I need to create a Lua binary for Windows that is fully portable, meaning that I can have it on a flash drive and it will work on any Windows computer (well, Windows 7 computer). I need at least a few additional libraries including Lua socket, a library that allows the proper storage (without rounding at all) and computation of large numbers (around 81 digits in total), and the rs232 library.
The problem is that I don't know how to compile them together into a binary, or if I can use some method to just use a plain Lua binary and use require to add the others. I've been researching this for a long time (a few weeks now) and haven't been able to find a solution. If anyone can help, it would be greatly appreciated.
If it makes the process any easier, I do have a Linux operating system I can use if necessary.
Answer: if you are using Windows, you can get the .dll files for each library and add them to your Lua directory. I now have a version of Lua with all of the libraries I wanted, plus a few more. Thank you everyone for your help.
Related
Sometimes in s/w companies, customers provide data in multiple formats. There are linkable and executable data that are said to be "Rehosted" and compiled object files that are said to be "Retargeted". I am trying to understand what rehosting and retargeting mean in this area. Is it similar to the Bootstrap theory in computer science? I have the understanding of the following process (if not incorrect):
PROBLEM:
I need to write a compiler for a new language called "MyLang" to run on PowerPC
Solution:
1. I need to write a compiler for a language "MyLang-Mini"; a subset of "MyLang" to run on PowerPC.
2. I need to write a compiler for "MyLang" using "MyLang-Mini" to run on PowerPC.
3. I run the compiler obtained from no. 1 through the compiler obtained from no. 2 to
obtain the compiler for MyLang to run on PowerPC.
IN BESPOKE "T" DIAGRAM (...ISH):
MyLang PowerPC MyLang PowerPC
MyLangMini MyLangMini PowerPC PowerPC(instr.)
PowerPC(instr.)
What I am getting confused about is rehosting and retargeting. How are they coonected to this concept? What am I rehosting and retargeting if I have some binary data such as .exe or .obj? I would appreciate some detailed explanation if possible please!
I know that this will embark onto "CROSS-COMPILERS", but would prefer expert opinions to be sure.
Thanks in advance.
I now know that in s/w engineering:
REHOSTING - If you have a third-party application linkable/executable that requires usage on your host machine, you do rehosting. The target in this case are most often the same (OS platform, processor, etc.). In worst case, there is a virtualisation required. The rehosted application will run as if it was one of the application running in the host machine
RETARGETTING - If you have a third-party source code, you might need to recompile that to match with your target environment. It may also be that you have third-party .o or .obj compiled models and you want to link them with your source code (retargeted) in order to host it on a host machine. Just like REHOSTED application, it will be as if the application was installed on the host machine.
It will be good to know how this is similar to the compiler rehosting and retargeting. Sorry, I am a newbee is this area and will appreciate even a slap on the wrist.
Question: How do make a single make file to compile several different systems, environments, and sets of libraries at once?
Info:
I'm a student and as such most of my work is done for the sake of learning how these things work. Right now I'm building a game engine from the ground up. I'd like to be able to make it cross platform in terms of OS, but also for different environments. My target environments are both 32 and 64 bit (my desktop as well as my netbook), with a graphics card and with mesa, and linux and windows. so overall it should out put 8 binaries.
I'm still very new to make, as well as the whole concept of cross compiling. I imagine that the process of compiling more than 1 binary isn't hard. but where I'm kind of stuck is how do i get it to attach the right libraries? The Ubuntu Linux vs the WinAPI libraries, 32bit vs 64bit libraries. etc etc. Is it even possible to get libraries in such a manner?
If you need me to clarify further I can. Thanks.
Addendum: Basically I want to know how to compile headers for drivers i may not have. for example. I want to compile all the files on my netbook, including the ones for openCL, I don't want to run them, as my netbook has no GPU, I just want to compile. conversely, I want to use my desktop compile for my netbook which uses ocelot and mesa for its gpu dealings, but my desktop does not have mesa or ocelot on it. that sort of thing. Thanks.
I'm trying to learn Lua, but I don't really know which binary to download. There's 2 choices:
Lua Binaries
Lua for Windows
The second option Lua for Windows seems to be the recommended option, but the installer weighs in at 26.6Mb, which is pretty hefty for what is supposed to be a v.lightweight language.
I'm thinking of using Lua as a scripting language for games, and perhaps as a fast development language for file processing like how Python or Ruby does it. So it must be something lightweight, not a 26.6Mb file.
Which is the appropriate one to download and start?
Luaforwindows, no doubt. It's simpler, easier and faster.
The installer comes with lots of stuff (Scite editor & several extra libs if I remember well). But the installer asks you before installing all those extra stuff. Just install the minimum and you will be fine.
Lua for Windows includes a handful of other, useful libraries and tools. The actual Lua executable included is still tiny, in the 1-2MB range as expected.
Having the extras there already will only make things easier, and disk space is cheap: go with Lua for Windows.
You may also want to check ZeroBrane Studio, which is only 4M download on Windows and is based on the same editor as SciTE that comes with Lua for Windows. ZBS also comes with 50+ Lua examples and few simple lessons to get started quickly with Lua programming.
Quoting from here.
Installation
The LuaBinaries files are intended for advanced users and programmers who want to incorporate Lua in their applications or distributions and would like to keep compatibility with LuaBinaries, so they also will be compatible with many other modules available on the Internet.
If what you want is a full Lua installation, please check other projects such as the Lua for Windows and LuaRocks.
Seems quite clear to me that you should download Lua for Windows.
Is it Possible to create bootable (Applications for MBR )application using Delphi or Pascal (I know we cant use vcl , RTL and other stuffs because they depend on OS), but can i use at least Readln and writeln.
