398 lines
		
	
	
		
			18 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			398 lines
		
	
	
		
			18 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
 | 
						|
            Frequently Asked Questions about ZLIB1.DLL
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This document describes the design, the rationale, and the usage
 | 
						|
of the official DLL build of zlib, named ZLIB1.DLL.  If you have
 | 
						|
general questions about zlib, you should see the file "FAQ" found
 | 
						|
in the zlib distribution, or at the following location:
 | 
						|
  http://www.gzip.org/zlib/zlib_faq.html
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 1. What is ZLIB1.DLL, and how can I get it?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - ZLIB1.DLL is the official build of zlib as a DLL.
 | 
						|
    (Please remark the character '1' in the name.)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    Pointers to a precompiled ZLIB1.DLL can be found in the zlib
 | 
						|
    web site at:
 | 
						|
      http://www.zlib.org/
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    Applications that link to ZLIB1.DLL can rely on the following
 | 
						|
    specification:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    * The exported symbols are exclusively defined in the source
 | 
						|
      files "zlib.h" and "zlib.def", found in an official zlib
 | 
						|
      source distribution.
 | 
						|
    * The symbols are exported by name, not by ordinal.
 | 
						|
    * The exported names are undecorated.
 | 
						|
    * The calling convention of functions is "C" (CDECL).
 | 
						|
    * The ZLIB1.DLL binary is linked to MSVCRT.DLL.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    The archive in which ZLIB1.DLL is bundled contains compiled
 | 
						|
    test programs that must run with a valid build of ZLIB1.DLL.
 | 
						|
    It is recommended to download the prebuilt DLL from the zlib
 | 
						|
    web site, instead of building it yourself, to avoid potential
 | 
						|
    incompatibilities that could be introduced by your compiler
 | 
						|
    and build settings.  If you do build the DLL yourself, please
 | 
						|
    make sure that it complies with all the above requirements,
 | 
						|
    and it runs with the precompiled test programs, bundled with
 | 
						|
    the original ZLIB1.DLL distribution.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    If, for any reason, you need to build an incompatible DLL,
 | 
						|
    please use a different file name.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 2. Why did you change the name of the DLL to ZLIB1.DLL?
 | 
						|
    What happened to the old ZLIB.DLL?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - The old ZLIB.DLL, built from zlib-1.1.4 or earlier, required
 | 
						|
    compilation settings that were incompatible to those used by
 | 
						|
    a static build.  The DLL settings were supposed to be enabled
 | 
						|
    by defining the macro ZLIB_DLL, before including "zlib.h".
 | 
						|
    Incorrect handling of this macro was silently accepted at
 | 
						|
    build time, resulting in two major problems:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    * ZLIB_DLL was missing from the old makefile.  When building
 | 
						|
      the DLL, not all people added it to the build options.  In
 | 
						|
      consequence, incompatible incarnations of ZLIB.DLL started
 | 
						|
      to circulate around the net.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    * When switching from using the static library to using the
 | 
						|
      DLL, applications had to define the ZLIB_DLL macro and
 | 
						|
      to recompile all the sources that contained calls to zlib
 | 
						|
      functions.  Failure to do so resulted in creating binaries
 | 
						|
      that were unable to run with the official ZLIB.DLL build.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    The only possible solution that we could foresee was to make
 | 
						|
    a binary-incompatible change in the DLL interface, in order to
 | 
						|
    remove the dependency on the ZLIB_DLL macro, and to release
 | 
						|
    the new DLL under a different name.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    We chose the name ZLIB1.DLL, where '1' indicates the major
 | 
						|
    zlib version number.  We hope that we will not have to break
 | 
						|
    the binary compatibility again, at least not as long as the
 | 
						|
    zlib-1.x series will last.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    There is still a ZLIB_DLL macro, that can trigger a more
 | 
						|
    efficient build and use of the DLL, but compatibility no
 | 
						|
    longer dependents on it.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 3. Can I build ZLIB.DLL from the new zlib sources, and replace
 | 
						|
    an old ZLIB.DLL, that was built from zlib-1.1.4 or earlier?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - In principle, you can do it by assigning calling convention
 | 
						|
    keywords to the macros ZEXPORT and ZEXPORTVA.  In practice,
 | 
						|
    it depends on what you mean by "an old ZLIB.DLL", because the
 | 
						|
    old DLL exists in several mutually-incompatible versions.
