build binary modules statically?

ruby · 2023-05-11T03:14:22+02:00

hi, previouly I like to use luart to create some single file project. but now I find that there are so many DLLs, modules\audio\audio.dll modules\canvas\...

Samir

Hi Ruby,

What you need in this case is to use embedded modules.

You have to indicate to wrtc the names of the modules you need in your scripts in the "embedded modules" field. Module names must be separated by space.

Your DLL modules will be then integrated inside your exe, but still accessible as usual from your Lua scripts.

The only file needed along your exe will be the lua54.dll runtime.

See this thread [Login to see the link]

ruby

add canvas module and build hello.exe.

without lua54.dll, it complains that can not find canvas module.

after put lua54.dll into same folder, no complains. but only got a blank window. no "hello world".

ruby

and lua54.dll is a must?

maybe we need something like [Login to see the link] to build them statically into one exe.

ruby

tried webview\calc.wlua, same blank window.

trid audio\welcome.wlua, this can work statically

ruby

tried crypto module, this can run statically , without lua54.dll

tried json module, this can run statically , with lua54.dll

ruby

tried net\weather.lua , the net module can run statically without lua54.dll.

so these binary modules are difffrent. some requires lua54.dll, some does not?

Samir

All binary modules need lua54.dll

The net module is the only exception when using static compilation to keep compatibility with previous LuaRT versions

For the Canvas issue it's very strange.... No error means the module is loading correctly, but I don't understand why nothing is displayed.

I will investigate this thank you ruby

Samir

I saw you use static compilation for hello.exe
Try with dynamic it should work

ruby

ok. I always thought it's static. but it need to be dynamic

Samir

Yes, when using binary modules, dynamic compilation is needed as they all rely on Lua54.dll

In fact, now that modules embedding works well, there is less need for static compilation.
It might be removed in further LuaRT versions., but I need more feedback on this before removing it.

ruby

if lua54.dll is required, then I do not mind another dll exist. no need to include into the exe. loading dll from memory is often considered virus , easy to be killed by antivirus software

Samir

ruby loading dll from memory is often considered virus , easy to be killed by antivirus software

Yes that's why LuaRT 1.4.0 uses now a better approach without the need to load DLL from memory