I'm working on a c++ project, and we recently needed to include a small part of boost in it. The boost part is really minimal (Boost::Python), thus, using bjam to build everything looks like an overkill (besides, everyone working on the project feels comfortable with make, and has no knowloedge of jam).
I made quite some tests already, but I cant find a way to include the formerly mentioned library in my makefile and make the build succesful.
All your help is deeply apreciated. :)
You can use Boost's bcp utility to extract only the subset of Boost you need.
That will minimize your build time & size.
That doesn't answer your question, though. You may want to consider building the Boost.Python libraries separately and checking them directly into your source control system. Then nobody would need to build them.
I had the same problem and found a solution in this tutorial. You 1) need to compile the source into an object file with the -fPIC gcc option, and 2) compile this object into a library with the -shared gcc option. Of course you have also to link against the Boost.Python library (generally -lboost_python, however for my debian system it is for example -lboost_python-mt-py25, I have also to add -I/usr/include/pythyon25). In my makefile I end up doing those two steps in one command. See also p. 13 of this presentation.
If you're uncomfortable with bjam, you might want to consider using Boost.Cmake.
Alternatively you should at least be able to see more easily what they are doing then with the bjam files.
Run bjam from the makefile, just for building that part
Related
There is a question about this already, but the asker was either doing some more complicated then me, or the posted answer assumed too much background knowledge for me to understand.
I am trying to use the following library: https://github.com/samehkamaleldin/socket.cpp
.
I downloaded the library from github and built it. I then placed the resulting .so file in the same directory as main.cpp, like this:
However, I'm not sure what to do from here, from my research, I need to use the command target_link_libraries, but I'm not sure what to pass in for each parameter.
In order to use the library, there are few approaches, I suggest you read this post: Correct way to use third-party libraries in cmake project
I have got my first project for this semester and I have been asked to submit it with a makefile. The literature available on the internet is a bit overwhelming and combined with my laziness, I came to stackoverflow for simple answers. I have found this answer by Brendan Long as a good place to start with.
The example he gives is:
all: a3driver.o
g++ -o a3driver a3driver.o
a3driver.o: a3driver.cpp
g++ -c a3driver.cpp
which i understand. This looks exactly like the make files I have seen on a Unix system and which i used to compile c++ files(only used, did not need to understand).
Then i search further and an answer to this question suggests using CMake which is completely different from the code I have pasted above.
So my question at this stage is which direction should i take? Should I learn about the CMake or the GNUMake? I only intend to work on C++ files for now.
Only you can answer this question because it depends heavily on your needs. Cmake is a "build control file generator", not a build control program. It doesn't actually build code: instead it will create a makefile, or a Visual Studio / Xcode / Eclipse project file, etc. You then use that build program (make, Visual Studio, XCode, Eclipse) to actually build the code.
Cmake is good if you need to support all those different types of builds across all those different architectures using their native build environments. If you're happy to use make on whichever architecture you need to build on (GNU make runs on all of those as well and all those IDEs except possibly Visual Studio have good integration with native make) then using make directly is fine. GNU make has lots of advanced features which make it very flexible.
I don't really agree with esseks assessment of the autotools although I know it's a very common opinion. Also note that automake itself does not use unusual, verbose syntax: automake files are just makefiles. However they have to be processed, and autoconf is how that's done... autoconf is more obscure although not as bad as people make it out to be, depending on your needs. This isn't the place for that discussion however.
I personally find cmake format even more annoying and strange than autotools, and it doesn't meet my needs in many ways (for example it's support for cross-compilation is not as good as autotools'). However I have to say its ability to generate native project files is really excellent--if you need it.
If you need a really really dead simple makefile for compiling one or few files only, then you are done with:
compile:
g++ myprogram.cpp -o myprogram
(note that lines must be indented with tab, not spaces).
If you need flexibility, you are on the right path with CMake. I suggest you to explore CMake, starting from their good tutorial or a simple example -- as the basics are simpler to undestand from code rather than learn from manual.
My personal opionion is to avoid GNU Automake (colloquially known as Autohell) because of the unusual, verbose syntax that sometimes scares beginners and tricks more experienced users.
EDIT: CMake is not used to compile, rather, it can generate makefiles for you, starting from a synthetic description of the project (where are the files to be compiled? What libraries are required? etc.). And it does this by checking for libraries, identifying compiler and carrying out other sanity check you would need to code by yourself otherwise.
I have just downloaded the boost libraries from the boost website and extracted them to my desktop. I was hoping to just have a quick look at them and have them installed on my machine and perhaps use them in the future when I am more accustomed to C++.
When I extracted it, I was confused with all of the extracted files. There is all of the headers in the boost directory but tutorials mention running bootstrap.bat (I'm using Windows).
So I am asking this: do I simply extract the headers to my compilers include directory like normal to get boost up and running or do I need to do something else?
As I understand it from searching about, apparently "most" of boost is just templates and can be used simply by including the headers, but what about the rest?
Am I totally barking up the wrong tree?
Thanks for any help
Since you mentioned you run Windows, take a look at this automated installer:
► http://www.boostpro.com/download/
Also, some general advice:
do I simply extract the headers to my compilers include directory
No! Do not pollute your compiler's includes with third-party includes; make a separate directory specifically for a particular library. You'll then need to tell your specific IDE in what directory it can find the library headers.
I usually use boostpro's installer, it is less work. I vaguely remember having to set up the BOOST_ROOT environment variable on one of my systems to use it.
The libraries that contained compiled source should be included in the installer.
