Libraries built with Mingw-w64 require those dll:
libwinpthread-1.dll
libstdc++-6.dll
libgcc_s_seh-1.dll
I wonder what's up with that, what each dll does? Especially libgcc_s_seh, is that structured exception handling? I thought mingw couldn't work with seh.
Why mingw requires to always bring those dll with your exe?
I wonder if I'm just wasting my time by not just using visual studio as a windows compiler. It's so bloated though, 9 gb for installation.
Especially libgcc_s_seh, is that structured exception handling? I thought mingw couldn't work with seh.
Newer versions of GCC (4.8+ if I'm correct) should support SEH on MinGW.
I wonder what's up with that, what each dll does?
They provide the runtime and standard library.
libwinpthread: PThreads implementation on Windows (Threading)
libstdc++: C++ Standard Library (C/C++ library functions etc.)
libgcc_s_seh: Exception handling (SEH)
Why mingw requires to always bring those dll with your exe?
Because your program uses them. If you write a program without threads, standard library and exception and any OS interaction you wont need them.
These DLL's bring everything you need to run your program. Btw. this is not a MinGW only thing, and happens on other systems / compilers too. Often you just don't note this because the OS already ships the libraries, eg. MSVC libraries are very likely on a Windows machine. Dynamic linking always requires some sort of library files, that are .dll on Windows and .so on Linux.
If you have it available on your system use ldd <your application> to see what libraries are dynamically linked.
You can install these MinGW libraries into the system libraries or somewhere where the OS can find it. This enables your programs to use it and you no longer have to ship it with every application (what avoids duplication).
On the other side another option is to static link them. Unlike dynamic linking, you don't need any DLL; on the downside is a increase of you applications size (as now the three libraries are baked into the exe now).
I wonder if I'm just wasting my time by not just using visual studio as a windows compiler.
This depends on your situation. But probably my answer will give you some more insight.
My Unmanaged VC++ MFC (No .NET used, No CLR support, Use MFC in shared DLL) application trying to deploy with visual C++ runtime files as private assemblies.
It is properly running on windows 7 fresh installed computer.
But I gives “This application has requested the Runtime to terminate it in an unusual way.
Please contact the application's support team for more information.” error in fresh installed wondows XP sp3 computer.
I checked in application event logs. But there also no more details, just showing the same error.
Then I read these threads and surf around the internet.
Thread - 1
Thread - 2
Article -1
But couldn't find any solution clue or trouble shooting method. so here looking for some assist.
The easiest way to test is to install depends on the computer. Most likely, your application is built to use a later version of C++ runtime libraries, e.g. <assemblyIdentity type='win32' name='Microsoft.VC80.CRT' version='8.0.50727.4053' processorArchitecture='x86' publicKeyToken='1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b' />, but on the XP system it is an older version.
You would need to check what version of the runtime library used by analysing the program's manifest. Then check what depends is showing.
If the required version of runtime is missing, distribute it with the program's install.
On the side note, you could consider switching to the static link. The size of the binaries will be bigger, but these type of problems will be gone
Is the package type (x86 or x64) dependent on my application type or on the OS type it is installed on?
I.e., if I develop a 32-bit application do I need to
deploy the x86 package only or
deploy both packages and install x86 on 32-bit windows and x64 on 64-bit windows?
The answer to this question 32-bit VC++ redistributable on 64 bit OS? suggests that it's only the x86 package, so it would be dependent on my application but it doesn't give any explanation/links.
The MS download sites are also not specific on this.
When you compile, all use of the standard library creates references that must be resolved at link time. The linker bakes in the import library for the matching runtime DLL(s), which must be matched completely at load time. That means matching the compiler version, service pack, and bitness.
Also remember that a 32-bit process cannot load 64-bit DLLs. Because the 64-bit redist only contains 64-bit DLLs, it is of no help when loading a 32-bit executable.
it depends on the application if you need to maximize the potential of 64-bit OS, you may deploy both for handling 64-bit and 32-bit processing. However, if your application did not exceed the limits of 32-bit, you may deploy the application on x86 only, anyway it should also work on 64-bit OS via 32-bit virtualization.