 | 
						|
    You have to find out first what kind of calling convention is
 | 
						|
    being used in your particular ZLIB.DLL build, and to use the
 | 
						|
    same one in the new build.  If you don't know what this is all
 | 
						|
    about, you might be better off if you would just leave the old
 | 
						|
    DLL intact.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 4. Can I compile my application using the new zlib interface, and
 | 
						|
    link it to an old ZLIB.DLL, that was built from zlib-1.1.4 or
 | 
						|
    earlier?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - The official answer is "no"; the real answer depends again on
 | 
						|
    what kind of ZLIB.DLL you have.  Even if you are lucky, this
 | 
						|
    course of action is unreliable.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    If you rebuild your application and you intend to use a newer
 | 
						|
    version of zlib (post- 1.1.4), it is strongly recommended to
 | 
						|
    link it to the new ZLIB1.DLL.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 5. Why are the zlib symbols exported by name, and not by ordinal?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - Although exporting symbols by ordinal is a little faster, it
 | 
						|
    is risky.  Any single glitch in the maintenance or use of the
 | 
						|
    DEF file that contains the ordinals can result in incompatible
 | 
						|
    builds and frustrating crashes.  Simply put, the benefits of
 | 
						|
    exporting symbols by ordinal do not justify the risks.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    Technically, it should be possible to maintain ordinals in
 | 
						|
    the DEF file, and still export the symbols by name.  Ordinals
 | 
						|
    exist in every DLL, and even if the dynamic linking performed
 | 
						|
    at the DLL startup is searching for names, ordinals serve as
 | 
						|
    hints, for a faster name lookup.  However, if the DEF file
 | 
						|
    contains ordinals, the Microsoft linker automatically builds
 | 
						|
    an implib that will cause the executables linked to it to use
 | 
						|
    those ordinals, and not the names.  It is interesting to
 | 
						|
    notice that the GNU linker for Win32 does not suffer from this
 | 
						|
    problem.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    It is possible to avoid the DEF file if the exported symbols
 | 
						|
    are accompanied by a "__declspec(dllexport)" attribute in the
 | 
						|
    source files.  You can do this in zlib by predefining the
 | 
						|
    ZLIB_DLL macro.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 6. I see that the ZLIB1.DLL functions use the "C" (CDECL) calling
 | 
						|
    convention.  Why not use the STDCALL convention?
 | 
						|
    STDCALL is the standard convention in Win32, and I need it in
 | 
						|
    my Visual Basic project!
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    (For readability, we use CDECL to refer to the convention
 | 
						|
     triggered by the "__cdecl" keyword, STDCALL to refer to
 | 
						|
     the convention triggered by "__stdcall", and FASTCALL to
 | 
						|
     refer to the convention triggered by "__fastcall".)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - Most of the native Windows API functions (without varargs) use
 | 
						|
    indeed the WINAPI convention (which translates to STDCALL in
 | 
						|
    Win32), but the standard C functions use CDECL.  If a user
 | 
						|
    application is intrinsically tied to the Windows API (e.g.
 | 
						|
    it calls native Windows API functions such as CreateFile()),
 | 
						|
    sometimes it makes sense to decorate its own functions with
 | 
						|
    WINAPI.  But if ANSI C or POSIX portability is a goal (e.g.
 | 
						|
    it calls standard C functions such as fopen()), it is not a
 | 
						|
    sound decision to request the inclusion of <windows.h>, or to
 | 
						|
    use non-ANSI constructs, for the sole purpose to make the user
 | 
						|
    functions STDCALL-able.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    The functionality offered by zlib is not in the category of
 | 
						|
    "Windows functionality", but is more like "C functionality".
