shared-libraries

I want to view the exported functions of a shared library on Linux. What command allows me to do this? (On Windows I use the program depends) What you need is nm and its -D option: $ nm -D /usr/lib/libopenal.so.1 . . . 00012ea0 T alcSetThreadContext 000140f0 T alcSuspendContext U atanf U calloc . . . Exported sumbols are indicated by a T . Required symbols that must be loaded from other shared objects have a U . Note that the symbol table does not include just functions, but exported variables as well. See the nm manual page for more information. user2391685 objdump -T *.so may also do the job

I'm trying to create a hello world project for Linux dynamic libraries (.so files). So I have a file hello.c: #include <stdio.h> void hello() { printf("Hello world!\n"); } How do I create a .so file that exports hello() , using gcc from the command line? dreamcrash To generate a shared library you need first to compile your C code with the -fPIC (position independent code) flag. gcc -c -fPIC hello.c -o hello.o This will generate an object file (.o), now you take it and create the .so file: gcc hello.o -shared -o libhello.so EDIT : Suggestions from the comments: You can use gcc -shared -o

I have a library I am building. All of my objects compile and link successively when I run either one of: ar rcs lib/libryftts.a $^ gcc -shared $^ -o lib/libryftts.so in my Makefile. I also am able to successfully install them into /usr/local/lib When I test the file with nm, all the functions are there. My problem is that when I run gcc testing/test.c -lryftts -o test && file ./test or gcc testing/test.c lib/libryftts.a -o test && file ./test it says: test: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object instead of test: ELF 64-bit LSB executable as I would expect. What am I doing wrong? What am I doing wrong?

We develop some project in plain C (C99). But, we have one library as source codes (math library) in C++ . We need this library so I would like to ask, what is the most elegant way to integrate this source codes? Ratio between sizes of C and C++ is 20:1 so moving to C++ is not the option. Should we use static library? DLL? (It's all on Windows). EDIT: Based on discussion in the comment, I should point out that separating things into a C-compatible struct duck and a derived class Duck is probably unnecessary. You can probably safely shovel the implementation into struct duck and eliminate class