[protobuf] Re: Cross compiling protobuf for ARM on Windows machine
Hi, i have the same problem. iam using on linux the following command cmake -D BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON -D CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RELEASE -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER=/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabihf-g++ -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER=/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc -DCMAKE_AR=/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabihf-ar .. But i dont know how to especify the protoc binary file. Do you fix your problem? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/protobuf/8b879fb0-4731-435b-b086-bc84150c25aa%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[protobuf] Re: Cross-compiling protobuf to 32-bit
Hi SyRenity. I've been running into this same issue on CentOS 5. Were you able to fix the problem? On Thursday, January 28, 2010 at 5:12:09 AM UTC-8, SyRenity wrote: > > Hi. > > I'm trying to compile a 32-bit protobuf on 64-bit machine. > > No matter what I tried (changing build option, host option or setting - > m32 flag), I couldn't get it working. Either I stuck on compile stage, > or the resulting binaries are 64-bit. > > I do able to compile other apps via -m32 flag. > > (I solved this for now by compiling on another 32-bit machine, which > is awfully inconvenient, plus may cause the strings issue I wrote > earlier.) > > Any advice how to sort it out? > > Thanks! > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[protobuf] Re: Cross Compiling Protobuf For Raspberry Pi
I took a look at the specific lines for the errors, and the /usr/bin/protoc
I built for the build machine is having issues on the following lines:
172 // For oneof test
*173 oneof oneof_field {*
174 uint32 oneof_uint32 = 111;
175 NestedMessage oneof_nested_message = 112;
176 string oneof_string = 113;
177 bytes oneof_bytes = 114;
178 }
// Test oneofs.
609 message TestOneof {
*610 oneof foo {*
611 int32 foo_int = 1;
612 string foo_string = 2;
613 TestAllTypes foo_message = 3;
614 group FooGroup = 4 {
615 optional int32 a = 5;
616 optional string b = 6;
617 }
618 }
619 }
631 message TestOneof2 {
*632 oneof foo {*
633 int32 foo_int = 1;
634 string foo_string = 2;
635 string foo_cord = 3 [ctype=CORD];
636 string foo_string_piece = 4 [ctype=STRING_PIECE];
637 bytes foo_bytes = 5;
638 NestedEnum foo_enum = 6;
639 NestedMessage foo_message = 7;
640 group FooGroup = 8 {
641 optional int32 a = 9;
642 optional string b = 10;
643 }
644 NestedMessage foo_lazy_message = 11 [lazy=true];
645 }
646
*647 oneof bar {*
648 int32 bar_int = 12 [default = 5];
649 string bar_string = 13 [default = STRING];
650 string bar_cord = 14 [ctype=CORD, default = CORD];
651 string bar_string_piece = 15 [ctype=STRING_PIECE, default = SPIECE
];
652 bytes bar_bytes = 16 [default = BYTES];
653 NestedEnum bar_enum = 17 [default = BAR];
654 }
671 message TestRequiredOneof {
*672 oneof foo {*
673 int32 foo_int = 1;
674 string foo_string = 2;
675 NestedMessage foo_message = 3;
676 }
677 message NestedMessage {
678 required double required_double = 1;
679 }
680 }
*853 service TestService {*
854 rpc Foo(FooRequest) returns (FooResponse);
855 rpc Bar(BarRequest) returns (BarResponse);
856 }
On Thursday, November 13, 2014 8:57:59 AM UTC-5, Andrew Capodieci wrote:
I'm trying to cross compile google Protocol buffers for the Raspberry Pi,
so I can cross compile my own software which links to protobuf.
I've installed protobuf-2.6.0 to the directory
~/ExternalLibs/protobuf-2.6.0, where I perform the following steps:
cd ~/ExternalLibs/protobuf-2.6.0
./configure --disable-shared
make
make check
-- all (5/5) tests pass
sudo make install
make distclean
This should set up the initial protoc executable that can be run by my
build machine (Lenovo w540 laptop running Ubuntu 12.04) during the cross
compiling for my host, the raspberry pi.