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    Technically, STDCALL is not bad; in fact, it is slightly
 | 
						|
    faster than CDECL, and it works with variable-argument
 | 
						|
    functions, just like CDECL.  It is unfortunate that, in spite
 | 
						|
    of using STDCALL in the Windows API, it is not the default
 | 
						|
    convention used by the C compilers that run under Windows.
 | 
						|
    The roots of the problem reside deep inside the unsafety of
 | 
						|
    the K&R-style function prototypes, where the argument types
 | 
						|
    are not specified; but that is another story for another day.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    The remaining fact is that CDECL is the default convention.
 | 
						|
    Even if an explicit convention is hard-coded into the function
 | 
						|
    prototypes inside C headers, problems may appear.  The
 | 
						|
    necessity to expose the convention in users' callbacks is one
 | 
						|
    of these problems.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    The calling convention issues are also important when using
 | 
						|
    zlib in other programming languages.  Some of them, like Ada
 | 
						|
    (GNAT) and Fortran (GNU G77), have C bindings implemented
 | 
						|
    initially on Unix, and relying on the C calling convention.
 | 
						|
    On the other hand, the pre- .NET versions of Microsoft Visual
 | 
						|
    Basic require STDCALL, while Borland Delphi prefers, although
 | 
						|
    it does not require, FASTCALL.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    In fairness to all possible uses of zlib outside the C
 | 
						|
    programming language, we choose the default "C" convention.
 | 
						|
    Anyone interested in different bindings or conventions is
 | 
						|
    encouraged to maintain specialized projects.  The "contrib/"
 | 
						|
    directory from the zlib distribution already holds a couple
 | 
						|
    of foreign bindings, such as Ada, C++, and Delphi.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 7. I need a DLL for my Visual Basic project.  What can I do?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - Define the ZLIB_WINAPI macro before including "zlib.h", when
 | 
						|
    building both the DLL and the user application (except that
 | 
						|
    you don't need to define anything when using the DLL in Visual
 | 
						|
    Basic).  The ZLIB_WINAPI macro will switch on the WINAPI
 | 
						|
    (STDCALL) convention.  The name of this DLL must be different
 | 
						|
    than the official ZLIB1.DLL.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    Gilles Vollant has contributed a build named ZLIBWAPI.DLL,
 | 
						|
    with the ZLIB_WINAPI macro turned on, and with the minizip
 | 
						|
    functionality built in.  For more information, please read
 | 
						|
    the notes inside "contrib/vstudio/readme.txt", found in the
 | 
						|
    zlib distribution.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 8. I need to use zlib in my Microsoft .NET project.  What can I
 | 
						|
    do?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - Henrik Ravn has contributed a .NET wrapper around zlib.  Look
 | 
						|
    into contrib/dotzlib/, inside the zlib distribution.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 9. If my application uses ZLIB1.DLL, should I link it to
 | 
						|
    MSVCRT.DLL?  Why?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - It is not required, but it is recommended to link your
 | 
						|
    application to MSVCRT.DLL, if it uses ZLIB1.DLL.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    The executables (.EXE, .DLL, etc.) that are involved in the
 | 
						|
    same process and are using the C run-time library (i.e. they
 | 
						|
    are calling standard C functions), must link to the same
 | 
						|
    library.  There are several libraries in the Win32 system:
 | 
						|
    CRTDLL.DLL, MSVCRT.DLL, the static C libraries, etc.
