In every platform there are various versions of a given library: multi-threaded, debug, dynamic, etc..
Correct me if I am wrong here, but in Linux an object can link to any version of a library just fine, regardless of how its compiled. For example, there is no need to use any special flags at compile time to specify whether the link will eventually be to a dynamic or a static version of the run-time libraries (clarification: I am not talking about creating dynamic/static libraries, I am talking about linking to them - so -fPIC doesn't apply). Same goes for debug or optimized version of libraries.
Why in MSVC (Windows in general with other compilers. true?) I need to recompile the code every time in order to link to different versions of libraries? I am talking the /MD, /MT, /MTd, /MDd, etc flags. Is the code actually using different system headers each time. If so, why?
I would really appreciate any pointers to solid documentation that discusses these library matters in Windows for a C/C++ programmer..
thanks!
The compiler setting does very little other than simple change some macro definitions. Its microsoft's c-runtime header files that change their behaviour based on the runtime selected.
First, the header files use a # pragma directive to embed in the object file a directive specifying which .lib file to include, choosing one of: msvcrt.lib, msvcrtd.lib, libcmt.lib and mibcmtd.lib
The directives look like this
#ifdef <release dll runtime>
#pragma comment(lib,"msvcrt.lib")
#endif
Next, it also modifies a macro definition used on all c-rt functions that adds the __declspec(dllimport) directive if a dll runtime was selected. the effect of this directive is to change the imported symbol from, say, '_strcmp' to '__imp__strcmp'.
The dll import libraries (msvcrt.lib and msvcrtd.lib) export their symbols (to the linker) as __imp_<function name>, which means that, in the Visual C++ world, once you have compiled code to link against the dll runtimes you cannot change your mind - they will NOT link against a static runtime.
Of course, the reverse is not the case - dll import libraries actually export their public symbols both ways: with and without the __imp_ prefix.
Which means that code built against a static runtime CAN be later co-erced into linking with the dll or static runtimes.
If you are building a static library for other consumers, you should ensure that your compiler settings include:
One of the static library settings, so that consumers of your .lib can choose themselves which c-runtime to use, and
Set the 'Omit Default Library Name' (/Zl)flag. This tells the compiler to ignore the #pragma comment(lib,... directives, so the obj files and resulting lib does NOT have any kind of implicit runtime dependency. If you don't do this, users of your lib who choose a different runtime setting will see confusing messages about duplicate symbols in libc.lib and msvcrt.lib which they will have to bypass by using the ignore default libraries flag.
These using these compiler options have two effects. The automatically #define a macro that may be used by header files (and your own code) to do different things. This effects only a small part of the C runtime, and you can check the headers to see if it's happening in your case.
The other thing is that the C++ compiler embeds a comment in your object file that tells the linker to automatically include a particular flavor of the MSVC runtime, whether you specify that library at link time or not.
This is convenient for small programs, where you simply type at a command prompt cl myprogram.cpp to compile and link, producing myprogram.exe.
You can defeat automatic linking of the commented-in flavor of the c-runtime by passing /nodefaultlib to the linker. And then specify a different flavor of the c-runtime instead. This will work if you are careful not to depend on the #defines for _MT and
_DLL (keep in mind that the standard C headers might be looking at these also).
I don't recommend this, but if you have a reason to need to do this, it can be made to work in most cases.
If you want to know what parts of the C header files behave differently, you should just search for _MT and _DLL in the headers and see.
All of the options use the same header files, however they all imply different #define which affect the header files. So they need to be recompiled.
The switches also link to the appropriate library, but the recompile is not because of the linking.
See here for a list of what is defined when you use each.
Related
I have a problem with an embedded linux C++ application I've written that consists of an executable and a dynamically linked library. The executable calls a function that is one of the entry points in the library, but that function misbehaves. I've investigated using gdb, and find that the library function, which is supposed to make a call to another function xyz() within the library, actually calls a function of the same name xyz()within the executable.
I'm very surprised this can happen, so maybe I'm doing something stupid. Isn't the library linked within itself without reference to the executable? If the executable wrongly made a call to abc() in the library instead of abc() in the executable that would make slightly more sense, because it is at least linked with the library, although in that case would the linker spot the dual definition? Or prioritise the local function?
