I would like to start with Haskell and I am at this page, the page clearly says
Get and install GHC 7.6.3 prior to building the platform
but if you click the link to GHC 7.6.3 ( the published version at this point in time )
Stop!
For most users, we recommend installing the Haskell Platform instead of GHC. The current Haskell Platform release includes a recent GHC release as well as some other tools (such as cabal), and a larger set of libraries that are known to work together.
What should I do ?
I'm interested in using Haskell in conjunction with C++11, so I'm particularly interested in building the interpreter and the essential libraries from the source and what is the best way to use Haskell in general, if Haskell provides more than 1 version of the interpreter and what are all the possible solutions, this informations do not help me in finding a way.
I'm under Ubuntu 13.10 amd64 and I would like to know what is the best way to start with Haskell .
The Linux source distribution of the Haskell Platform does not include GHC. So if you actually want to build everything from source, then you need GHC separately first.
But most people get the platform via a binary installer, or, on Linux, via their distribution. So you should check whether Ubuntu 13.10 has the Haskell Platform, and it seems it does, so I recommend you start from there.
You can also try out https://www.fpcomplete.com/. The website has interactive tutorials and allows you to run haskell without having to install it on your machine.
Related
I've been trying to find a way to make my applications compatible between different Ubuntu LTS versions.
However, most of the time it ends up with the "symbol lookup error:" or "cannot find libxxxx.so.xx".
The requirement is very clear, developer should be able to compile the code on one of last 3 Ubuntu LTS (currently 12,14,16-04) versions and the output should be able to run on all 3 last versions. But the problem is getting complex.
Is there any way to do this?
Thanks in advance.
Linux binaries compiled on older distributions are generally compatible with newer ones. The kernel invests a lot of effort in being backwards compatible - as does glibc. This may not be true for all libraries, but in my experience; most try.
So, what you probably want to do is, compile your app on the oldest supported distro and it will most likely work on the newer one(s).
A really simple trick is to ... compile from source on the appropriate distro.
You can even almost automate this as Ubuntu / Canonical give you free accounts on Launchpad. For example, I use my PPA for either backports or unpackaged sources I want at either work, or home, or on Travis CI, ... in a particular release flavour.
Otherwise, the very obvious alternative is of course to create a static build which is independent of the runtimes of the particular release. That will work 'forever' or until the kernel changes. In the 20+ years I have used Linux, such a change occurred once (with the introduction of the Elf format).
My aim is to use Apache thrift on one of our device having vxWorks 6.8 (C++).
I need steps to build thrift lib(.so) or sample application on vxWorks. It would be great help if someone could suggest way out. I am using Windriver Workbench 3.2 on windows 7 and target is PENTIUM3gnu. I can use boost but not C++ 11.
Well, as someone who had to make Thrift build on a bog-normal Fedora PC, and as someone who knows the pain of making it work on embedded platforms¹, I can assure you that your confusion is at least partly caused by Thrift's sub-par build system.
I can't actually give you detailed descriptions on how to build it on vxWorks, but here's the general consensus on what needs to be done when building it on something that doesn't happen to be very similar to the maintainer's machines:
massage all the ./configure options, and explicitly disable every single thing you don't need. Even after much script fixing, I couldn't build the examples/tutorials, so I had to disable them
explicitly state dependency paths. The autoconfigure scripts seem to have been modified in a manner that makes auto-detection of libraries work worse than it normally does with autoconf
try to build. Find the places where for some reasons, the build system uses hardwired locations and hence fails
rinse, repeat.
¹ OpenEmbedded, Android
I would like to start programming in OCaml. As I am a Windows user, I understand that it is preferred to do so using the OCaml plugin for Netbeans.
I have downloaded the aforementioned plugin from the following link: http://ocamlplugin.loki-a.com/ocamlplugin/updates/ . I have installed the plugin into Netbeans as instructed. I managed to open a project but even the sample "Hello World" won't run.
I then tried to install the OCaml IDE from here: http://ocamlplugin.loki-a.com/index.php?title=Main_Page#Download_2 , but it still wouldn't run anything.
I am not interested in working with Eclipse because that would include downloading Cygwin.
I would appreciate a simple solution. Thank you! :)
I would suggest OCaIDE under Eclipse, if you stick to Windows anyway.
But I don't understand your reluctancy to use cygwin, especially when there is such nice step-by-step tutorial for configuring cygwin for OcaIDE and Eclipse.