 | 
						|
    Since ZLIB1.DLL is linked to MSVCRT.DLL, the executables that
 | 
						|
    depend on it should also be linked to MSVCRT.DLL.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
10. Why are you saying that ZLIB1.DLL and my application should
 | 
						|
    be linked to the same C run-time (CRT) library?  I linked my
 | 
						|
    application and my DLLs to different C libraries (e.g. my
 | 
						|
    application to a static library, and my DLLs to MSVCRT.DLL),
 | 
						|
    and everything works fine.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - If a user library invokes only pure Win32 API (accessible via
 | 
						|
    <windows.h> and the related headers), its DLL build will work
 | 
						|
    in any context.  But if this library invokes standard C API,
 | 
						|
    things get more complicated.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    There is a single Win32 library in a Win32 system.  Every
 | 
						|
    function in this library resides in a single DLL module, that
 | 
						|
    is safe to call from anywhere.  On the other hand, there are
 | 
						|
    multiple versions of the C library, and each of them has its
 | 
						|
    own separate internal state.  Standalone executables and user
 | 
						|
    DLLs that call standard C functions must link to a C run-time
 | 
						|
    (CRT) library, be it static or shared (DLL).  Intermixing
 | 
						|
    occurs when an executable (not necessarily standalone) and a
 | 
						|
    DLL are linked to different CRTs, and both are running in the
 | 
						|
    same process.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    Intermixing multiple CRTs is possible, as long as their
 | 
						|
    internal states are kept intact.  The Microsoft Knowledge Base
 | 
						|
    articles KB94248 "HOWTO: Use the C Run-Time" and KB140584
 | 
						|
    "HOWTO: Link with the Correct C Run-Time (CRT) Library"
 | 
						|
    mention the potential problems raised by intermixing.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    If intermixing works for you, it's because your application
 | 
						|
    and DLLs are avoiding the corruption of each of the CRTs'
 | 
						|
    internal states, maybe by careful design, or maybe by fortune.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    Also note that linking ZLIB1.DLL to non-Microsoft CRTs, such
 | 
						|
    as those provided by Borland, raises similar problems.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
11. Why are you linking ZLIB1.DLL to MSVCRT.DLL?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - MSVCRT.DLL exists on every Windows 95 with a new service pack
 | 
						|
    installed, or with Microsoft Internet Explorer 4 or later, and
 | 
						|
    on all other Windows 4.x or later (Windows 98, Windows NT 4,
 | 
						|
    or later).  It is freely distributable; if not present in the
 | 
						|
    system, it can be downloaded from Microsoft or from other
 | 
						|
    software provider for free.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    The fact that MSVCRT.DLL does not exist on a virgin Windows 95
 | 
						|
    is not so problematic.  Windows 95 is scarcely found nowadays,
 | 
						|
    Microsoft ended its support a long time ago, and many recent
 | 
						|
    applications from various vendors, including Microsoft, do not
 | 
						|
    even run on it.  Furthermore, no serious user should run
 | 
						|
    Windows 95 without a proper update installed.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
12. Why are you not linking ZLIB1.DLL to
 | 
						|
    <<my favorite C run-time library>> ?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - We considered and abandoned the following alternatives:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    * Linking ZLIB1.DLL to a static C library (LIBC.LIB, or
 | 
						|
      LIBCMT.LIB) is not a good option.  People are using the DLL
 | 
						|
      mainly to save disk space.  If you are linking your program
 | 
						|
      to a static C library, you may as well consider linking zlib
 | 
						|
      in statically, too.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    * Linking ZLIB1.DLL to CRTDLL.DLL looks appealing, because
 | 
						|
      CRTDLL.DLL is present on every Win32 installation.
 | 
						|
      Unfortunately, it has a series of problems: it does not
 | 
						|
      work properly with Microsoft's C++ libraries, it does not
 | 
						|
      provide support for 64-bit file offsets, (and so on...),
 | 
						|
      and Microsoft discontinued its support a long time ago.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    * Linking ZLIB1.DLL to MSVCR70.DLL or MSVCR71.DLL, supplied
 | 
						|
      with the Microsoft .NET platform, and Visual C++ 7.0/7.1,
 | 
						|
      raises problems related to the status of ZLIB1.DLL as a
 | 
						|
      system component.  According to the Microsoft Knowledge Base
 | 
						|
      article KB326922 "INFO: Redistribution of the Shared C
 | 
						|
      Runtime Component in Visual C++ .NET", MSVCR70.DLL and
 | 
						|
      MSVCR71.DLL are not supposed to function as system DLLs,
 | 
						|
      because they may clash with MSVCRT.DLL.  Instead, the
 | 
						|
      application's installer is supposed to put these DLLs
 | 
						|
      (if needed) in the application's private directory.
 | 
						|
      If ZLIB1.DLL depends on a non-system runtime, it cannot
 | 
						|
      function as a redistributable system component.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    * Linking ZLIB1.DLL to non-Microsoft runtimes, such as
 | 
						|
      Borland's, or Cygwin's, raises problems related to the
 | 
						|
      reliable presence of these runtimes on Win32 systems.