I am trying to implement a virtual camera application in Visual C++ for 64 bit Windows. I started with the code here: tmhare.mvps.org/downloads/vcam.zip which emulates a video capture device using DirectShow filters. It works fine for me on 32 bit windows, but doesn't work on 64 bit windows. I modified the Visual C++ project as follows:
1) changed the platform to x64 and recompiled the dll, linking in the 64-bit version of strmbase.lib
2) changed preprocessor definitions to WIN64,_WIN64 from WIN32,_WIN32;
3) Recompiled the library and registered the dll using C:\Windows\system32\regsvr32.exe
The dll registers successfully and regedit shows three keys for my virtual camera in
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{860BB310-5D01-11D0-BD3B-00A0C911CE86}\Instance\{8E14549A-DB61-4309-AFA1-3578E927E933},
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID\{860BB310-5D01-11D0-BD3B-00A0C911CE86}\Instance\{8E14549A-DB61-4309-AFA1-3578E927E933},
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\CLSID\{8E14549A-DB61-4309-AFA1-3578E927E933}\InprocServer32
However, neither Skype nor Windows Live Messenger see the camera on 64-bit windows.
What am I doing wrong? I understand that Win64 has HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Classes\CLSID{guid} for 64-bit applications and HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Wow6432Node for 32-bit applications, but since I am compiling my code as a 64-bit application, it seems to me that its keys are being placed in the right part of the registry. Is there a DirectShow virtual camera filter implementation for 64-bit windows I could use as a sample (I only found one for 32-bit windows)?
I tried out DirectShow a year or so back, and from what I can remember, there isn't support for it in 64-bit applications. So I'd recommend either switching to 32-bit mode, or finding a library which supports 64-bit. This may help you.
http://directshownet.sourceforge.net/
64-bit filters work exactly as their 32-bit peers, no specificity involved. A general rule applies, which is worth mentioning: filter DLL bitness should match the application bitness, e.g. as Skype is always 32-bit regardless of OS bitness, you need 32-bit virtual camera for it. Skype just does not care about 64-bit filters as it never uses them.
Also, I don't understand your #2 above. You only need to create duplicate existing configuration for another target (x64) and visual Studio will update predefined conditionals such _WIN64, no manual changes required in code.
We are getting new dev machines and moving up to Vista 64 Ultimate to take advantage of our 8gb ram. Our manager wants us to do all dev in 32bit virtual machines to make sure there will be no problems with our code moving into production.
Is there any way to guarantee the resultant programs will work on 32bit os's?
I don't mind using virtual machines, but I don't like how they force you back into a "Single" monitor type view. I like moving my VS toolbars off to my other monitor.
EDIT: We are using Visual Studio 2005 and 2008, VB.NET and/or C#
EDIT: Using Harpreet's answer, these are the steps I used to set my Visual Studio IDE to compile x86 / 32bit:
Click Build and open Configuration Manager
Select Active Solution Platform drop down list
Select x86 if it is in the list and skip to step 5, if not Select <New...>
In the New Solution Platform dialog, select x86 and press OK
Verify the selected platform for all of your projects is x86
Click Close.
Enjoy.
Thank you,
Keith
I do development on 64 bit machines for 32 bit Windows. It's not a problem. You should make sure that your projects are set to compile in x86 mode in order to be conservative. You'll want to go through each project in the solution and double check this. You could also use the AnyCPU setting but that's a little riskier since it will run differently on your dev machine than a 32 bit machine. You want to avoid the 64bit mode, of course.
The problems I've run into are drivers that don't work when the app is compiled for 64 bit (explicitly 64 bit or AnyCPU compiled and running on 64 bit Windows). Those problems are completely avoidable by sticking with x86 compilation. That should reveal all flaws on your dev machines.
Ideally, you could set up a build and test environment that could be executed against frequently on a 32 bit machine. That should reassure your management and let you avoid the VM as your desktop.
As long as you compile your executables as 32 bit, they will run on both 32 bit and 64 Windows machines (guaranteed). Using 64 dev machines has the advantage that you can start testing your code with 64 bit compilation (to check for things like pointers casted to 32 bit integers), this way making the transition to 64 bit easier in the future (should you your company choose to do a 64 bit version).
Compiling for a 64bit OS is an option in the compiler. You can absolutely compile to a 32bit exe from within Vista 64 bit. When you run the app, you can then see in the TaskManager that there is a "*32" next to the process...this means it's 32bit ;)
I believe your managers need some more education on what 64bit OS really means :)
Not an answer to your question, but possibly a solution to your problem: VirtualBox (and probably others) supports "seamless integration" mode, which just gives you a second start bar and lets you drag windows around freely.
