I made a application in Netbeans on windows 7. I want to run it on another system but it seems to have lots of dll's it depends on. The compiler tool kit I am using is MinGW, and the first two missing dll's are form that. I only get one missing dll file per run so it is a lot of back and forth to find them all.
Is there a way to list all the dll's that my executable depends on?
Is there a way to compile it so that it does not depend on so many of them (ie compiles the code into the exe)?
Thanks
From the menu bar, select Menu -> Project Properties. Then in the categories column, expand the node that says Build and select Linker. Then in command line under additional options, add -static-libgcc -static-libstdc++. This will statically link the C and C++ libraries for you. You can also add other libraries with the -static option.
There are tools to help you find dependencies for you, but for windows dlls, I usually just look at MSDN. Here is an SO question that talks about some tools if you want to use them.
Related
My current preferred C++ environment is the free and largely excellent Microsoft Visual Studio 2005 Express edition. From time to time I have sent release .exe files to other people with pleasing results. However recently I made the disturbing discovery that the pleasing results were based on more luck that I would like. Attempting to run one of these programs on an old (2001 vintage, not scrupulously updated) XP box gave me nothing but a nasty "System cannot run x.exe" (or similar) message.
Some googling revealed that with this toolset, even specifying static linking results in a simple hello-world.exe actually relying on extra .dll files (msvcm80.dll etc.). An incredibly elaborate version scheming system (manifest files anyone?) then will not let the .exe run without exactly the right .dll versions. I don't want or need this stuff, I just want an old fashioned self contained .exe that does nothing but lowest common denominator Win32 operations and runs on any old win32 OS.
Does anyone know if its possible to do what I want to do with my existing toolset ?
Thank you.
For the C-runtime go to the project settings, choose C/C++ then 'Code Generation'. Change the 'runtime library' setting to 'multithreaded' instead of 'multithreaded dll'.
If you are using any other libraries you may need to tell the linker to ignore the dynamically linked CRT explicitly.
My experience in Visual Studio 2010 is that there are two changes needed so as to not need DLL's. From the project property page (right click on the project name in the Solution Explorer window):
Under Configuration Properties --> General, change the "Use of MFC" field to "Use MFC in a Static Library".
Under Configuration Properties --> C/C++ --> Code Generation, change the "Runtime Library" field to "Multi-Threaded (/MT)"
Not sure why both were needed. I used this to remove a dependency on glut32.dll.
Added later: When making these changes to the configurations, you should make them to "All Configurations" --- you can select this at the top of the Properties window. If you make the change to just the Debug configuration, it won't apply to the Release configuration, and vice-versa.
I've had this same dependency problem and I also know that you can include the VS 8.0 DLLs (release only! not debug!---and your program has to be release, too) in a folder of the appropriate name, in the parent folder with your .exe:
How to: Deploy using XCopy (MSDN)
Also note that things are guaranteed to go awry if you need to have C++ and C code in the same statically linked .exe because you will get linker conflicts that can only be resolved by ignoring the correct libXXX.lib and then linking dynamically (DLLs).
Lastly, with a different toolset (VC++ 6.0) things "just work", since Windows 2000 and above have the correct DLLs installed.
In regards Jared's response, having Windows 2000 or better will not necessarily fix the issue at hand. Rob's response does work, however it is possible that this fix introduces security issues, as Windows updates will not be able to patch applications built as such.
In another post, Nick Guerrera suggests packaging the Visual C++ Runtime Redistributable with your applications, which installs quickly, and is independent of Visual Studio.
I have made an allegro simple game . But when I open the *.exe file on another computer it says that there are many missing .dll files . How can I make my game to run on other computers without Visual Studio and Allegro 5 library installed ?
Longer version of my comment:
When you created your application, it links to certain DLL's that exist on your computer. When you distribute your game, you will either need to ZIP the DLL's along with your .exe or package them using package creators and ship it.
The best way to find which DLL's your exe depends on will be to use a tool like Dependency Walker. You don't need to copy absolutely all DLL's that your EXE depends on. Only the ones that you see are in non-standard paths like ones that are not in C:\Windows\System32. That being said, you might need to copy some from C:\Windows\System32. You will need to find that out on your own.
To package them all as a setup, you can use package creators like InnoSetup or NSIS. Otherwise, create a script that ZIPs it all up for you. AFAIK, there is no easy way to get all DLL's required that are missing from the other persons' system. You'll need to find them out by trial and error. It is a pain, unfortunately.