If you don't use the installer (or don't set up your build correctly), and try to use the libraries that need it you will likely get some linker errors when you try and compile your program. Usually if you take those linker errors and plop them in google it tells you pretty quick which libraries you need to include in your build system. I use CMake for that and have been very happy..
Just add the root boost directory to include paths of your compiler/IDE (so if you have Boost extracted to C:\Boost, the compiler will use that path, not C:\Boost\boost).
Don't do any copying of the boost folder to your compiler's include directory, because it may make upgrading Boost harder in the future.
Also if you plan to use any of boost's compiled libraries, add Boost's lib directory to compiler's library search paths. Configuring the compiling step is a matter of putting the right toolset parameter to boost's build tool. If you have your command line environment configured properly, bootstrap should run and compile the builder without any problems, and the Boost builder should properly detect your toolset, so no parameters will be necessary.
As you do such configuration only once every time you do a clean install of your favorite compiler, it's not as hard or daunting as it seems.
I've been trying to get the boost library working with Code::Blocks and am having some trouble.
When I first tried to get boost, all I did was download the latest zip file and extract it into the CodeBlocks folder. Then I set the compiler settings to look in the boost folder. This allowed me to compile, but not to link. I then read the BoostWindowsQuickReference. I removed everything I had related to boost from my machine, and started fresh.
I followed the instructions step by step, and the only thing that didn't go exactly as the instructions said was that the install-proper folder with the include\boost inside of it was in C: and not my CodeBlocks folder. So I simply copied it (just in case for some reason it needed to be there) to the CodeBlocks folder, which I thought odd because I already had a boost_1_40_0 folder there from downloading the .zip.
I then tried to compile a program and it came up with the exact same error. Then I realized that I forgot to put in the link library (Ex: boost_regex-mgw44-mt-1_40.lib). Now I get
error: ld.exe||cannot find -lboost_regex-mgw44-mt-1_40.lib|
I have a few questions:
Obviously, what am I doing wrong?
Will I need to put in a link library every time I want to use a boost facility (everything is separated into different files, there isn't just one big project.)
Was it necessary to build the library with the boost-jam or could I have just extracted it and used it? (Probably a dumb question, but a small seed of doubt was planted when I got the exact same error.)
Should I try nuwen's MinGW Distro? (Would it make things any easier?)
If any clarification is needed I'd be happy to do so. Thanks.
Edit: and now I can't compile regular programs. So I'm just starting fresh again.
1, it should be -lboost_regex-mgw44-mt-1_40
2, Read the document, most boost library doesn't require to link library
3,4, You should compile it yourself, or try nuwen's MinGW ( I'd installed it and it worked fine )
BoostPro has Windows binaries available for the Boost libraries. If you download just the Boost sources, you will have to compile it, if you are using any of the libraries that are not header-only (such as boost regex). The BoostPro binaries will allow you to link to these without having to build anything.
On Windows it doesn't really matter where you "install" Boost to. Just get the .7z, compile using bjam.exe and pass it the options you need. It will create a folder called "bin.v2" and put the resulting libs in there. In Code::Blocks, all you need to do is edit the project options and point the search path to boost_1_40_0\boost and manually input the libraries to link against (those from bin.v2). It should just work then.
Do not use a precompiled Boost library.
I'm building a special-purpose embedded Python interpreter and want to avoid having dependencies on dynamic libraries so I want to compile the interpreter with static libraries instead (e.g. libc.a not libc.so).
I would also like to statically link all dynamic libraries that are part of the Python standard library. I know this can be done using Freeze.py, but is there an alternative so that it can be done in one step?
I found this (mainly concerning static compilation of Python modules):
http://bytes.com/groups/python/23235-build-static-python-executable-linux
Which describes a file used for configuration located here:
<Python_Source>/Modules/Setup
If this file isn't present, it can be created by copying:
<Python_Source>/Modules/Setup.dist
The Setup file has tons of documentation in it and the README included with the source offers lots of good compilation information as well.
I haven't tried compiling yet, but I think with these resources, I should be successful when I try. I will post my results as a comment here.
Update
To get a pure-static python executable, you must also configure as follows:
./configure LDFLAGS="-static -static-libgcc" CPPFLAGS="-static"
Once you build with these flags enabled, you will likely get lots of warnings about "renaming because library isn't present". This means that you have not configured Modules/Setup correctly and need to:
a) add a single line (near the top) like this:
*static*
(that's asterisk/star the word "static" and asterisk with no spaces)
b) uncomment all modules that you want to be available statically (such as math, array, etc...)
You may also need to add specific linker flags (as mentioned in the link I posted above). My experience so far has been that the libraries are working without modification.
It may also be helpful to run make with as follows:
make 2>&1 | grep 'renaming'
This will show all modules that are failing to compile due to being statically linked.
CPython CMake Buildsystem offers an alternative way to build Python, using CMake.
It can build python lib statically, and include in that lib all the modules you want. Just set CMake's options
BUILD_SHARED OFF
BUILD_STATIC ON
and set the BUILTIN_<extension> you want to ON.
Using freeze doesn't prevent doing it all in one run (no matter what approach you use, you will need multiple build steps - e.g. many compiler invocations). First, you edit Modules/Setup to include all extension modules that you want. Next, you build Python, getting libpythonxy.a. Then, you run freeze, getting a number of C files and a config.c. You compile these as well, and integrate them into libpythonxy.a (or create a separate library).
You do all this once, for each architecture and Python version you want to integrate. When building your application, you only link with libpythonxy.a, and the library that freeze has produced.
You can try with ELF STATIFIER. I've been used it before and it works fairly well. I just had problems with it in a couple of cases and then I had to use another similar program called Ermine. Unfortunately this one is a commercial program.