I then run:
./configure --host=arm-linux-gnueabi CC=/opt/cross/x-tools/arm-unknown
-linux-gnueabi/bin/arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi-gcc CXX=/opt/cross/x-tools/
arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi/bin/arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi-g++ --with-protoc=
/usr/bin/protoc --prefix=/home/andrewc1204/raspberrypi_crosscompile/
protobuf_xtools/
My cross compiler was built following this tutorial:
http://www.bootc.net/archives/2012/05/26/how-to-build-a-cross-compiler-for-your-raspberry-pi/.
The only extra thing I did was enable an additional c++ compiler on top of
building the c compiler in the ct-ng menus, which is why I'm able to use
the g++ compiler on top of the gcc compiler.
This ./configure seems to run, and then I call
make
The output is as follows:
make all-recursive
make[1]: Entering directory
`/home/andrewc1204/ExternalLibs/protobuf-2.6.0'
Making all in .
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/andrewc1204/ExternalLibs/protobuf-
2.6.0'
make[2]: Leaving directory
`/home/andrewc1204/ExternalLibs/protobuf-2.6.0'
Making all in src
make[2]: Entering directory
`/home/andrewc1204/ExternalLibs/protobuf-2.6.0/src'
/usr/bin/protoc -I. --cpp_out=. google/protobuf/unittest.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_empty.proto google/protobuf/unittest_import.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_import_public.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_mset.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_optimize_for.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_embed_optimize_for.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_custom_options.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_lite.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_import_lite.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_import_public_lite.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_lite_imports_nonlite.proto
google/protobuf/unittest_no_generic_services.proto
google/protobuf/compiler/cpp/cpp_test_bad_identifiers.proto
google/protobuf/unittest.proto:173:3: Expected required, optional,
or repeated.
google/protobuf/unittest.proto:173:21: Missing field number.
google/protobuf/unittest.proto:610:3: Expected required, optional,
or repeated.
google/protobuf/unittest.proto:610:13: Missing field number.
google/protobuf/unittest.proto:632:3: Expected required, optional,
or repeated.
google/protobuf/unittest.proto:632:13: Missing field number.
google/protobuf/unittest.proto:647:3: Expected required, optional,
or repeated.
Re: Fwd: [protobuf] Re: Cross-compiling protobuf to 32-bit
Hi. Any idea of the issue below? I'm currently using static libraries compiled on another (virtual) 32- bit machine, which seems to be working fine, but I really would prefer a native solution. Regards. On Jan 29, 11:28 pm, Stas Oskin stas.os...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry, forwarding to list as well. -- Forwarded message -- From: Stas Oskin stas.os...@gmail.com Date: Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:27 PM Subject: Re: [protobuf] Re: Cross-compiling protobuf to 32-bit To: Kenton Varda ken...@google.com Hi. And when you configure other autotool-based packages the same way, it works? Yes, it is. You said you were using the -m32 flag. Where is it? It actually broke the compilation, and didn't let it finish. Is there any one using a correct cross-architecture compile on RedHat? Regards. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
Re: Fwd: [protobuf] Re: Cross-compiling protobuf to 32-bit
I don't think anyone here is likely to have any idea what the problem is. I cannot reproduce it, so I can't be of any help. You'll need to debug it yourself. Try examining the build logs to see exactly how your compiler is being invoked and figure out how it is *supposed* to be invoked to get the results you want. Maybe if you post those, we might be able to figure out how to invoke configure to get what you want. On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:13 PM, SyRenity stas.os...@gmail.com wrote: Hi. Any idea of the issue below? I'm currently using static libraries compiled on another (virtual) 32- bit machine, which seems to be working fine, but I really would prefer a native solution. Regards. On Jan 29, 11:28 pm, Stas Oskin stas.os...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry, forwarding to list as well. -- Forwarded message -- From: Stas Oskin stas.os...@gmail.com Date: Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:27 PM Subject: Re: [protobuf] Re: Cross-compiling protobuf to 32-bit To: Kenton Varda ken...@google.com Hi. And when you configure other autotool-based packages the same way, it works? Yes, it is. You said you were using the -m32 flag. Where is it? It actually broke the compilation, and didn't let it finish. Is there any one using a correct cross-architecture compile on RedHat? Regards. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comprotobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