If it is true !!! Can we run the program under other OS.
but i know that PE (windows) and ELF (Linux ) formats are different. but at least with some small modification can i do it.
It's worth saying that PE is a very diverse format than ELF.
Not only a few bytes to modify... the whole layout and library access is diverse, and binding is totally diverse.
In order to boot Delphi application in console mode, you can put a small DOS system (take a look at FreeDOS, for instance), then run your Delphi application using for instance DWPL. DWPL allows to run native 32-bit protected mode DOS programs with Delphi 5-7 using the WDOSX DOS extender as the core. I used this in some old hardware with a network adapter, and it worked like a charm. If you are interested in it, I could post some updated code of DWPL.
For such targets, you should take a look at Free Pascal. By nature, you can customize it to whatever target you want. There is even diverse draft Operating Systems written using FPC. See for instance Toro or ClassiOS - the latest uses Delphi executables as source.
You can see the boot code of Toro from here, and a "main program" source code created with it.
But for direct booting applications, booting is not so difficult. The real problem is the hardware layer.
The BIOS gives very little access to it.
Just for the network layer, you'll have to take a look at EtherBoot sites and such to get some low-level network access... but it could be very time consuming to rewrite all those drivers by hand!
In short: all those "pure pascal" OS are only theoretical, running a console and some low-performance network (emulating a poor network adapter like NE2000 or such). So those "pascal" OS are only proof of concept. FAR away from a working solution! But very nice technological challenge, in all cases, very inspiring.
Why reinvent the wheel? If you want a light and fast system, use a custom Linux kernel.
Then use CrossKylix to compile your Delphi application (with no User Interface) into Linux, or even better Free Pascal.
You don't really place "applications" in the MBR.
The entire size of an MBR is 512 bytes, of which you can only use 446 for code.
Good luck creating something useful in that if you don't even have an OS to delegate functionality to yet. Basically all that you can do in the MBR is place code to start a boot loader.
Here's a page with disassembly of an MBR:
http://www.dewassoc.com/kbase/hard_drives/master_boot_record.htm
Why must you write the boot loader?
You could use a ready-made bootloader like GRUB and chainload your PE executable, from it.
Of course, this is very ancient and hairy stuff, but in the good old days, people did this win PE format executables, and a DOS Extender.
For something a little more this-century, why not make your own bootable REACTOS disk, and add your own PE executable written in Delphi to handle the "user shell"?
You could also (but this would require licensing) use the Windows PXE. I think that projects like BartPE probably fall on the gray side of legal, or are at least, unlicensed. Thus, a completely MS-free solution (reactos) for a completely self-contained kiosk PC, with ReactOS, might be more what you are looking for.
Can you write your own operating system? your own UI layer? your own video device drivers? I didn't think so. So use DOS and TurboPascal, or ReactOS and a PE win executable. Or you can use FreePascal and just build your app on a very lightweight portable Linux kernel and root filesystem.
So here is the problem: Recently someone bought a new PC for server to replace an older dating from before 1985 (i wonder how it is possible to work daily from then) .
He wants to put there the old COBOL software and he isnt willing in any means to rewrite it to something better..
So is there any compiler for 1985 cobol? For nowadays red hat linux? Googling it found opencobol and other few but all converted the code to c... Seems too compilacted too me..
UPDATE AS REQUESTED
AIX was the old system
What's the problem with converting the COBOL to C and then compiling? As long as it works. Early C++ environments were implemented in the same way: they converted the C++ to C, and then invoked the C compiler.
Converting the COBOL to C allows them to use high-level abstractions that implement the COBOL equivalents in C. They can leverage the standard C libraries, and also convert the COBOL data access code into calls to widely available databases like MySQL. Finally, converting to C and then compiling leverages the vast amount of development effort that went into code generation. Were they to try compiling directly to object code, they'd have to generate the intermediate code expected by the GNU compiler subsystem, or they'd have to go directly to object code. Either one of those would be much more complicated than converting to C, meaning that the likelihood of bugs in the COBOL compiler would be much higher.
From where I sit, I'd say OpenCOBOL is worth looking into. Note that they say they implement "a substantial part of the COBOL 85 and COBOL 2002 standards." You probably want to make sure that they implement the parts that you need.
I would also suggest that you look into TinyCOBOL.
You don't mention when the application, or AIX was last updated. If these were updated in the last few years, you may be able to port the application, without re-compiling. You should check to see what COBOL compiler was used originally, e.g IBM, RM/COBOL, AcuCOBOL, etc. It might be possible to buy a run-time only version (will execute, but not compile), which would be cheaper than buying a compiler.
A company called Micro Focus make a cobol compiler for Windows but I can assure you it is not cheap at all!
Standard method for doing this is called migrating and involves a number of steps including converting source file to a textfile format or a filetype compatible with the target computer, using an approved method of converting to a file and writing to magtape with compatible recording method of Phase encoding or to disk or other data medium possibly in the ASN.xx mode, transferring to the new computer to then read in the file (through ASN.yy) and store it in a native or import file format, then either use a utility to convert it to the sourcefile format or by running the program development environment to access the native text file or import file and saving the content as a native sourcefile. Perform manual checks and amendments to the source or script code and then compile the program and repeat alterations until a working version is achieved. Create test data files on the new computer and create a new jobfile or macro to run the job in the development environment. When fully tested the program can be run live using data files and live macros or jobfiles migrated over from the old system or newly created in more or less the same way as bringing over the source code. An important point is that the live data must be read into a specialized data takeon or loading program to achieve a populated database before any new transactions occur in the case of a structured datafile being necessary. When moving from AIX or other versions of Unix to an entirely different operating system the characters for end of line and linefeed and end of record may need specific conversion if they are not handled by a file format convertor or exporter utility.