If you downloaded the pre-built binaries, link against the static, monolithic, mt build of Allegro. You'll need to adjust your compiler settings to match (/MT) and add ALLEGRO_STATICLINK to your list of preprocessor definitions.
If you do that, then you only need to distribute your executable file and your resources (images, sounds, etc).
Note that you should have at least two configurations: Debug & Release. When working on your application, you should use the Debug configuration (linking against the regular debug Allegro library). When distributing your application, you should use the Release configuration.
I am trying to compile the SkpWriter example from the latest SketchUp C++ SDK. However, the linker gives me LNK1104 saying that "mfc80u.lib" could not be found since one of the static libraries (Utils.lib) in the SDK depends on some MFC 8 libraries. I am using VS2008 and only mfc90u.lib is available.
Is there a way to use mfc90u.lib in place of mfc80u.lib (anything short of renaming the file)?
Are MFC 8 DLLs and LIBs available for download? (Why should someone using a DLL created with VS2005 also be expected to install VS2005?!!) What are my options here?
Right-click your project, Properties, Linker, Input. In the "Ignore Specific Library" setting put mfc80u.lib. In the "Additional Dependencies" setting add mfc90u.lib
No guarantee that this will work but you got a decent shot at it. Your best bet is to contact the SDK vendor and ask for an update.
Probably you have 2 option:
1. Build your exe in VS2005 and use existing dll.
2. Rebuilt your dll in VS2008 and link with your exe.
MFC6 & MFC9 binary is not compatible, especially CString and CWnd, they are different in VC6 and VC9....
I have a number of native C++ libraries (Win32, without MFC) compiling under Visual Studio 2005, and used in a number of solutions.
I'd like to be able to choose to compile and link them as either static libraries or DLLs, depending on the needs of the particular solution in which I'm using them.
What's the best way to do this? I've considered these approaches:
1. Multiple project files
Example: "foo_static.vcproj" vs "foo_dll.vcproj"
Pro: easy to generate for new libraries, not too much manual vcproj munging.
Con: settings, file lists, etc. in two places get out of sync too easily.
2. Single project file, multiple configurations
Example: "Debug | Win32" vs "Debug DLL | Win32", etc.
Pro: file lists are easier to keep in sync; compilation options are somewhat easier to keep in sync
Con: I build for both Win32 and Smart Device targets, so I already have multiple configurations; I don't want to make my combinatorial explosion worse ("Static library for FooPhone | WinMobile 6", "Dynamic library for FooPhone | WinMobile 6", "Static library for BarPda | WinMobile 6", etc.
Worse Con: VS 2005 has a bad habit of assuming that if you have a configuration defined for platform "Foo", then you really need it for all other platforms in your solution, and haphazardly inserts all permutations of configuration/platform configurations all over the affected vcproj files, whether valid or not. (Bug filed with MS; closed as WONTFIX.)
3. Single project file, selecting static or dynamic via vsprops files
Example: store the appropriate vcproj fragments in property sheet files, then apply the "FooApp Static Library" property sheet to config/platform combinations when you want static libs, and apply the "FooApp DLL" property sheet when you want DLLs.
Pros: This is what I really want to do!
Cons: It doesn't seem possible. It seems that the .vcproj attribute that switches between static and dynamic libraries (the ConfigurationType attribute of the Configuration element) isn't overrideable by the .vsprops file. Microsoft's published schema for these files lists only <Tool> and <UserMacro> elements.
EDIT: In case someone suggests it, I've also tried a more "clever" version of #3, in which I define a .vsprops containing a UserMacro called "ModuleConfigurationType" with a value of either "2" (DLL) or "4" (static library), and changed the configuration in the .vcproj to have ConfigurationType="$(ModuleConfigurationType)". Visual Studio silently and without warning removes the attribute and replaces it with ConfigurationType="1". So helpful!
Am I missing a better solution?
I may have missed something, but why can't you define the DLL project with no files, and just have it link the lib created by the other project?
And, with respect to settings, you can factor them out in vsprop files...
There is an easy way to create both static and dll lib versions in one project.
Create your dll project. Then do the following to it:
Simply create an nmake makefile or .bat file that runs the lib tool.
Basically, this is just this:
lib /NOLOGO /OUT:<your_lib_pathname> #<<
<list_all_of_your_obj_paths_here>
<<
Then, in your project, add a Post Build Event where the command just runs the .bat file (or nmake or perl). Then, you will always get both a dll and a static lib.