Another option, which I haven't tried but would strongly suggest you trying, is Sublime Text 2. It supports OCaml and is a very popular cross-platform text editor. But since I haven't tried it, I would not be able to provide you with details about it. Although it comes with a cost, you can evaluate it for free without time limit.
TypeRex has been my favourite for OCaml so far, and you can now use Emacs in Windows, so with some workaround in cygwin you can use TypeRex in Windows.
Another option is to use VirtualBox, install a normal linux distro and use Typerex+Emacs inside it. It is also not complicated, as it takes 1 hour to config at most.
The ocaml links that you gave have not been touched since 2009 (4 years ago). That probably means the odds of them running with the current NetBeans are equivalent to the proverbial sphere of solidified water in the Christian place of eternal theological punishment.
Since you are asking about running under Cygwin, it sounds like you want a Linux version of Eclipse as well. Eclipse runs quite well under Win7, at least, and under Mint (I use them under both) However, all my attempts to get ANY OCaml IDE running under either system have been borged (resistance is futile, and depends and capacitance anyway).
So, under Mint 15, emacs and vim (the old standards) work well as text editors. I wish I could suggest anything else.
Good luck!!!
By now, another option has appeared for Windows 10 users wanting to use OCaml: the Windows Subsystem for Linux.
Basically, what it does is that it allows you to run Bash and any non-GUI Linux program on your PC. Once installed, you can install OCaml and OPAM with apt-get and you're good to go.
As far as I am concerned, I use Windows 10 on my desktop PC, and I haven't had any inconvenience with WSL yet.
I personally use Merlin/... which is are plugins for emacs. But I can understand that you dont want to use emacs. I have been told that the support with Visual Studio Code is supposed to be quite good, especially when using it together with the builtin console. Also for smaller things there is Ocamltop but I have now idea how the Windows support is. In the end I suggest, using the Linux Shell on Windows as RichouHunter suggests.
My company is thinking of dumping InstallShield and move to something else, mainly because of the poor experience it had with it, mostly on Linux.
Our product is a C++ application (binaries, shared libraries) targeted at Windows and Linux (Red Hat).
The installer itself isn't required to do anything special, just dump some binaries and shared libraries and sometime execute an external process. Things like version upgrading through the installer isn't necessary, this is handled after the installer finishes.
I thought of suggesting using NSIS on Windows and RPM on Linux.
What are the recommended installer systems to use when deploying to Windows/Linux? Something that is cross platform to prevent maintaining two installers is a definite plus.
For Windows I would definitively use NSIS. It's very lightweight, easy to code and very simple to understand. Using msis would just be a killer - it generates guid for every file so you can get upgrades for free and stuff but truth being said, you never end up using any of these.
Regarding Linux I would go for RPM and Deb. They're probably the two biggest packaging system so you'll be targeting most of the Linux users. I've never tried RPM but creating a Deb package is fairly straightforward.
See also:
What to use for creating a quick and light setup file?
Packaging to use to deploy cross-platform?
And even:
Creating installers for complex cross-platform programs
There's a tool called BitRock Installer which can create installers for Windows, Linux and OS X.
However, I think that if you target RedHat it would be better to provide native packages for that platform (that is .rpm).
For C++ projects, I'd go with cmake/cpack, if you are also willing to change your build system. Great support, strongly cross-platform. cpack has various generators, NSIS is one..
Take a look at InstallJammer. It will handle both platforms from the same build project, and you can have the installer register the package with the RPM database as well if that's your requirement.
You may want to consider our tool BitRock InstallBuilder , it can generate installers for Windows and Linux from a single project file and also RPMs. Is your application based on Qt? Our clients include the makers of Qt, Nokia (previously Trolltech) and they use it to package their Qt Creator product. We encourage to give InstallBuilder a try and contact our support with any questions or suggestions you may have.
I would like to port my C/C++ apps to OS X.
I don't have a Mac, but I have Linux and Windows. Is there any tool for this?
For Linux, there is a prebuilt GCC cross-compiler (from publicly available Apple's modified GCC sources).
https://launchpad.net/~flosoft/+archive/cross-apple
Update for 2015
After so many years, the industry-standard IDE now supports OSX/iOS/Android.
http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Visual-Studio/Connect-event-2014/311
Embarcadero's RadStudio also supports building OSX/iOS/Android apps on Windows.