I could just rename my functions so none of them have matching names, but I'd like to understand what is going on. I don't have much experience in this area, or with the gcc tools. Firstly, is what I think is happening in the above scenario even possible?
Both the executable and the library make calls to another library.
The link command for the library I'm using is:
powerpc-unknown-linux-gnuspe-g++-4.9.3 aaa.o bbb.o [etc] -shared -o libmylibary.so -L ../otherlibpath -Wl,-rpath-link,../otherlibpath -lotherlibname
That is way how the dynamic linker works. The symbols in executable have higher priority then symbols in dynamic libraries. Dynamic library designer must be aware about it. She must do measures to avoid unwanted symbol mismatch. Most libraries use:
In case of C++ use namespaces. All symbols exported from library should be in a library namespace.
In case of C use a name prefix or suffix for all exported symbol. For example OpenSSL library uses the prefix SSL_ and the public functions have names like SSL_set_mode() so the unwanted symbol collision is avoided.
Do not export symbols from the library that are supposed to be private. If the symbol is not exported from the library then the dynamic linker use the local symbol in the library. #pragma visibility is your friend. See https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Visibility
If the library with duplicate symbols is a 3rd party library and its author does not follow the recommendations above then you have to rename your function or perhaps ask the author for a library update.
EDIT
Export/do not export may be controlled by #pragma visibility directive (gcc specific extension):
void exported_function1(int);
void exported_function2(int);
#pragma GCC visibility push(hidden)
void private_function1(int);
void private_function2(int);
#pragma GCC visibility pop
Detail at the link above.
I'm getting a linker error indicating that the linker was unable to open a file (a static library) and therefore it fails. I am having a very difficult time troubleshooting this error because I never told the linker to link to the file which it is failing to open.
I am telling the linker to link to several static libraries. Many of the libraries I am linking to are wxWidgets static libraries. I don't need ALL of the modules from wxWidgets, so there are some which I am linking to and many which I am not. The file which the linker can't open is 'wxbase31ud_net.lib'. Like I said, that file is not among the libraries I am linking to. My immediate thought was that this dependency was being introduced implicitly somehow, perhaps by one of the wxwidgets libraries I WAS linking to. I didn't think static linkage worked this way but I didn't have any other ideas. I have been investigating that possibility and I've found nothing which indicates that is the case.
I set the build output verbosity to maximum, and the 'wxbase31ud_net.lib' is never mentioned anywhere until the error is reported.
I confirmed in my cmake project that the file in question was never passed back to me from the FindWxWidgets module, and was never referenced in any of the lists of files I associate with the target.
I grepped through the entire project directory and found no reference to the file anywhere, including the cmake-generated project files (visual studio project files).
What could be causing the linker to try and open this file?
Edit: Also, to be clear, the error I'm seeing is LNK1104
it's probably from a #pragma comment(lib,"???") except in the case of wx the argument to the pragma may be complex macros and it will be difficult to grep. This particular one may be from setup.h with #pragma comment(lib, wxWX_LIB_NAME("base", "")). You should be solving this by adding the directory with the wx libs to the linker's search directories.
The answer by zeromus is correct, this is almost certainly indeed due to including msvc/wx/setup.h which contains #pragma comment(lib)s. Possible solutions:
Simplest: build all the libraries, this will solve the errors and it's not a problem to link with a library you don't use.
Also simple but slightly less obvious: predefine wxNO_NET_LIB when building your project, this will prevent the file above from autolinking this particular library. You may/will need to define more wxNO_XXX_LIB symbols if you're missing other libraries, of course.
Less simple but arguably the least magic too: stop using $(WXWIN)/include/msvc in your include path, then wx/setup.h under it won't be included and nothing will be linked in automatically. The drawback is that you will have to specify all the libraries you do need to link with manually.
I'm trying to build my application with MSVC 2010 instead of GCC. With GCC everything works fine. My app uses boost_system and boost_thread libraries.
