How can I append my own exe to upgrade it with c programming. I have tried to use append mode in exe but helpless with it. Any way to modify any exe? There are simpler process for .txt but none for .exe.
I want to add the codes or join the functions just like any program updates.
It's not that simple. You can't (simply) add code to the end of an .exe file to modify it; there are internal indexes, tables, etc.
For software update you need to replace the file in question with a newer versions. There are frameworks for doing that in an easy and automated way. If you tell is what language and environment you are using, someone is sure to recommend a good software update solution.
Related
I never needed to add an installer to my programs but I always wondered about Microsoft Installer (.msi or .exe installers). What tasks do they do?
They make the life easier for the user, but that's not all to it. I know they also deal with the Operating System in several aspects.
But before learning about installers themselves. I feel there's a gap on my knowledge on some prerequisite subjects related to this.
So, which subjects would they be? And where can I learn them? (Books, articles, videos, courses, ...)
And to be clear I'm not asking about how to create an installer (I can do it with Visual Studio or tools like Install Shield). But I'm more concerned about the prerequisite subjects I need to learn to proper understand and handle installers. Specially in what areas do they deal with the Operating System?
Installers are nothing special. They give this impression because they do a bunch of weird things that don't seem accessible to other apps. The .msi and .exe installers will self extract (take a portion of the file itself and copy it to another file) or they will download other files from a server. The .exe and .msi files are thus normal executables that the OS recognizes due to their file extension as files that it should execute.
Each file extension has a default app to open them. When you open a file, its default app is started and the path to that file is passed as a string to the main function of the app. That way, the app can parse the file and show the content of it to you (similarly to compiling a program).
Other things like creating desktop icons are available with some dlls native to Windows and some other libraries that call in those dlls for higher level languages like C#. Quite simply, you create an average window like any other, you extract the app being installed from the same file to Program Files and you're good minus some other minor details. The apps available are really just to make your life easier.
Before I start, I know of the existence of GResource, however I'm using gtkmm (C++), and I'm not sure if GResource works with C++. I can't find anything along the lines Glib::GResource, and I've been looking for a while.
Anyway, I'm writing a GUI using Gtkmm, and I want to pack the .glade file which I load within the executable, so that the executable can be run without having to have a file next to it. I'm not sure that I completely understand how GResources work, and I can't find any clear instructions anywhere.
So, using Gtkmm, how would I pack a .glade file inside my executable?
update: I've found this. (Gio::Resource), which sounds hopeful, but no documentation.
I've made some more research and found this tutorial and this documentation. Looks like what you need is Gio::Resource::lookup_data_global. Below is C version of my answer.
When something in glib world lacks documentation, it's time to read documentation for c. In short: with the help of glib-compile-resources and a simple xml file you build a .c file, which can be compiled into your application. After that you can use g_resources_lookup_data (resourceS, it's important) to load data.
I'm supposed to install the MATLAB compiler runtime for class purposes in one of my subjects at University. I have installed it and followed the guide - and this is my silly question: How do I run it? I mean, shouldn't there be some sort of icon or file I need to click to run the actual program?
It shows up on my list of installed programs (under controlpanel -> programs and features), and I have checked the folders where i installed it, but there doesn't seem to be any file or anything I can use to actually run it.
Maybe I misunderstood the purpose of MCR, but any help would be greatly appreciated.
Also, note that I am still new to anything computer-related that is more advanced than basic HTML and opening zipped files.
This question was already correctly answered in the comments by #seb, but to make sure it does not remain open I will post the answer here:
You need to write Matlab code and generate a .dll (or executable
maybe). Then this .dll can be run on a PC that has either Matlab or
MCR installed. But you don't click and start MCR.
And in addition to that I have added a description of how I see the MCR:
Think of the MCR as a bundle of complicated functions. When you compile a program you will just have the references to those functions in your program. Most of the content will actually be drawn from the MCR when your program is run.
That being said, if you actually want students to work with matlab (not just with programs pre built by the teacher) you will actually need to install Matlab, and not the MCR.
I need to create a batch file which will copy web log files from a web server to a local desktop box on daily frequency.
I'm a web developer, but I'd like to take a stab at learning the process for creating a batch file and I think using the windows scheduler should get me where I need to go.
In any case, I'm just looking for a jumping off point.
I understand the premise behind a batch file (echo to print info, commands to cause actions such as mkdir or move, etc), but some straight forward tutorials would be great.
Or even a reference guide such as devguru.com or 4guysfromrolla.com would be helpful.
Thanks,
Creating a batch file is relatively straightforward.
