Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Dependencies


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
6 replies to this topic

#1 Vincent_M   Members   -  Reputation: 596

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 19 May 2013 - 09:43 AM

Supporting multiple libraries

Sponsor:

#2 Vincent_M   Members   -  Reputation: 596

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 19 May 2013 - 11:26 AM

My last post didn't save on my phone^

I have a bunch of code that require a few libraries such as cURL and LUA to build. I'd like to make the installation as simple as possible and run on quote a few operating systems. Would it be best just to list the dependencies and have then install it or provide the correct version of each library in the download since they're GNU licensed?

#3 Khatharr   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2940

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 19 May 2013 - 12:37 PM

Have a separate distro for each platform?


void hurrrrrrrr() {__asm sub [ebp+4],5;}

There are ten kinds of people in this world: those who understand binary and those who don't.

#4 NightCreature83   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2705

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 19 May 2013 - 02:26 PM

When distributing code you should provide all libraries, dll's the executable needs to run. These should also exist in the right location usually the install directory of the application, but in the case of C++ runtime on windows you should run the redist installer instead, same goes for Direct X. The latter two are free to redistribute with your application. As for Other Os I have not enough experience with those to comment on this, but it boils down to the similar fact that you should apply all the dependencies it requires, a-la apt-get install fashion for Debian and derivatives for example where it asks the user to install the dependent libraries.

Edited by NightCreature83, 19 May 2013 - 02:28 PM.

Worked on titles: CMR:DiRT2, DiRT 3, DiRT: Showdown, GRID 2, Mad Max

#5 Hodgman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 28667

Like
3Likes
Like

Posted 19 May 2013 - 08:08 PM

The convention on Linux seems to be to inform the system of your dependencies, and have it download and install them into some global location for you... Whereas on windows each application is usually bundled with all their own components internally (except some exceptions, like runtimes from Microsoft, java, python, etc)...
IMHO, the Linux convention is absolutely horrible from a configuration management and quality assurance perspective, so I much prefer every app to be bundled with their dependencies.

#6 Vincent_M   Members   -  Reputation: 596

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 May 2013 - 07:59 AM

I'd like to stay away from having a separate distro per platform at this time since since it's so early on. Another reason is because you're able to develop for multiple platforms per OS. For example, on Mac, you can develop Mac, iOS, Android/OUYA, and possibly PS Vita (assuming it's the full SDK) games. So for this, I'd like to have it to where people can just drop their code where they feel comfortable, and drag and drop files.

 

I definitely agree with NightCreature83's suggestion about providing all libraries. This concerns me with Linux, however, since there are so many different distros of that OS, and it seems commonplace, from my experience, to build the libraries from source using that specific distro's source code repository (generally through apt-get install, etc) so the binaries match up with the OS's 'dialect'. I'm assuming that some distros of Linux have modified kernels, but I'm quite new in this area!

 

Having an install script for Linux was something I think would be a good idea. That's something I'll need to learn how to do when I have free time.

 

One thing I've done in the past, and it's probably bad practice, but if I have to install any development DLLs such as glu32, glew32.dll, etc, I'd just add them into my Windows' system/system32 directory. I understand that could be malicious by sticking foreign DLLs into, but it was a sandbox environment. I'd like to have some way of Visual Studio just to drop the necessary DLLs into the executable's directory for the release build to automate things. It seems easy enough, but that's yet another responsibility my engine would require developers using it. It's a small step developers could overlook --and that goes for me too! lol



#7 NightCreature83   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2705

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 21 May 2013 - 02:42 AM

I'd like to stay away from having a separate distro per platform at this time since since it's so early on. Another reason is because you're able to develop for multiple platforms per OS. For example, on Mac, you can develop Mac, iOS, Android/OUYA, and possibly PS Vita (assuming it's the full SDK) games. So for this, I'd like to have it to where people can just drop their code where they feel comfortable, and drag and drop files.

 

I definitely agree with NightCreature83's suggestion about providing all libraries. This concerns me with Linux, however, since there are so many different distros of that OS, and it seems commonplace, from my experience, to build the libraries from source using that specific distro's source code repository (generally through apt-get install, etc) so the binaries match up with the OS's 'dialect'. I'm assuming that some distros of Linux have modified kernels, but I'm quite new in this area!

 

Having an install script for Linux was something I think would be a good idea. That's something I'll need to learn how to do when I have free time.

 

One thing I've done in the past, and it's probably bad practice, but if I have to install any development DLLs such as glu32, glew32.dll, etc, I'd just add them into my Windows' system/system32 directory. I understand that could be malicious by sticking foreign DLLs into, but it was a sandbox environment. I'd like to have some way of Visual Studio just to drop the necessary DLLs into the executable's directory for the release build to automate things. It seems easy enough, but that's yet another responsibility my engine would require developers using it. It's a small step developers could overlook --and that goes for me too! lol

 

apt-get install doesn't do any compiling it only gets and installs *.deb packages for you which are all precompiled.

 

You should never ever copy anything into the system, system32 or SySWOW64 directories in windows, unless it is through an official installer, read up on dll hell. If you really want to distribute your own versions of these dlls, put the next to the executable as the dll loader will look in that directory before any other one. Currently all dependencies are installed in WinSxS (side-by-side installation of dlls) and you really don't want to mess around in that directory on your own.

 

You need to look into installers as they can take care of all these dependencies for you, and kick off the correct redistributable installers as well. If you want VS to place the right dlls into your exes build directory look into post build steps for VS.
 


Edited by NightCreature83, 21 May 2013 - 02:46 AM.

Worked on titles: CMR:DiRT2, DiRT 3, DiRT: Showdown, GRID 2, Mad Max




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS