Qt 5.5.1 OS X 10.11 Static linkage Qt Multimedia
-
I need to static compile an application in OS X. This application is works and statically compiles in Windows. And I can compile it non-statically via Qt Creator in OS X. It's a simple console script wich use the qtmultimedia module.
OS X version is 10.11, Xcode 7.2.I try the following steps:
- Install Qt through the Qt installer.
- Build Qt statically from Source:
2.1. ./configure -prefix /Users/User/qtstatic -static -debug-and-release -opensource -nomake tests -nomake examples -skip declarative -skip quick1 -skip quickcontrols -qt-libpng -qt-libjpeg -no-opengl -qt-zlib
2.2. make -j 4
2.3. For build the Qt Multimedia module do this steps (https://forum.qt.io/topic/30781/solved-qt5-deploying-an-application-on-windows-static-linking/7):
- cd qtmultimedia
- Users/User/Qt5.5.1/5.5/Src/qtbase/bin/qmake /Users/User/Qt5.5.1/5.5/Src/qtmultimedia/qtmultimedia.pro -o Makefile
- cd ../
- make
2.4. sudo make install
- Try compile an application:
3.1. cd applicationDir
3.2. make clean
3.3. /Users/User/qtstatic/bin/qmake -config release
3.4. make
Then I get the following error message:
"Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
"AVFVideoRendererControl::staticMetaObject", referenced from:
AVFMediaPlayerService::releaseControl(QMediaControl*) in libqavfmediaplayer.a(avfmediaplayerservice.o)
"AVFVideoRendererControl::AVFVideoRendererControl(QObject*)", referenced from:
AVFMediaPlayerService::requestControl(char const*) in libqavfmediaplayer.a(avfmediaplayerservice.o)
ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64
clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation)
make: *** [MetadataExtractor] Error 1
Please see .pro file of this application:
QT += core multimedia widgets
#QMAKE_LFLAGS += -static -static-libgcc
QT -= gui
TARGET = MetadataExtractor
CONFIG += console
CONFIG -= app_bundle
#QMAKE_LFLAGS_RELEASE += -static -static-libgcc
TEMPLATE = app
SOURCES += main.cpp
extractor.cpp
HEADERS +=
extractor.hPlease advise how I can fix this issue.
-
You can't build static linked binaries in OSX.
Apple doesn't provide static versions of their libs, so, static compilation always fail.
You can try what they say in the link below, but, for me, didn't worked.
https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/qa/qa1118/_index.html
When a coder says that it's impossible to do something, he's actually feeling too lazy to do it.
-
You can't build static linked binaries in OSX.
Apple doesn't provide static versions of their libs, so, static compilation always fail.
You can try what they say in the link below, but, for me, didn't worked.
https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/qa/qa1118/_index.html
@Tyras said:
Apple doesn't provide static versions of their libs
As far as I know no one does, except linux, but you'd need the full source of the system libraries, which is a bit excessive and unnecessary.
@Ivan-Kolesnikov
It's a linker error, so you have to investigate that. While I don't work on macs, you seem to link with default options against the OS-wide Qt binaries, which probably are dynamic libraries. I can't seeCONFIG += staticin your project.
Kind regards.
-
@Tyras said:
Apple doesn't provide static versions of their libs
As far as I know no one does, except linux, but you'd need the full source of the system libraries, which is a bit excessive and unnecessary.
@Ivan-Kolesnikov
It's a linker error, so you have to investigate that. While I don't work on macs, you seem to link with default options against the OS-wide Qt binaries, which probably are dynamic libraries. I can't seeCONFIG += staticin your project.
Kind regards.
I'm not sure, but looks like windows provide them with MSVC, since static builds works even without the source. in OSX, Even if you do as you say and put CONFIG += static, the build will fail, saying that it can't find the crt0 library, unless its a library project. You can confirm this from apple in the link I provided.
When a coder says that it's impossible to do something, he's actually feeling too lazy to do it.
-
I'm not sure, but looks like windows provide them with MSVC, since static builds works even without the source. in OSX, Even if you do as you say and put CONFIG += static, the build will fail, saying that it can't find the crt0 library, unless its a library project. You can confirm this from apple in the link I provided.
@Tyras said:
I'm not sure, but looks like windows provide them with MSVC
It certainly doesn't, how else MS could ask you for a lot of money for windows?
the build will fail, saying that it can't find the crt0 library, unless its a library project.
It's possible, however I don't see a reason for anyone to want to link the runtime statically.
You can confirm this from apple in the link I provided.
I can't really confirm it, because I neither have a mac, nor I'm going to have. What I can do is to wait for some of the mac users to jump at the chance to make me look silly ;)
Kind regards.
-
It certainly doesn't, how else MS could ask you for a lot of money for windows?
AFAIK, static libraries are binaries, and they can dynamically link (and require) to the system libraries blunded in Windows. Why couldn't they charge for it?