 | 
						|
      It's easier to let the DLL build of zlib up to the people
 | 
						|
      who distribute these runtimes, and who may proceed as
 | 
						|
      explained in the answer to Question 14.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
13. If ZLIB1.DLL cannot be linked to MSVCR70.DLL or MSVCR71.DLL,
 | 
						|
    how can I build/use ZLIB1.DLL in Microsoft Visual C++ 7.0
 | 
						|
    (Visual Studio .NET) or newer?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - Due to the problems explained in the Microsoft Knowledge Base
 | 
						|
    article KB326922 (see the previous answer), the C runtime that
 | 
						|
    comes with the VC7 environment is no longer considered a
 | 
						|
    system component.  That is, it should not be assumed that this
 | 
						|
    runtime exists, or may be installed in a system directory.
 | 
						|
    Since ZLIB1.DLL is supposed to be a system component, it may
 | 
						|
    not depend on a non-system component.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    In order to link ZLIB1.DLL and your application to MSVCRT.DLL
 | 
						|
    in VC7, you need the library of Visual C++ 6.0 or older.  If
 | 
						|
    you don't have this library at hand, it's probably best not to
 | 
						|
    use ZLIB1.DLL.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    We are hoping that, in the future, Microsoft will provide a
 | 
						|
    way to build applications linked to a proper system runtime,
 | 
						|
    from the Visual C++ environment.  Until then, you have a
 | 
						|
    couple of alternatives, such as linking zlib in statically.
 | 
						|
    If your application requires dynamic linking, you may proceed
 | 
						|
    as explained in the answer to Question 14.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
14. I need to link my own DLL build to a CRT different than
 | 
						|
    MSVCRT.DLL.  What can I do?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - Feel free to rebuild the DLL from the zlib sources, and link
 | 
						|
    it the way you want.  You should, however, clearly state that
 | 
						|
    your build is unofficial.  You should give it a different file
 | 
						|
    name, and/or install it in a private directory that can be
 | 
						|
    accessed by your application only, and is not visible to the
 | 
						|
    others (e.g. it's not in the SYSTEM or the SYSTEM32 directory,
 | 
						|
    and it's not in the PATH).  Otherwise, your build may clash
 | 
						|
    with applications that link to the official build.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    For example, in Cygwin, zlib is linked to the Cygwin runtime
 | 
						|
    CYGWIN1.DLL, and it is distributed under the name CYGZ.DLL.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
15. May I include additional pieces of code that I find useful,
 | 
						|
    link them in ZLIB1.DLL, and export them?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - No.  A legitimate build of ZLIB1.DLL must not include code
 | 
						|
    that does not originate from the official zlib source code.
 | 
						|
    But you can make your own private DLL build, under a different
 | 
						|
    file name, as suggested in the previous answer.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    For example, zlib is a part of the VCL library, distributed
 | 
						|
    with Borland Delphi and C++ Builder.  The DLL build of VCL
 | 
						|
    is a redistributable file, named VCLxx.DLL.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
16. May I remove some functionality out of ZLIB1.DLL, by enabling
 | 
						|
    macros like NO_GZCOMPRESS or NO_GZIP at compile time?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - No.  A legitimate build of ZLIB1.DLL must provide the complete
 | 
						|
    zlib functionality, as implemented in the official zlib source
 | 
						|
    code.  But you can make your own private DLL build, under a
 | 
						|
    different file name, as suggested in the previous answer.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
17. I made my own ZLIB1.DLL build.  Can I test it for compliance?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - We prefer that you download the official DLL from the zlib
 | 
						|
    web site.  If you need something peculiar from this DLL, you
 | 
						|
    can send your suggestion to the zlib mailing list.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    However, in case you do rebuild the DLL yourself, you can run
 | 
						|
    it with the test programs found in the DLL distribution.
 | 
						|
    Running these test programs is not a guarantee of compliance,
 | 
						|
    but a failure can imply a detected problem.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
**
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This document is written and maintained by
 | 
						|
Cosmin Truta <cosmint@cs.ubbcluj.ro>
 |