This answer by Thomas also provides a cross-compilation tool.
For all these options you still need a real mac/i-device to test the application.
I have created a project called OSXCross which aims to target OS X (10.4-10.9) from Linux.
It currently supports clang 3.2 up to 3.8 (trunk) (you can use your dist's clang).
In addition you can build an up-to-date vanilla GCC as well (4.6+).
LTO works as well, for both, clang and GCC.
Currently using cctools-870 with ld64-242.
https://github.com/tpoechtrager/osxcross
There appears to be some scripts that have been written to help get you set up cross compiling for the Mac; I can't say how good they are, or how applicable to your project. In the documentation, they refer to these instructions for cross-compiling for 10.4, and these ones for cross compiling for 10.5; those instructions may be more helpful than the script, depending on how well the script fits your needs.
If your program is free or open source software, then you may wish instead to create a MacPorts portfile (documentation here), and allow your users to build your program using MacPorts; that is generally the preferred way to install portable free or open source software on Mac OS X. MacPorts has been known to run on Linux in the past, so it may be possible to develop and test your Portfile on Linux (though it will obviously need to be tested on a Mac).
Get "VMware Player"
Get "Mac OS X vm image"
Compile/Debug/Integrate-and-test your code on the new OS to make sure everything works
When you are trying to get something working on multiple platforms you absolutely must compile/run/integrate/test on the intended platform. You can not just compile/run on one platform and then say "oh it should work the same on the other platform".
Even with the a really good cross-platform language like Java you will run into problems where it won't work exactly the same on the other platform.
The only way I have found that respects my time/productivity/ability-to-rapidly iterate on multiple platforms is to use a VM of the other platforms.
There are other solutions like dual-boot and ones that I haven't mentioned but I find that they don't respect my productivity/time.
Take dual-booting as an example:
I make a change on OS 1
reboot into OS 2
forget something on OS 1
reboot into OS 1
make a change on OS 1
reboot into OS 2 ... AGAIN...
BAM there goes 30 minutes of my time and I haven't done anything productive.
You would need a toolchain to cross compile for mach-o, but even if you had that, you won't have the Apple libraries around to develop with. I'm not sure how you would be able to port without them, unfortunately.
Apple development is a strange beast unto itself. OS X uses a port of GCC with some modifications to make it 'appley'. In theory, it's possible to the the sources to the Apple GCC and toolchain as well as the Apple kernel and library headers and build a cross compiler on your Windows machine.
Why you'd want to go down this path is beyond me. You can have a cheap Mac mini from $600. The time you invest getting a cross compiler working right (particularly with a Windows host for Unix tools) will probably cost more than the $600 anyway.
If you're really keen to make your app cross platform look into Qt, wxWidgets or FLTK. All provide cross-platform support with minimal changes to the base code. At least that way all you need to do is find a Mac to compile your app on, and that's not too hard to do if you have some technically minded friends who don't mind giving you SSH access to their Mac.
You will definitely need OS X somehow. Even if you don't own a Mac, you can still try some alternatives.
I found this small documentation on the net:
http://devs.openttd.org/~truebrain/compile-farm/apple-darwin9.txt
This describes exactly what you want. I am interested in it myself, haven't tested it yet though (found it 10 minutes ago). The documentation seems good, though.
You can hire a mac in the cloud from this website. You can hire them from $1, which should be enough (unless you need root access, then you are looking at $49+).
There are a few cross-compiler setups, but nearly all of them are meant for distcc-style distributed compiling. To my knowledge there is no way to directly target the Mac platform without actually having a Mac. The closest you can get without resorting to QT or wxWidgets is OpenStep with GNUStep or similar, but that's not a true Cocoa platform, just very close.
I know this question isn’t very active but answering anyways. Why don’t you try using TransMac, then download the XCode image and do it that way? Or you can use a VM, or Sosumi. You’ll find a video on youtube about sosumi, definitely.
The short answer is kind of. You will need to use a cross-platform library like QT. There are IDE's like QT Creator that will let you develop on one OS and generate Makefiles for others. For more information on cross platform development, check out the cross-platform episodes of this podcast (note that the series isn't over and new episodes appear to come out weekly).
As other answers explain you can probably compile for a Mac on Windows or Linux but you won't be able to test your applications so you should probably spend the $600 for a Mac if you’re doing professional programming, or if you’re working on open-source software find a developer with a Mac who will help you.