Fwd: [protobuf] Re: Cross-compiling protobuf to 32-bit
Sorry, forwarding to list as well. -- Forwarded message -- From: Stas Oskin stas.os...@gmail.com Date: Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:27 PM Subject: Re: [protobuf] Re: Cross-compiling protobuf to 32-bit To: Kenton Varda ken...@google.com Hi. And when you configure other autotool-based packages the same way, it works? Yes, it is. You said you were using the -m32 flag. Where is it? It actually broke the compilation, and didn't let it finish. Is there any one using a correct cross-architecture compile on RedHat? Regards. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
Re: [protobuf] Re: Cross-compiling protobuf to 32-bit
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:45 AM, SyRenity stas.os...@gmail.com wrote: CentOS 5.4 GCC 4.1.2 Configure for example: ./configure --prefix=/tmp/protobuf --host i386-redhat-linux And when you configure other autotool-based packages the same way, it works? You said you were using the -m32 flag. Where is it? On Jan 28, 9:22 pm, Kenton Varda ken...@google.com wrote: What OS? What compiler? What is your ./configure command line? On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 5:12 AM, SyRenity stas.os...@gmail.com wrote: Hi. I'm trying to compile a 32-bit protobuf on 64-bit machine. No matter what I tried (changing build option, host option or setting - m32 flag), I couldn't get it working. Either I stuck on compile stage, or the resulting binaries are 64-bit. I do able to compile other apps via -m32 flag. (I solved this for now by compiling on another 32-bit machine, which is awfully inconvenient, plus may cause the strings issue I wrote earlier.) Any advice how to sort it out? Thanks! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comprotobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com protobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.comprotobuf%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comprotobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
Re: Cross Compiling Protobuf
In v2.1.0 I've added a parameter to the configure script --with-protoc= which lets you specify an alternate protoc binary to use when compiling. This way, the makefiles won't invoke the protoc they just built. So, cross-compiling should work. However, I haven't actually tested this with cross-compiling as I don't actually have a cross-compiling setup available to me. It would be great if one of you could test this feature. The release candidate (2.1.0rc1) can be found here: http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf/files http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf/filesPlease let me know if it works. On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Peter K. koots...@gmail.com wrote: On May 12, 1:43 pm, ry.n...@gmail.com ry.n...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I am reasonably new to the embedded world but I am trying to use protobufs on a virtex5 ppc. I have a xcompiler and was wondering what steps/flags I would need to create appropriate libraries to use. The setup: I have some proto files that I want to use. I have the 2.0.3 tarball. I have the xcomp. Do i call something like ./configure --target=TYPE? What is the TYPE that I put in? That should generate a protoc (the proto compiler) that will generate the c/h files appropriately correct? It will also generate the libprotobuf.so files that have the right binary format. Correct? Thanks for your help, I am just getting lost in the layers of compilers. My experience is that the protobuf libraries don't support cross- compilation well. We've been using an ARM, with an Intel build machine. We haven't figured out (quite) the right way for protoc to be built for the Intel machine, whereas the libraries etc. need to be built for the ARM. This is all under Linux. Our builds fail because protoc is compiled for the target, but it is run on the build machine. What we tend to do is install the Intel version (e.g. /usr/local/bin/ protoc), re-configure for cross-compiling. Make. Wait for make to break. Move the ./src/protoc to ./src/protoc.cross. Copy /usr/local/ bin/protoc to ./src/protoc. Make again. Copy ./src/protoc.cross back to ./src/protoc. Then make install. As for configure, we use: ./configure --host=arm-linux--prefix=/srv/rootfs/usr/local/ where the gcc compiler is arm-linux-gcc. HTH, Peter K. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Cross Compiling Protobuf
Thanks, Kenton, I'll try it out tomorrow and post the results. We're sticking with 2.0.3 for now, but will switch once 2.1 goes to full release. Ciao, Peter K. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
