Does anyone know how to publish a .NET Core 3.0 application for ARM64?
I can only select "linux-arm" but no "linux-arm64".
Setting linux-arm in combination with x64 also doesnt work. It says the settings are not compatible.
As stated here it should already be supported: https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/master/release-notes/3.0/3.0-supported-os.md
The linked article points to the supported OSs, not the list of runtime identifiers. An explanation of an RID and a list of common ones can be found in .NET Core RID Catalog. The full list can be found at the CoreFX repo, in runtime.json. linux-arm64 is included but that's only the base OS. There are a lot of specific identifiers like "debian-arm64", "debian.10-arm64", "rhel-arm64" and "ubuntu-arm64". You'll have to use the RID that corresponds to your distribution.
As the RID catalog explains, a runtime identifier consists of the OS, OS version, architecture and optional extra qualifiers.
[os].[version]-[architecture]-[additional qualifiers]
ubuntu-arm64 is the generic Ubuntu version for ARM64 while ubuntu.19.04-arm64 targets Ubuntu 19.04 specifically.
There's no specific version for Raspbian. If you want to target Raspberry in general, you'll have to use linux-arm. If you want to take advantage of the 4GB RAM model, assuming you already use a 64bit OS you may be able to target linux-arm64.
The linux-arm64 isn't available from the publish profile settings, but if you build it using linux-arm and manually edit your .pubxml file afterwards, it works on the pi just fine. As the link you provided shows, it is supported. It seems it hasn't been added to the tooling yet.
Just publish as usual and then edit .pubxml
Change
<RuntimeIdentifier>linux-arm</RuntimeIdentifier>
to
<RuntimeIdentifier>linux-arm64</RuntimeIdentifier>
Then you can publish on a 64bit Raspberry pi.
Related
I am setting up a Qt project which will be cross-copiled for a given display (running on ARM/Linux). The display will come with a self-contained cross-build toolchain which comprises Qt libraries with a specific Qt version (probably 5.15).
Now I would like to use a specific "static" toolchain incl. Qt libraries to also generate x86-builds of this Qt project (for testing, simulation; building/running on Linux and maybe also on Windows).
I'd avoid using the GCC and Qt development files introduced by the Linux package manager (e.g. apt), because the are not tied to a specific Qt version, i.e. upgrading the OS would always come with the risk to introduce build problems or break compatibility completely.
Are there good-practice approaches to achieve this?
So far I see three options:
Use a docker image
Possible problems:
Finding a image with the correct Qt version
building the Qt application would then work, but to execute it, the compatible Qt LGPL shared libs need to be available to the Qt application binary
Use a x86 -> x86 "standalone" toolchain
Find some standalone x86-toolchain analog to those (x86 -> x86), but additionaly...
it would either have to come with the Qt development files in the correct version
or we would have to build the Qt sources with this toolchain, and then extend the toolchain with the Qt built artifacts
Would be the preferred solution (and currently seems to be the most feasible of the approaches I can think of).
Virtual machine
Possible problems:
Finding a OS version with the correct Qt version
Select a OS version that contains the correct Qt version via package manager.
Not very elegant.
Qt online installer
only provides a limited choice of Qt versions (as of today: 5.15.2, 6.2.4, 6.3.2, 6.4.0) which is probably subject to change in the future
We started to test OE12.4 to migrate our systems from 11.7, but 12.4 licenses doesn't include 32-bit versions of PROWIN32 and AppBuilder anymore. Therefore, we're unable to update and develop new applications using MSCOMCTL Treeview OCX, as we did until now. This isn't a problem for future programs, but for migration it is. We're unable to run programs from PROWIN (x64) which uses MSCOMCTL Treeview OCX's, as well as all other programs who uses 32-bit DLL's. The programs compile like a charm, flawless, but doesn't execute.
I tried to register MSCOMCTL OCX throug CMD in c:\windows\system32 directory but, as expected, it didn't worked. For this DLL, as a discontinued resource, Microsoft doesn't provide a 64-bit compiled code.
I'm aware that exist a open project called PureAblTreeView, which works pretty good and doesn't rely on DLL's dependency, but this object was built on ADM2 and the majority of my old programs are ADM1. Therefore, I'm unable to use that solution without rewrite my programs, which can't be done at this time. I even tried to "rebuid" PureAblTreeView as a SmartV8Object, but it didn't worked. Too many differences to be solved and too little time to achieve a running solution.
Is there any workaround for this situation, besides rebuild the programs?
Thank you all in advance.
If I am reading Knowledge Base article 000153835 correctly, then your issue should have been addressed in 12.4:
The 12.2.5 update and the 12.4 release have re-introduced the
AppBuilder to 32-bit OpenEdge. It is now available to run from the
installed Program Group icons.