I built boost with VC2010 in "system" layout, that means the libraries are named just libboost_system.lib (and not libboost_system_compiler_threading_version_wtf_snafu.lib)
The libs reside in C:\Boost\lib,
the Makefile specifies
LFLAGS = /NOLOGO /INCREMENTAL:NO /SUBSYSTEM:CONSOLE
LIBS = /LIBPATH:C:/Boost/lib libboost_system.lib libboost_thread.lib Ws2_32.lib
when invoking nmake it compiles, but when trying to link it quits with
LINK : fatal error LNK1104: cannot open file 'libboost_date_time-vc100-mt-1_43.lib
I mean seriously, WTF? I told it to link libboost_systen.lib and libboost_thread.lib how come it tries to link libboost_data_time and why does it assume I built the libs in "tagged" layout??
How can I stop MSVC trying to be smart and guess what I might have wanted to link?
Thanks,
Philipp
This is a feature of the Boost libs with compatible compilers for automatic linking.
(Those convoluted library names cover the myriad of threading and linking options that are available on the platform; there are good reasons to use that convention on Windows...)
More information here:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_33_1/more/getting_started.html#auto-link
I can't find a page for a more recent version, but I believe the BOOST_ALL_NO_LIB and related options are all still valid in 1.43.
Assuming you are auto-linking (i.e. you've defined BOOST_ALL_DYN_LINK or library specific equivalents).
For layout 'system' you have to define the preprocessor macro:
BOOST_AUTO_LINK_NOMANGLE
to link to the correct library names.
For layout 'tagged' you have to define the preprocessor macro:
BOOST_AUTO_LINK_TAGGED
to link to the correct library names.
I don't know if you could do this override for some libraries and keep the default for others. That would be a very cumbersome setup I'd imagine.
I don't know if it's possible to do this, but I would like the /NODEFAULTLIB to be applied to a static library project.
I have many application projects (A.exe, B.dll, C.dll) that use a common static library D.lib.
This library has a lot of code and also has other .lib dependencies as well. One of them is the openssl library, which seems to have been built for win32 against the Release version of the CRT (i don't have the original project/sources).
So far, to avoid the mixing of the Release/Debug versions of CRT, I have to put the /NODEFAULTLIB:msvcrt.lib linker directive in all leaf projects (A.exe, B.dll). This works but I think it's not the ideal way of dealing with that issue.
I tried to put this property in D.lib project, but it has no effect.
Is there a way to force msvc++ to ignore the msvcrt.lib dependency from the 3rd party library?
A .lib does not have any linker settings because you don't link it, you link to it. A .lib is just an archive of .obj files, sort of like an uncompressed .zip file - that's why you have to put the setting on all projects that link to it.
If you're using VS2005+ you could use property sheets so that you only have to put the setting in one place and then use that property sheet in all projects.
However, OpenSSL is just that - Open Source, so you should be able to get the source for the version you are using and build it again (and add it to your version control system of course). I thought OpenSSL could be built as a DLL or LIB, which would solve your problem as the DLL would not interfere with the linking of your code.
Failing that, you always have the option of slitting your functionality out into a separate DLL so that you only have issues with one project.
To prevent your distributed static link library from depending on a specific MSVC runtime library you need to set this compiler option (in Visual Studio 2010 it looks like):
Configuration Properties -> C/C++ -> Advanced -> Omit Default Library Name = Yes (/ZI)
Now your users can link to your release built static lib from their debug build and not try to link to the incorrect runtime library causing problems, as well as linkers warnings.
Note that may cause link errors if your library actually depends on a specific runtime library or its behavior, and compatible components are not provided in some other way.
My understanding is that if library LIB in linked statically into a DLL, the DLL contains already all relevant code from LIB. Therefore, this coupling cannot be removed. This is just based on my understanding of statical linking, not on experiments.
I have a set of statically-compiled libraries, with fairly deep-running dependencies between the libraries. For example, the executable X uses libraries A and B, A uses library C, and B uses libraries C and D:
X -> A
A -> C
X -> B
B -> C
B -> D
When I link X with A and B, I don't want to get errors if C and D were not also added to the list of libraries—the fact that A and B use these libraries internally is an implementation detail that X should not need to know about. Also, when new dependencies are added anywhere in the dependency tree, the project file of any program that uses A or B would have to be reconfigured. For a deep dependency tree, the list of required libraries can become really long and hard to maintain.
