So it is 5:12am and I have been trying to figure this out for hours. I am a little new to the subject so please forgive the noob.
I download this exploit from http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/9301/ .. The problem is the program comes with two .c files and 2 .h files along with a makefile. Could anyone shed some light on how to complie this. I can't seem to find the information I am looking for.
BTW this is for a security course I am taking online.
Thanks
Type make. If you don't have make installed, you will need to install it (and in that case it is very likely you will also need to install a C compiler and its dependencies).
Related
I am relatively new to programming on Linux.
I understand that Makefiles are used to ease the compiling process when compiling several files.
Rather than writing "g++ main.cpp x.cpp y.cpp -o executable" everytime you need to compile and run your program, you can throw it into a Makefile and run make in that directory.
I am trying to get a RPi and Arduino to communicate with each other using the nRF24L01 radios using tmrh20's library here. I have been successful using tmrh20's Makefile to build the the executable needed (on the RPi). I would like to, however, use tmrh20's library to build my own executables.
I have watched several tutorial videos on Makefiles but still cannot seem to piece together what is happening in tmrh20's.
The Makefile (1) in question is here. I believe it is somehow referencing a second Makefile (2) (for filenames?) here. (Why is this necessary?)
If it helps anyone understand (it took me a while) I had to build using SPIDEV (the instructions here) the Makefile (3) in the RF24 directory which produced several object files which I think are relevant to Makefile (1)&(2).
How do I find out what files I need to make my own Makefile, from tmrh20's Makefile (if that makes sense?) He seems to use variables in his Makefile that are not defined? Or are perhaps defined elsewhere?
Apologies for my poor explanation.
The canonical sequence is not just make and make install. There is an initial ./configure step (such a file is here) that sets up everything and generates several files used in the make steps.
You only need to run this configure script successfully only once, unless you want to change build parameters. I say "successfully" because the first execution will usually complain that you are missing libraries or header files. But ince ./configure runs without errors, make and make install should run without errors.
PS: I didn't try to compile it, but since the project has a rather comprehensive configure it is likely complete and you shouldn't need to tweak makefiles if your follow the usual procedure.
The reason for splitting the Makefiles in the way you've mentioned and linked to here is to separate the definition of the variables from the implementation. This way you could have multiple base Makefiles that define their PROGRAM variable differently, but all do the same thing based on the value of that variable.
In my own personal opinion, I see some value here - but there very many ways to skin this proverbial cat.
Having learned GNU Make the hard way, I can only recommend you do the same. There's a slight steep curve at the beginning, but once you get the main concepts down following other peoples Makefiles gets pretty easy.
Good luck: https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/index.html
This is a pretty rookie question, but unfortunately I'm not really familiar with cmake or CGAL. I just can't figure out how to configure cmake to generate a shared library from my source code. I looked through some docs and some pages on github, but I don't seem to get anywehere.
I would be really grateful if someone could point me to some documentation, or provide an example CMakeLists.txt or something (to be honest I'm completely lost here).
I need the .so-s for a python binding for some functionality of the 2D arrangements package.
The CGAL Manual has copious information you can use to get you started. Here you'll find information for building/installing CGAL itself.
If you already have CGAL built/installed on your system, there are some examples to show how to use it in your own CMake project. Check out their Github wiki, or for even more info, Sections 14 and 15 of their Installation Manual.
You mention python bindings, so if your looking to use something like SWIG, I suggest taking a look here.
I'm new to decompiling, so I'm sorry if I sound like an idiot.
Using Process Explorer I found out that the .exe I want to decompile is packed, and via PEiD it says "Nothing found *" . Due to it being packed, I am clueless on how to proceed. Any suggestions?
It is recommended to ask questions about Reverse Engineering in its suitable Stack Excahnge community.
There are already existing questions in SE.RE that might help you:
Unpacking binaries in a generic way
Unpacking binary statically
In a personal note, I'd suggest you to stop using PEiD since it is not maintaned for years. Check out Detect It Easy.