I can't really confirm it, because I neither have a mac, nor I'm going to have. What I can do is to wait for some of the mac users to jump at the chance to make me look silly ;)
Well, You can, since in the link (that is from Apple's Technical Q&A), says:
Apple does not support statically linked binaries on Mac OS X. A statically linked binary assumes binary compatibility at the kernel system call interface, and we do not make any guarantees on that front. Rather, we strive to ensure binary compatibility in each dynamically linked system library and framework.
When a coder says that it's impossible to do something, he's actually feeling too lazy to do it.
-
It certainly doesn't, how else MS could ask you for a lot of money for windows?
AFAIK, static libraries are binaries, and they can dynamically link (and require) to the system libraries blunded in Windows. Why couldn't they charge for it?
I can't really confirm it, because I neither have a mac, nor I'm going to have. What I can do is to wait for some of the mac users to jump at the chance to make me look silly ;)
Well, You can, since in the link (that is from Apple's Technical Q&A), says:
Apple does not support statically linked binaries on Mac OS X. A statically linked binary assumes binary compatibility at the kernel system call interface, and we do not make any guarantees on that front. Rather, we strive to ensure binary compatibility in each dynamically linked system library and framework.
@Tyras said:
AFAIK, static libraries are binaries
Everything built is a binary, a static library, a dynamic library, an executable, you name it. However you're not linking the system libraries statically, and that's exactly the point of having an SDK.
A statically linked binary assumes binary compatibility at the kernel system call interface
Meaning you can't statically link the system libraries, the frameworks and the like, as they make direct calls to the kernel interface.
Rather, we strive to ensure binary compatibility in each dynamically linked system library and framework.
So you can link the system libraries and frameworks dynamically. This doesn't in principle mean that Qt can't be built statically and/or your applications can't link Qt statically.
Kind regards.
-
So you can link the system libraries and frameworks dynamically. This doesn't in principle mean that Qt can't be built statically and/or your applications can't link Qt statically.
The Applications can link QT statically, yes. The problem won't be when linking to QT, since, as I said before, it is possible to create static libraries in OSX, and therefore, create a static build of QT libraries.
Talking from experience, when you try to build an static executable in OSX (with or without QT), it will try to link to a static version of crt0, that is not provided. So, unless you build yourself a static version of crt0 for OSX (as said in the link I provided), It will fail.
When a coder says that it's impossible to do something, he's actually feeling too lazy to do it.
-
So you can link the system libraries and frameworks dynamically. This doesn't in principle mean that Qt can't be built statically and/or your applications can't link Qt statically.
The Applications can link QT statically, yes. The problem won't be when linking to QT, since, as I said before, it is possible to create static libraries in OSX, and therefore, create a static build of QT libraries.
Talking from experience, when you try to build an static executable in OSX (with or without QT), it will try to link to a static version of crt0, that is not provided. So, unless you build yourself a static version of crt0 for OSX (as said in the link I provided), It will fail.
@Tyras said:
static executable
I have no notion of what that is, sorry. Maybe @SGaist will explain to me, if he's feeling benevolent, what Apple considers a "static binary".
Talking from experience, when you try to build an static executable in OSX (with or without QT), it will try to link to a static version of crt0, that is not provided. So, unless you build yourself a static version of crt0 for OSX (as said in the link I provided), It will fail.
I'll just take your word for it, since I have no basis for comparison. Note that I'm not so much arguing, as trying to understand "why" would that be. :)
Kind regards.
-
I understand "static executable" (or, as Apple calls it, "static binary") as an executable file that requires no libraries other than those blunded by default with the OS.
I'll just take your word for it, since I have no basis for comparison. Note that I'm not so much arguing, as trying to understand "why" would that be. :)
Trust me, I'm still trying to understand why they did it this way.
When a coder says that it's impossible to do something, he's actually feeling too lazy to do it.
-
I understand "static executable" (or, as Apple calls it, "static binary") as an executable file that requires no libraries other than those blunded by default with the OS.
I'll just take your word for it, since I have no basis for comparison. Note that I'm not so much arguing, as trying to understand "why" would that be. :)
Trust me, I'm still trying to understand why they did it this way.
I understand "static executable" (or, as Apple calls it, "static binary") as an executable file that requires no libraries other than those blunded by default with the OS.
I don't understand it like this. However I believe @Ivan-Kolesnikov is not linking the needed dynamic libraries from the OS X framework(s) - the foundation framework or however that is called ... he has to have
LIBS += -lavfoundationor something along this lines in his application.Edit:
Maybe something like:LIBS += -framework AppKit -framework QuartzCore -framework QTKitwhich I saw in a repo diff update somewhere.
Kind regards.
-
Hi,
The symbols missing come from the Qt multimedia plugin based on AV Foundation. There are some special considerations for plugins when using Qt statically. These are described here.
