Currently we have a legacy client/server system written in MFC(server) and Java(client). This system cant not run on Internet because of various reason. So, we are developing a small system (very few functionalities of this legacy system) in cake php etc to fullfill customer requirement.
Now, one functionality in legacy system needs in this new system. We are thinking of making a DLL of that code and then integrate it with cake php (to save time) but this DLL will not work on Linux where this new system will sit.
So, is there any way to generate a dll so that it works with php in Linux system using QT etc?
OR
we have to rewrite the whole thing? In this case, what would be the most appropriate framework to develop cross platform dll. I would prefer to use Windows to write it.
Also, can we run dll with cake php?
Thanks
So, is there any way to generate a dll so that it works with php in Linux system using QT etc?
No, Linux doesn't support the DLL file format. You may want to compile a shared object file in the ELF format from your source code.
I think, the two most prominent cross platform GUI libraries are wxWidgets and Qt.
You cannot use a Windows DLL as a part of a Linux application. That is simply not possible, because of the different object formats.
So, the only option is to rewrite or port it in some form.
A guide for porting your application might be Porting MFC applications to Linux, which uses wxWidgets.
Another one using Qt, could be MFC to Qt Migration - Walkthrough.
Related
I would like to make c++ that will work both on Linux and windows as I understand if I use the win32 template in visual studio then it will only work on windows is there something built into c++ like java's jframe that I can use. Also I would like to use any external library at this time.
Here are some cross platform alternatives QT, wxWidgets, Ultimate++. I have used QT, it is intuitive with a huge collection of tools to use in your code. The others are also popular but I have never used them.
I make used of wxWidgets due to it's cross platform and even cross architecture, native look on the OS where it appear. Binary application yields by wxWidgets is small enough thus make it possible to linking statically as portable application. Qt produce huge binary if linked statically (and may be violate qt licensing scheme).
Another reason are licensing flexibly, well documentation and supported by huge community arround the world. wx is considered as mature framework since it first release about 20yrs ago. It's use standard C++ syntax and preprocessor that will make you easily switch from plain C or C++. Complete library are available ranging from appeal window GUI, string, network, stream, webview, xml, and wx is playing very well with 3rd party library as such database SOCI, Asio, etc ....
You may try start to code with wxWidgets easily using Eclipse-IDE and wxFormBuilder as GUI designer. Plese check my experience for ease setup it's IDE+Toolchain. This wx installer can be used do develop, test and run wx application on Linux desktop, and then deploy the binary on Raspberry Pi is available for another board target beside Linux x86_64.
http://yasriady.blogspot.co.id/2016/01/raspberry-pi-toolchain.html
There is a cross-platform application & UI development framework called Qt. I think it meets your requirements. Click here for more info.
There is a long list of both active and dead cross-platform C++ UI libraries here: https://philippegroarke.com/posts/2018/c++_ui_solutions/
I have been using Qt (uses c++ code + Qt libraries) on the windows platform and am in the process of porting my project onto the Linux platform.
Using Qt this has been a very simple process and my project works on the Linux platform with barely any changes required.
However, we need to use a 3rd party windows compiled .lib with an associated header file. Clearly this file cannot work under Linux, but I have been reading posts that suggest I could use Wine to do this.
So in general my project will work as a normal Linux (Ubuntu) project, but I would like to include this .lib file using Wine. I have not been able to find a definitive answer "how to do this". I am not sure if you use Wine to translate the .lib into a .so file or if you have to statically link it in with some "Wine-like" convention...
Can anyone help point me in the right direction?
Thanks :)
AFAIK, you can't make hybrid applications with Wine (i.e. link C++ Linux executable with some Linux static libraries and Windows static libraries).
One of the solution I suggest is to encapsulate you Windows library in a Windows program that act as some network service, then you make your Linux application talk to your Windows library through the network.
However, it adds complexity to your software, requires you know how to do some network programing (however, these days it is quite easy to do) and is not suitable to every kind of library, especially if your library has some kind of GUI.
Have you tried compiling under Windows and running the entire program under Wine?
I'm not sure you can splice Wine and Linux programs.
I cannot imagine that a hybrid approach would work. In any case, running part of your program as a native application and the other part inside WINE will not give you much advantage over the complete program running in WINE. In either case, WINE is needed.
The main disadvantage of running the complete program in WINE is the look and feel of the GUI which might look a little alien to the system. However, using a proper setup for WINE will minimize the problem. And as a side note, most Linux users are used to different GUI concepts due to the different desktop environments available. Personally I have a lot of GNOME applications running in my KDE desktop.
I would personally try running your program in WINE. It makes development much easier. A circuit simulation tool that is quite famous with electrical engineers uses this approach. It is called LTSpice. While only Windows binaries are available, the developers test it with WINE to ensure that it runs on Linux. Admitted, it is a tool offered for free but the community accepts this approach.
