people can modify others code.
Please check on code and also on items, maybe on some fields are values for folder path.
I discovered a way to accomplish this, but it can be quite involved or even impossible, depending on the complexity and size of the package.
First of all, I did take the question to the module creator and had a very helpful and informative conversation with the creator. So thanks for that suggestion - they may even move the install location in a future release, based on my request.
The workaround is to first install the package on a system as normal. Then you figure out everything that comes with the package. For files, this is easy if your Sitecore root is under source control. For items, this is really complicated. You can search for the installed items by owner, if you had the foresight to create & use a unique user for the package installation. Or you can check the untyped files in the package that are essentially xml based item manifests.
Once you have a detailed list, you make the desired modifications to the locations. Then you recreate the package yourself using the Sitecore package designer.
This works for simple packages - I did it to one small package that I hope to get up on the Sitecore marketplace as shared source soon. And by small, I mean it was 2 files and 3 items. The package that prompted me to ask this question would not cooperate with this workaround. The included .dll had some assumptions about the file structure hard-coded into it.
The workaround I took for the more complex package was really quite basic: I just created a new source-code external to the required path. That let me wrap everything up neatly without getting medieval on the package files.
Thanks for both your answers, a very fine +1 to you.
I am currently taking a few different online programming courses, one of which is the Programming Abstractions Stanford course. They have a set of default libraries that are utilized for the class.
You can download that package here:
http://see.stanford.edu/materials/icspacs106b/cs106libs_for_xcode.zip
I am needing assistance with figuring out how to get this package of libraries into Xcode so that I can utilize them with the programs I write. How can I go about doing that so when I create a new project I can create one that has these libraries ready to go, on top of the standard C++ libraries.
Thanks a bunch in advance!
Edit: I did install the .pkg file, but I do not where it installed. How do I utilize the installed library from within Xcode?
Bad luck. From this page:
How to install external library in X-Code 4
You need to install XCode 3.0 in order to use
CS106LibrariesForXcode.pkg library.
XCode 4 have a very different UI and functionality compared to XCode
3. So it would be unwise to study XCode 3 only. But if you're going to study C++ using those tutorials you'd probably want to install XCode 3
and use it.
Old answer [Not applicable]
If the package is a pkg file, you actually needs to install it. Double-click on it, follow the steps.
If you have a warning message,
CS106LibrariesForXcode.pkg” can’t be opened because it is from an
unidentified developer.
then right-click (or ctrl+click) and select open. The warning will then have an open option to allow you to open the package.
Once this is done, just write a new program, and include the headers you need.
All over the web, the answer to the question "uuid.h not found" is "install some kind of rpm or deb file". This may be appropriate for attempting to build some kind of open source project, which has dependencies on other open source, but it does not seem correct for building one's own software.
At my company, most of our own code can be built by getting the code from our source control and building it. Dependent headers, libs, etc. are included in the sync. However, whenever someone gets a uuid.h not found, soemone always says "do apt-get install uuid-dev" or something like that.
My question: what is so different about uuid.h that it must be installed like this? Our code uses ODBC too, but we don't need to "install" odbc headers. Ditto xml parsers, and many other third party code.
I don't think there's anything magical about uuid.h that requires a packages installation; just that installing the package is a simpler step than adding the required files one by one, and it will be easier for you to keep them up to date through your Linux distro's package update utilities.
So installing the package is the simplest way to get a user going, and will keep them up to date without manual intervention. I suspect there is a way to build from source and add the files one-by-one, but that is not as simple.
For those who have compiled from source knows how much of a pain it is to run "./configure" only to find that X library or missing, worst yet it spits out a silly line saying a cryptic lib file is missing, which you then have to go to a web browser type in the missing file cross you fingers that Google can find the answer for you...
I find that very repetitive, so my question is:
Is there a way to work out all the required dependencies but without doing "./configure"
Read the README* or INSTALL* files in the source distribution, if there are any, or look for any documentation on the website where you downloaded it from. If the package is well documented, dependencies will usually be listed somewhere.
Given that there's no mention of a specific pkg has been mentioned, I assume this is a generic "how to avoid using configure" question. From a source tarball, no there is no automated way to work the dependencies out. That's what configure is for (you can always read the Makefiles and autoconf files and understand the dependencies manually, but then you'll miss configure very quickly). To avoid it, you need use something other the straight tarball, which has already worked out the dependencies.
For example you can switch to building source rpms (or debs, dependending on your system). Or you can use a system such as Gentoo which is really good at working out the dependencies for you. But all of these require the pkg you're interested in to be available in their format, so they won't work for tarballs that you download from the source provider.
Read configure.ac/configure.in. Look for calls to AC_CHECK_LIB, AC_CHECK_LIBS, AC_SEARCH_LIBS, AM_PATH_* (some old packages that don't use pkg-config put their checks into the AM_* namespace for some reason), PKG_CHECK_MODULES (for pkg-config), AX_* (many autoconf-archive macros are written to check for uncommon dependencies) and any macro call that start with an odd name (i.e., not AC_*, AM_* or AX_*. Try grep '^[^A]'?).
One thing you can do that would be good for the community is to submit a bug report/feature request to the package maintainers. There are quite a few packages whose configure script does not abort on the first missing dependency, but runs to completion and then prints a summary of all the dependencies that are missing. That greatly reduces the tedium you describe. Unfortunately, "quite a few" translates to less than .00001 percent (this is a made up statistic). If you can convince the package maintainers to re-write their configure script to support this behavior, you will contribute to making the world a better place.
Good luck with that!