Just type out the commands you want as you would in the command shell, and save the file with a .bat extension.
There's a simple example here that you may find useful. Note, you can use any editor to create your batch file, as long as it saves in a text format.
Depending on which version of Windows you're using, the process to create a scheduled task is slightly different:
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Edit: A little followup on misteraiden's answer.
Essentially, what you're looking for is scripting functionality. There are a variety of tools available. A batch file is the simplest form of scripting that Windows supports. You could, for example, write scripts in PowerShell or Python. Both are more powerful and flexible scripting languages. Depending on what the requirements are for your script, and what you feel like learning, they may be more appropriate.
However, If all you want to do is a copy, the simplest, easiest place to start is a batch file.
This is a little left-of-field, but using an XML build interpreter such as NAnt could come in handy here. Probably over-kill for what you are trying to do, but if you learn it now, you'll be able to apply it's uses in many different places.
You could use Windows Scheduler to trigger the build, which would then complete various operations such as deleting, copying, logging on to network shares.
However, perhaps to learn this you would probably need to learn more about the command line and command line programming.
Either way, I recommend you check out some of the NAnt examples that deal with copying and other basics etc..
I found one of the best references other than the Microsoft website that was mentioned in an earlier is: http://www.robvanderwoude.com/batchfiles.php I have been using this for many of the issues I have had and have been using it to learn more. I think since you have the premise of how batch files work, this will work out will for you.
How can someone distribute native (non-"compiled/perl2exe/...") Perl scripts without forcing users to be aware of the custom (non-CPAN) modules that the scripts needs in order to run?
The problem is users will inevitably copy the script somewhere else on the system and take the script out of its native environment and then it can no longer find the modules it needs to run.
I've sometimes settled with just copying the module into the actual script, but I'd prefer a cleaner solution.
Update: I better clarify. I distribute a bunch of scripts which happen to use similar modules in the backend. The users understand how to run Perl scripts, but rather than relying on telling them "no don't move the script" I'd prefer to simply allow them to move the files. The path of least resistence.
The right way is to tell them "Don't do that!" I would hope that they wouldn't expect to move an exe file and have the program continue to work. This is no different.
That said, there are a couple of alternatives. One is replacing the script with a wrapper (e.g. pl2bat) that knows the full path to the real script. Another is to use PAR, but that would require PAR and/or parl (from PAR::Packer) to be installed.
If a script that your prepared for a client needs "custom" modules, simply pack your modules as if you were trying to upload them to cpan. Then give the package to the client and he can use the cpan utility to install the script and the modules.
Distribute an installer along with the script. The installer will need to be run with root privileges and it will put the custom modules into the standard system location (/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl or whatever).
I've not tried this, but Module::Install looks helpful in this regard. It's described as a:
Standalone, extensible Perl module installer
As a variant of the "put your modules all in one place and make your applications aware of it" that will even work across multiple computers and networks, maybe you should check out PAR::Repository and respectively PAR::Repository::Client. You'd just provide a single binary client executable that connects to the repository (via file system or https) and executes any of the arbitrary number of programs (using an arbitrary set of modules) provided by the repository that the user asks for.
If there are many users, this also has a benefit for maintenance: Simply update the software provided by the repository and the users will start using the updated code for their system when they next start the programs.
It would be really nice if you could just use a NeXTSTEP style application bundle. Since you probably aren't developing for a platform that uses bundles, you'll have to make do.
Put all support files in a known location, and point your executable at those files for access to settings and libraries. The easiest way to do this is with a simple installer.
For example, with an app called foo, put all your required files in /opt/xlyd_apps/foo, libraries in /opt/xlyd_apps/foo/lib, configuration in/opt/xlyd_apps/foo/etc, and so on. Put the executable in /opt/xlyd_apps/foo/bin.
The important thing is to make sure the executable knows to look in /opt/xlyd_apps/foo for all its goodies, so if the customer/client move the foo script to a new location the install still works.
So, while you can't make the whole thing self contained and relocatable, you have made the actual calling script relocatable.
I've actually come up with my own solution, and I'm kind of curious what kind of reception it will have.
I've written a script that reads a perl script and looks for "use/require" statements. Upon finding them it checks if the module is part of the standard library (looks at module path for /perl5/\d+.\d+[\d.]+/) and then rewrites the use/require line in two different ways depending on usage.
If require is found:
{
... inline the entire module here...
}
If use is found:
BEGIN {
... inline the entire module here...
}
If use has imports, immediately follow above with:
BEGIN { import Module ...imports seen... }
I understand this doesn't work with modules that use XS, but I was fine with this. Mostly I need to support only pure perl modules.