I have a project that requires writing a code for small executable file. I used visual C++ express 2010 IDE to create this file. After I finished writing the code, I tried to copy it to a couple of different PCs. It gives me an error message every time I clicking on this file to execute it. The message states that I have to install (.NET framework). I watched a couple videos on YouTube explaining how overcome this problem by changing the runtime library from multi-threaded Debug DLL (/MDd) to multi-threaded Debug (/Mtd). However; the IDE can’t debug the C++ code because when I create my project by using CLR template!
Is there any way to solve this problem? Can I create a similar program that not requires any further downloading once I using on different PC?
Is learning a different language like JAVA or C# will help creating small programs (like my program) that run on most Window platform machine?
Just use Qt - it runs on Windows, Linux, MacOS, support for Android and iOS is scheduled for this year, plus it supports embedded platforms and some of the more obscure mobile platforms. Also, support for Windows RT was just kickstarted. A complete library with tons of functionality, good documentation and lots of educational resources. It provides tons of tools, from implicitly shared containers through threading, signals and slots, 2D and 3D graphics, widgets, multimedia, sensors... and whatnot...
You can even develop commercial applications under the LGPL license.
Also comes with a pretty good IDE - Qt Creator.
You can develop standard C++ applications or use QML, which is a JavaScript like language for markup and scripting, which is used to build applications from C++ implemented components. You can also extend QML. It is much faster to develop with QML and you still get the advantages of platform native binary under the hood.
Note that you will still need to either ship a few DLLs with your application. Unless of course you use a static build, which requires you to either have your application open source, or purchase a commercial license... which doesn't come cheap...
But still, a few MB of DLLs are far better than the entire .NET framework. A static build will produce executables about 8-9 MB with no external dependencies.
Stick with the C++ standard, avoid Microsoft extensions (managed code), and call only POSIX functions of your OS, then you should be able to write portable programs.
You seem to have created a Managed C++ Project. Instead create an empty Win32 C++ project and then add in your .cpp/.h files. This will limit you to the default libraries available on all PCs with the C++ runtime. If you want to remove that dependency too then statically compile in the runtime using the /MT option. Details # http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/2kzt1wy3(v=vs.71).aspx
As you move ahead you would need to be conscious of what libraries you take dependencies on and what versions of the OS are those libraries available on or if you need to package them with your bits.
Both Java and C# will help making portable programs. Usually, people will have to install runtime environments for executables written in these two languages, however. These days, C++ is more portable than ever. You can easily run C++ executables in your browser:
https://github.com/kripken/emscripten
http://code.google.com/p/nativeclient/
This makes many of the reasons why Java and C# came about irrelevant.
Open standards like OpenGL also make portable GUI programming easier than ever. Try Qt, if you want to write a simple GUI in C++.
Note: It is possible to run C++ program in any computer without installing anything if you haven't use .NET framework. In your case, there can be two reasons to trigger error in target computer.
New computer doesn't have required run-time assembles.
New computer doesn't have required .NET framework installed.
..........................................
So what to do:
Before start your program you have to design weather are you going to use .NET framework support or not. If you use .NET framework when you develop your program, then you much install same or higher .NET framework in target computer.
If you no need to use .NET component then your target computer should only containing run-time assemblies.
How to get rid of .net framework
right click on the project in solution -> properties -> General -> Common language run time support -> select "No common language run time support".
..........................................
Then what you need is only relevant run-time assemblies be in target computer.
How can run-time assemblies be in new computer:
There are two ways:
Install suitable C++ disputable environment in target computer(if you use VS2008 SP1, C++ RD package should be this. Please consider the solution build architecture also (32 bit/64 bit) before download ).
Deploy run-time assemblies with your solution package. (I like this because user no need to install any third party components)
..........................................
How Deploy assemblies with my project:
for this your all DLL, LIB, EXE should use same run time version.(if not, you face troubling to redirect assemblies by 'manifest' files ).
How to check the run-time version.
open DLL,EXE by visual studio (open->file) -> expand RT_MANIFEST-> double click the file under it ->then assembly dependency details will open. -> copy the data in right column and paste to note pad.
You will see this kind of line there. and ther is the version run-time assemblies your specific DLL or EXE use.
assemblyIdentity type="win32" name="Microsoft.VC90.CRT" version="9.0.21022.8" processorArchitecture="x86".....
After identifying the version of run-time assemblies follow this tutorial and try to run in fresh installed computer.
At last: If you think this bla.. bla.. is so complex and your program is very simple, then you can consider about "run time assemblies statically linking" (try Google). But personally I don't like this method.
good luck!
Native exe!
that means my program can run easily without any requirement?
even if I use .net classes?