Also, and this is an answer to your question, it depends on your compile settings. You can compile for different environments, and you can perfectly compile 32-bit programs on a 64-bit system with Visual Studio. Can't tell you how, but I'm sure some Visual Studio guru could help you out.
We develop a 32-bit application using VS 2005 (2008 soon) and have just purchased some new machines with XP Pro x64 or Vista Business 64-bit on them so that we can take advantage of the extra RAM whilst holding a watching brief on the possibility of doing a 64-bit port if it becomes commercially necessary to do so. We haven't had any problems with doing this other than tweaking some scripts in our development environment etc.
Those developers who weren't included in this upgrade cycle still use 32-bit machines, so these should pick up problems when the unit tests and the application test suite are run as a matter of course before a check-in.
What we also do is to make sure that we have a set of "test build" machines made up of "typical" configurations (XP/Vista, 2/4/8 cores, etc.) that build and test sets of check-ins - we have various different test suites for stability, performance, etc. - before they are added to the integration area proper. Again, these haven't picked up any problems with running a 32-bit application built on a 64-bit OS.
Anyway, as others have already said, I wouldn't expect it to be a problem because it's the compiler that generates the appropriate code for the target OS regardless of the OS that the compiler is actually running on.
yeah, like adam was saying. There's 3 options: MSIL (default), x64, and x86. You can target x64 and it will generate dll's specifically for 64-bit systems, or you can do x86 which will run on 32-bit and 64-bit, but will have the same restrictions as 32-bit on a 64-bit system.
MSIL will basically let the JITer issue the platform specific instruction (at a slight performance penalty compared to a native image)
EDIT: no language, so i'm talking about .net framework languages like vb.net and c#, c++ is a completely different animal.
Found this today:
http://www.brianpeek.com/blog/archive/2007/11/13/x64-development-with-net.aspx
x64 Development with .NET
Earlier this year I made the switch to a 64-bit operating system - Vista Ultimate x64 to be exact. For the most part, this process has been relatively painless, but there have been a few hiccups along the way (x64 compatible drivers, mainly, but that's not the point of this discussion).
In the world of x64 development, there have been a few struggling points that I thought I'd outline here. This list will likely grow, so expect future posts on the matter.
In the wonderful world of .NET development, applications and assemblies can be compiled to target various platforms. By default, applications and assemblies are compiled as Any CPU in Visual Studio. In this scenario, the CLR will load the assembly as whatever the default target is for the machine it is being executed on. For example, when running an executable on an x64 machine, it will be run as a 64-bit process.
Visual Studio also provides for 3 specific platform targets: x86, x64 and Itanium (IA-64). When building an executable as a specific target, it will be loaded as a process of that type. For example, an x86-targeted executable run on an x64 machine will run as a 32-bit process using the 32-bit CLR and WOW64 layer. When assemblies are loaded at runtime, they can only be loaded by a process if their target matches that of the hosting process, or it is compiled as Any CPU. For example, if x64 were set as the target for an assembly, it can only be loaded by an x64 process.
This has come into play in a few scenarios for me:
XNA - XNA is available as a set of 32-bit assemblies only. Therefore, when referencing the XNA assemblies, the executable/assembly using them must be targeted to the x86 platform. If it is targeted as x64 (or as Any CPU and run on a 64-bit machine), an error will be thrown when trying to load the XNA assemblies.
Microsoft Robotics Studio - The XInputGamepadService uses XNA internally to talk to the Xbox 360 controller. See above.
Managed DirectX - While this is already deprecated and being replaced with XNA, it still has its uses. The assemblies are not marked for a specific target, however I had difficulty with memory exceptions, especially with the Microsoft.DirectX.AudioVideoPlayback assembly.
Phidgets - Depending on what library you download and when, it may or may not be marked as 32-bit only. The current version (11/8/07) is marked as such, and so requires a 32-bit process to host it.
The easiest way to determine if an executable or assembly is targeted to a specific platform is to use the corflags application. To use this, open a Visual Studio Command Prompt from your Start menu and run it against the assembly you wish to check.
The easiest way to determine if an executable or assembly is targeted to a specific platform is to use the corflags application. To use this, open a Visual Studio Command Prompt from your Start menu and run it against the assembly you wish to check.