So, I am using the "Additional Dependencies" setting of the Librarian section in the A project, adding C.lib. And in the same section of B's project, I add C.lib and D.lib. The effect of this is that the librarian bundles C.lib into A.lib, and C.lib and D.lib into B.lib.
When I link X, however, both A.lib and B.lib contain their own copy of C.lib. This leads to tons of warnings along the lines of
A.lib(c.obj) : warning LNK4006 "symbol" (_symbol) already defined in B.lib(c.obj); second definition ignored.
How can I accomplish this without getting warnings? Is there a way to simply disable the warning, or is there a better way?
EDIT: I have seen more than one answer suggesting that, for the lack of a better alternative, I simply disable the warning. Well, this is part of the problem: I don't even know how to disable it!
As far as I know you can't disable linker warnings.
However, you can ignore some of them, using command line parameter of linker eg. /ignore:4006
Put it in your project properties under linker->command line setting (don't remember exact location).
Also read this:
Link /ignore
MSDN Forum - hiding LNK warnings
Wacek
Update If you can build all involved project in single solution, try this:
Put all project in one sln.
Remove all references to static libraries from projects' linker or librarian properties.
There is "Project Dependencies..." option in context menu for each project in Solution Explorer. Use it to define dependencies between project.
It should work. It doesn't invalidate anything I said before, the basic model of building C/C++ programs stays the same. VS (at least 2005 and newer) is simply smart enough to add all needed static libraries to linker command line. You can see it in project properties.
Of course this method won't help if you need to use already compiled static libraries. Then you need to add them all to exe or dll project that directly or indirectly uses them.
I don't think you can do anything about that. You should remove references to other static libs from static libs projects and add all needed static libs projects as dependences of exe or dll projects. You will just have to live with fact that any project that includes A.lib or B.lib also needs to include C.lib.
As an alternative you can turn your libraries into dlls which provide a richer model.
Statically compiled libraries simply aren't real libraries with dependency information, etc, like dlls. See how, when you build them, you don't really need to provide libraries they depend on? Headers are all that's needed. See? You can't even really say static libraries depend on something.
Static library is just an archive of compiled and not yet linked object code. It's not consistent whole. Each object file is compiled separately and remains separate entity inside the library. Linking happens when you build exe or dll. That's when you need to provide all object code. That's when all the symbol and dependency resolving happens.
If you add other static libraries to static library dependencies, librarian will simply copy all code together. Then, when building exe, linker will give you lots of warnings about duplicate symbols. You might be able to block those warnings (I don't know how) but be careful. It may conceal real problems like real duplicate symbols with differing definitions. And if you have static data defined in libraries, it probably won't work anyway.
Microsoft (R) Incremental Linker Version 9.00.x (link.exe) knows argument /ignore:4006
You could create one library which contains A, B, C & D and then link X against that.
Since it's a library, only object modules which are actually referenced will get linked into the final executable.
Note that one way of getting this warning is to define a member function in a header without the inline statement:
// Foo.h
class Foo
{
void someFunction();
};
void Foo:someFunction() // Warning! - should be "inline void Foo::someFunction()"
{
// do stuff
}
The problem is you are not localizing library C's symbols. So you have a ODR violation when you link in A and B. You need to have a way to make these private. By default all symbols are exported. One way to do this is to have a special linker definition file for both A and B that explicitly mention which files need to be exported.
[1] ODR = One Definition Rule.
I think the best course of action here will be to ignore/disable the linker warnings(LNK4006) since C.lib needs to be part of both A.Lib and B.lib and A.Lib does not need to know that B.lib itself uses C.Lib.
This may not fix your link error, but it might help with your dependency tree issue.
What I do, is just use a #pragma to include a lib in the .cpp file that needs it. For example:
#pragma comment(lib:"wsock32")
Like I said, I'm not sure it would keep the symbols in that object file, I'd have to whip up an example to try it out.
Poor flodin seems frustrated that nobody will explain how to disable the linker warnings. Well, I've had a similar problem, and for years I have simply lived with the fact that several hundred warnings were displayed. Now, however, thanks to the info from Link /ignore, I figured out how to disable the linker warnings.
I'm using Visual Studio 2008. In Project -> Settings -> Configuration Properties -> Librarian -> Command Line -> Additional Options, I added "/ignore:4006" (without the quotes). Now my warnings are gone!