You know I want to write a program that is so light and I don't like to use C# or any other .net programing language because all of them need .net-framework 4.5.
Just think a 2.5 MB programm needs a +250 MB .netframework.
New Update - 12/01/2016:
It's almost 4 years ago when I asked this question. As you know Dotnet Native is announced. It's an interesting feature which compile IL into native code.
Compiling Apps with .NET Native
.NET Native is a precompilation technology for building and deploying
Windows apps that is included with Visual Studio 2015. It
automatically compiles the release version of apps that are written in
managed code (C# or Visual Basic) and that target the .NET Framework
and Windows 10 to native code. Typically, apps that target the .NET
Framework are compiled to intermediate language (IL). At run time, the
just-in-time (JIT) compiler translates the IL to native code. In
contrast, .NET Native compiles Windows apps directly to native code.
For developers, this means:
Your apps will provide the superior performance of native code.
You can continue to program in C# or Visual Basic.
You can continue to take advantage of the resources provided by the .NET Framework, including its class library, automatic memory
management and garbage collection, and exception handling.
Last I checked none of the .NET frameworks were 250+ MB! Yes, the offline installer for .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 is 231MB but it contains x86 and x64 versions of .NET 2, 3 and 3.5 sp1.
You should read this http://www.smallestdotnet.com for details on sizes of various versions of the installers.
Now on to your question:
Yes, It is a little annoying to have your clients install a big framework, even 20-40MB does get annoying. With .NET, the advantage is the ease of programming (In my opionion) compared to other Native options.
Your native options are:
MFC - You need only the VS runtimes installed, which is 1-2MB and is usually installed on newer pcs. Also, you can ship your application with the MFC libraries packaged into a dll which is again <2MB
The trade of here is you need to program in C++, the libraries overall are a very thin layer over the native libraries. and people have had harsh opinions about MFC. I've barely just tried it.
Win32 API - This is going all bare bones, and quite difficult, you could use C or C++ but you'd really have to know a lot about the Win32 API and how windows itself works (Stuff like windows messages, hwnds etc) Its not fun, believe me. But during deployment you would not need any external libraries.
There are tons more options, see here:
Native Windows Application Development Options
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2711599/what-programming-language-should-i-use-to-create-small-native-windows-applicatio
Here are some links on MFC that might help:
Want to learn Windows Programming,some suggestions?
How do I decide whether to use ATL, MFC, Win32 or CLR for a new C++ project?
C++ MFC vs .NET?
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/557114/stick-with-mfc-or-go-to-net
you are able to create native exe by using c++ Win 32 projects.
Alas, nearly everything requires a download runtime library and even if you have one installed, you'll need to download updates for them almost continually. Even Microsoft C++ apps nowadays come with security updates that have to be installed if you've compiled your app with them.
But.. there is a solution of sorts. If you use C++, it has a feature where only the things you use are compiled into the final app. Normally, this would require linking with all the library dlls, but if you statically link with the library, you will end up with a single .exe that is as small as can be, and you will not need any dlls (as all the code contained in the library will be compiled into the .exe).
The benefits are debatable compared to dlls, but as MS has pretty much broken the idea of shared dlls in .NET (ie, you practically have to put all the shared dlls in the same directory as your running app, giving you a nightmare in maintenance if you have these shared dlls spread around all your apps) then there's not much of a difference anymore. Static linking is getting a little bit of a comeback and sounds like its what you want.
For modern C++ development, you'll probably want to take a look at Qt instead of MFC. Its a lot nicer to use and is cross-platform so you can run Qt apps on your Android or Linux platforms as well as Windows.
I have built a windows C++ application that I'd like to port to linux. The main reasons to do this is ease of system maintenance for our IT staff. Apart from the one windows machine that runs this application we're a linux only operation.
The reason this application was built in-, and runs on- windows is that it uses a windows API (dll and header) to connect to a server belonging to an external party. This connection uses some proprietary protocol that I don't really want to mess with, (and I think I'm contractually not allowed to) so I'm stuck with the .dll.
This dll is windows only because of (I suspect) windows sockets specific code in the dll. Apart from that it doesn't do a whole lot of advanced stuff. Is there a way somewhere between just running the app on linux in WINE and sniffing out the protocol and reimplementing the DLL myself that will allow me to get this application to run on a linux machine?
This idea got inspired by this item about QT creator so any solution that allows me to play with that would be extra cool.
The most obvious middle ground would be to use Winelib. I do not know if it can link directly to a native DLL, but if not you probably could load it with LoadLibrary().
You could then split your application in two parts: a wrapper which only calls the DLL, and the rest of the code talking to your wrapper. You could have both in separate processes, and thus only the wrapper would have to be compiled with Winelib. The rest of the application could then use whatever framework you want.