I am in process of prepping my Windows Desktop app for upload to the MS Store. I have a (fully functional) MSI installer for my app and attempted to use the Desktop App Converter (DAC) but experienced an error and have not gotten past it yet. So I decided to give manual package (appx) creation a try and it went well since I was able to install my app using the package I created. But I have a question about how to handle my .NET Framework dependency in the package. My MSI Installer has the '.NET Framework version 4.7.1' as a prerequisite so that it gets downloaded and installed (from MS, if not already installed). My question is how to handle the prerequisite in my package. I'm assuming it would go in the AppxManifest.xml under Dependencies where I currently have (note I removed the brackets so my code would display here)...
Dependencies
TargetDeviceFamily Name="Windows.Desktop" MinVersion="10.0.14316.0" MaxVersionTested="10.0.16299.309" /
/Dependencies
...but I am unsure of the syntax to add .NET Framework 4.7.1 so that it gets properly installed (if not already there) on target systems for my app.
Thanks!
If the app has 4.7.1 as a prerequisite, they will need to set their minversion to 16299 (Fall Creators Update).
In general, you cannot redist .NET with your app package, as it comes with the OS. But if you require a specific version, you need to make sure the minversion matches the update of Win10 that includes that specific version. You could use this table to look it up: .NET Framework Versions and Dependencies.
I am developing an application in Qt, but using D language (with QtD binding). I've noticed that my app crashes with Qt 4.7.x, so I need to use Qt 4.6.2 instead. However in my system Qt 4.7.2 is installed. Unfortunately I neither make QtD work with the latest Qt versions nor (I'm afraid) count on QtD developers...
The only thing I need to make my application install in system Qt 4.6.2 libs and use it, but let all the other applications still use Qt 4.7.2. Is it possible? If it is, how to do it then?
The answer to your question is the version of Qt is determined by the qmake you use to generate your Makefile.
/opt/QtSDK/Qt-4.6.2/bin/qmake
/opt/QtSDK/Qt-4.7.3/bin/qmake
Each will use the library in the directory.
It is possible to install several versions of the library into one system, and all package managers (rpm, deb) support this out of the box.
These libraries will be just differently named. For example, if id do
ls /usr/lib/ | grep libcurl
on my system, I'll get:
libcurl-gnutls.so.3
libcurl-gnutls.so.4
libcurl-gnutls.so.4.2.0
libcurl.so.3
libcurl.so.4
libcurl.so.4.2.0
, so, different version of the same library happily live together.
All you need to do is to link against the desired version of QT library. You need to sepcify it in linker options (don't remember the exact option).
I am using Qt in order to build a cross platform GUI app (Windows and Mac). I want to be able to update the app efficiently and automatically whenever there is a new patch available.
I saw this post which got me to take a look at WyBuild. It looks great and probably what I may end up using for the Windows version but what about Mac? What are some alternatives available to me?
I've just started developing a Qt-based autoupdater called Fervor for my own needs. You can try it out, contributions are more than welcome too.
For Mac the best choice is Sparkle used by WebKit, Adium, Cyberduck and more. Its only for Mac but I guess native look matters on Mac a lot.
Not familiar with WyBuild so cannot comment. Sparkle is a fine choice but the poster preferred a single app for both platforms. BitRock InstallBuilder contains an autoupdater written in Qt that can be used independently (disclaimer, I am the original BitRock developer). It is a commercial app, but we have free licenses for open source projects.
There is Updatenode which seems to provide a real Qt cross-platform solution.
It comes with a prebuilt client for Windows, Mac and Linux. The online service lets you manage updates very easy and are able to see good charts of your application usage.
And here another one of the possibilities:
Using the Qt Installer Framework: It provides installers for Windows/Linux/Mac with an build-in updater. If you need an example - The MaintenanceTool of your Qt-Installation uses the framework.
To get an auto-updater from it, all you need to do is:
Create an online installer (Just check the documentation, it's not that hard)
Use the maintenancetool in your application to check for updates.
This cane be done using my QtAutoUpdater. Go there for more information about the whole process
If new updates are available, the maintenancetool can be started in updater mode to install the update
Update the online repository - and your update is out.
Advantages:
Installer and updater in 1 tool - this means less work for you
Easy to use (with or without the QtAutoUpdater library)
Cross-Platform for all desktop platforms supported by Qt
The installer itself is a Qt original
Disadvantages:
No "native" installers (i.e. no .msi on windows or .deb on ubuntu)
Must be used together - if you want to use the update feature, you have to use the framework as installer
This may be obvious, but for Linux you can use the built in package manager. For example, apt-get, yum, pacman, or what have you.