The title may seem complicated.
I made a library to be loaded within a Tcl script. Now I need to transfer it to Ubuntu 12.04.
Tclsh gives the following error:
couldn't load file "/apollo/applications/Linux-PORT/i586/lib/libapmntwraptcl.so":
**libgeos-3.4.2.so**:
cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
while executing "load $::env(ACCLIB)/libapmntwraptcl[info sharedlibextension]"
The library libgeos doesn't have the version 3.4.2 under Ubuntu 12.04. So I need to know which (sub) dependency of my library needs the famous libgeos-3.4.2.so, so that I can rebuild it or find an alternative.
Many thanks in advance.
Edit:
Thank you for your USEFUL answers. I already did ldd -v or -r. I have 200+ dependencies when I do ldd -r. The worst is, in the result list I see libgeos-3.3.8.so => /usr/lib/libgeos-3.3.8.so (0xb3ea9000) (version I have), but when I execute, Tclsh says
libgeos-3.4.2.so missing.
That's why I need something able to tell me the complete dependency tree of my library.
Could anyone give me a hint (not some useless showoff)?
Thank you so much.
You've accidentally (probably through no fault of your own) wandered into “DLL Hell”; the problem is that something that libapmntwraptcl.so depends on, possibly indirectly, does not have its dependencies satisfied. This sort of thing can be very difficult to solve precisely because the tools that know what went wrong (in particular, the system dynamic linker library) produce such little informative output by default.
What's even worse is that you have apparently multiple versions about. That's where DLL Hell reaches its worst incarnation. You need to be a detective to solve this; it's too hard to sensibly do remotely as many of the things that you poke your fingers at are determined by what previous steps said.
You need to identify exactly what versions you're loading, with ldd libapmntwraptcl.so (in your shell, not in Tcl). You also need to double check what your environment variables are immediately before the offending load command, as several of them can affect the loading process. The easiest way to do that is to put parray env just before the offending load, which will produce a dump of everything in the context where things could be failing; reading the manual page for ld.so will tell you a lot more about each of the possible candidates for trouble (there's many!).
You might also need to go through the list of libraries identified by the ldd program above and check whether each of those also has all their dependencies satisfied and in a way that you expect, and you should also bear in mind that failing to locate with ldd might not mean that the code actually fails. (That would be too easy.)
You can also try setting the LD_DEBUG environment variable to all before doing the load. That will produce quite a lot of information on standard out; maybe it will give you enough to figure out what is going wrong?
Finally, on Linux you need to bear in mind that there can be an RPATH set for a particular library (which can affect where it is found) and there's a system library cache which can also affect things.
I'm really sorry the error message isn't better. All I can really say is that it's exactly as much as Tcl is told about what went wrong, and its hardly anything.
I'm trying to port a wide Visual Studio (2008) Project to Linux System.
Do somebody know if it exist a way to easly "transform" the .vcproj file into a makefile?
Easiest would be to just learn how to write your own Makefile. It's quite simple.
But other than that you could try http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/28908/Tool-for-Converting-VC-2005-Project-to-Linux-Makef
Maybe this can help you, but you need to handle whit you outputs in the original code
Make-It-so
http://code.google.com/p/make-it-so/
or
sln2mak
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/28908/Tool-for-Converting-VC-2005-Project-to-Linux-Makef
i hope this can help you
You can use Winemaker, which is part of WINE: something all major distributions already include.
On Fedora, which use yum, you can, as root, run yum install /usr/bin/winemaker to install it. This will probably also work on other yum based operating system, but you may have to provide another path, if winemaker is packaged to install in /usr/bin (which I doubt will be the case).
Once you have converted the project, consider using Autotools instead -- it's, in my experience, by far the simplest build tool available and is very easy to learn and use. Just don't be scared to poor documentation you will often find lying around. The only files you have to edit are configure.ac and Makefile.am files.