I'll refrain from denigrating visual studio for not allowing the tool for this to exist in a project just before Linker (in the tool flow).
I think the typical way this is done is choice 2 above. It is what I use and what I have seen done by a number of libraries and companies.
If you find it does not work for you then by all means use something else.
Good luck.
I prefer 2 configurations way.
Setup all common settings via 'All configurations' item in a project properties windows. After it separated settings. And it's done. Let's go coding.
Also there is very good feature named 'Batch build', which builds specified configurations by turn.
Multiple projects are the best way to go - this is the configuration i have most widely seen in umpteen no of projects that i have come across.
That said, it might be also possible to implement the third option by modifying your vcproj files on the fly from external tools(like a custom vbscript), that you could invoke from a make file. You can use shell variables to control the behavior of the tool.
Note that you should still use use visual studio to make the build, the makefile should only launch your external tool if required to make the mods and then follow that by the actual build command
I use Visual Studio 6.0 (Still) due to issues that are preventing us from Migrating to VS2005 or newer. Rebuilding causes severe issues (everything breaks)... so many of us are considering lobbying a migration to GnuC++ moving forward in a structured way to eventually get us off of licensed Visual Studio products and onto Eclipse and Linux.
In Unix/Linux it is easy to build for all configurations.. so I can't believe what a time and productivity sink it is to try and accomplish the same task in Visual Studio. For VS6.0 I have so far found that only having two separate projects seems to be workable. I haven't yet tried the multiple configuration technique, but will see if it works in the older VS6.0.
Why not go for version 1 and generate the second set of project files from the first using a script or something. That way you know that the differences are JUST the pieces required to build a dll or static lib.
My current preferred C++ environment is the free and largely excellent Microsoft Visual Studio 2005 Express edition. From time to time I have sent release .exe files to other people with pleasing results. However recently I made the disturbing discovery that the pleasing results were based on more luck that I would like. Attempting to run one of these programs on an old (2001 vintage, not scrupulously updated) XP box gave me nothing but a nasty "System cannot run x.exe" (or similar) message.
Some googling revealed that with this toolset, even specifying static linking results in a simple hello-world.exe actually relying on extra .dll files (msvcm80.dll etc.). An incredibly elaborate version scheming system (manifest files anyone?) then will not let the .exe run without exactly the right .dll versions. I don't want or need this stuff, I just want an old fashioned self contained .exe that does nothing but lowest common denominator Win32 operations and runs on any old win32 OS.
Does anyone know if its possible to do what I want to do with my existing toolset ?
Thank you.
For the C-runtime go to the project settings, choose C/C++ then 'Code Generation'. Change the 'runtime library' setting to 'multithreaded' instead of 'multithreaded dll'.
If you are using any other libraries you may need to tell the linker to ignore the dynamically linked CRT explicitly.
My experience in Visual Studio 2010 is that there are two changes needed so as to not need DLL's. From the project property page (right click on the project name in the Solution Explorer window):
Under Configuration Properties --> General, change the "Use of MFC" field to "Use MFC in a Static Library".
Under Configuration Properties --> C/C++ --> Code Generation, change the "Runtime Library" field to "Multi-Threaded (/MT)"
Not sure why both were needed. I used this to remove a dependency on glut32.dll.
Added later: When making these changes to the configurations, you should make them to "All Configurations" --- you can select this at the top of the Properties window. If you make the change to just the Debug configuration, it won't apply to the Release configuration, and vice-versa.
I've had this same dependency problem and I also know that you can include the VS 8.0 DLLs (release only! not debug!---and your program has to be release, too) in a folder of the appropriate name, in the parent folder with your .exe:
How to: Deploy using XCopy (MSDN)
Also note that things are guaranteed to go awry if you need to have C++ and C code in the same statically linked .exe because you will get linker conflicts that can only be resolved by ignoring the correct libXXX.lib and then linking dynamically (DLLs).
Lastly, with a different toolset (VC++ 6.0) things "just work", since Windows 2000 and above have the correct DLLs installed.
In regards Jared's response, having Windows 2000 or better will not necessarily fix the issue at hand. Rob's response does work, however it is possible that this fix introduces security issues, as Windows updates will not be able to patch applications built as such.
In another post, Nick Guerrera suggests packaging the Visual C++ Runtime Redistributable with your applications, which installs quickly, and is independent of Visual Studio.