On Windows you can have a fully static application. Microsoft does provide their runtime in both configurations but recommend to use the shared version to allow update to be done to them (as in security update). Going the full static way is possible but requires to modify Qt's mkspec to link against the static runtime and thus a full rebuild.
On OS X, it's indeed not possible to have 100% static application. You will always link dynamically to the system frameworks. Note that if you want to use the App Store, having a statically linked application is likely to get your application rejected. IIRC it's part of Apple's guideline to use dynamic libraries and framework.
So all in all, you can use a static Qt while still having dynamic dependencies.
On an important side note: static linking has licensing implications.
Interested in AI ? www.idiap.ch
Please read the Qt Code of Conduct - https://forum.qt.io/topic/113070/qt-code-of-conduct -
Hi,
The symbols missing come from the Qt multimedia plugin based on AV Foundation. There are some special considerations for plugins when using Qt statically. These are described here.
On Windows you can have a fully static application. Microsoft does provide their runtime in both configurations but recommend to use the shared version to allow update to be done to them (as in security update). Going the full static way is possible but requires to modify Qt's mkspec to link against the static runtime and thus a full rebuild.
On OS X, it's indeed not possible to have 100% static application. You will always link dynamically to the system frameworks. Note that if you want to use the App Store, having a statically linked application is likely to get your application rejected. IIRC it's part of Apple's guideline to use dynamic libraries and framework.
So all in all, you can use a static Qt while still having dynamic dependencies.
On an important side note: static linking has licensing implications.
@SGaist said:
On Windows you can have a fully static application. Microsoft does provide their runtime in both configurations
This is news to me, but in any case I'm dynamic-linking enthusiast ...
On OS X, it's indeed not possible to have 100% static application. You will always link dynamically to the system frameworks.
So there's no problem as long as you link dynamically against the runtime, which is what I was trying to convince @Tyras. :)
-
@SGaist said:
On Windows you can have a fully static application. Microsoft does provide their runtime in both configurations
This is news to me, but in any case I'm dynamic-linking enthusiast ...
On OS X, it's indeed not possible to have 100% static application. You will always link dynamically to the system frameworks.
So there's no problem as long as you link dynamically against the runtime, which is what I was trying to convince @Tyras. :)
@kshegunov said
So there's no problem as long as you link dynamically against the runtime
Fair enough, I guess, but that can end up requiring the final user to install such runtimes in the target machine, or to bundle it with the application, what, IMHO, go against the purporse of static linking... but, if that suits the OP, or if the required runtimes are already present on the target, then you're right.
-
What happens usually on Windows is that the runtime is bundled with the application. What can also be done is to run the Microsoft runtime installer as part of the installation of the application.
Interested in AI ? www.idiap.ch
Please read the Qt Code of Conduct - https://forum.qt.io/topic/113070/qt-code-of-conduct -
What happens usually on Windows is that the runtime is bundled with the application. What can also be done is to run the Microsoft runtime installer as part of the installation of the application.
I, personally, would never consider linking statically the runtime, but that's just me. As it can be seen I was not even aware MS provides static binaries for the runtime ...
What can also be done is to run the Microsoft runtime installer as part of the installation of the application.
This always seemed to me as the best option on any platform, not only on windows.
-
What can also be done is to run the Microsoft runtime installer as part of the installation of the application.
@kshegunov said:
This always seemed to me as the best option on any platform, not only on windows.
For applications meant to be installed, I agree completely. But, sometimes, for small applications meant to be run without installation from anywhere, is somewhat of a bother.
-
Thanks to Everyone for replies!
My main task is build this application in OS X and be able to run it in another OS X system without any Qt libraries. No need add this application to the App Store. If I build this application via Qt Creator without any static libraries then I can run executable file on this machine and it works fine, but if I move this executable file on a Mac without Qt then I getting the following error:
"dyld: Library not loaded: @rpath/QtMultimedia.framework/Versions/5/QtMultimedia
Referenced from: /Users/ivan/Downloads/Archive/./MetadataExtractor
Reason: image not found
Trace/BPT trap: 5"@SGaist I think for solve this issue need only to create Qt Multimedia plugin statically as described here: http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/plugins-howto.html#creating-static-plugins
In Q_IMPORT_PLUGIN(PluginName) PluginName is multimedia.
In Q_INIT_RESOURCE(name) Name is a path to .qrc file for Qt Multimedia plugin
Is this correct ? -
In that case, why not just use macdeployqt to create the application bundle ?
Interested in AI ? www.idiap.ch
Please read the Qt Code of Conduct - https://forum.qt.io/topic/113070/qt-code-of-conduct -
I updated a .pro file to the following state:
QT += core multimedia widgets
QT -= gui
TARGET = MetadataExtractor
CONFIG += console
CONFIG += static
TEMPLATE = app
SOURCES += main.cpp
extractor.cpp
HEADERS +=
extractor.hThen used the macdeployqt. This issue is resolved for me.
@SGaist @Tyras @kshegunov Thanks to Everyone!
