13 replies to this topic

[mfaraj57]

I am not familiar with c language,i use software called nuitka https://github.com/kayhayen/Nuitka to convert python module to c file with extension .so

i succeeded to import function from .so file in by using Ubuntu python but when tried to import the the same function from .so file in my et7500 box with python 2.7 gave me this error

root@et7x00:~# python /tmp/testobject.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/tmp/testobject.py", line 1, in <module>
    from printtext import print_text
ImportError: /var/volatile/tmp/printtext.so: cannot open shared object file: No
such file or directory
root@et7x00:~#

i put the .so and the test module in tmp path

attached the .so file and the python module to test the .so file

Attached Files

•  testsharedobject.rar   34.18KB   14 downloads

[athoik]

So you need to cross compile the .so for mips. Because .so are machine specific.

[mfaraj57]

Thanks athoik

as i said i used the nuitka mentioned above to convert the python nodule to .so,The conversion completed in pc linux 32 bit with the already installed GCC

is there way to configure GCC to  compile the file specific to MIPS?

i found this library codescape-mips-sdk-essentials https://community.im...dk-essentials/ 

but do not know if im in the right way

sorry if asked selly question i am not familiar at all with this filed

Edited by mfaraj57, 29 July 2017 - 10:13.

[athoik]

I guess if you perform the procedure from devshell the produced so will be good for mips.

 

Using file xxx.so will tell you if produced for mips or not.

[mfaraj57]

Thanks athoik

looks complicated but will give try and see

[MiLo]

If nuitka does what I think it does, it's actually a bad idea to do "compile" python modules on an embedded system. Instead of re-using what is already on the system, it embeds copies of everything, thus slowing things down and using more memory.

Just use the Python code on the box directly. Much easier and more efficient too.

Edited by MiLo, 29 July 2017 - 15:04.

[mfaraj57]

I am interested in more protection for python code(not for my code,nothing important to protect) so i think about .so as harder to decompile  in comparison with pyo or pyc files.

Edited by mfaraj57, 29 July 2017 - 16:21.

[Erik Slagter]

Exactly what I thought. This doesn't make sense. Don't do it. It won't do what you expect and it will only have drawbacks. Just another "copy protection: system and they're always the same.

[pcd]

One option is to 'obfuscate' the python code. Then it is extremely difficult to read.

[samsamsam]

Security through obscurity is no security at all. 

However, library written in the C sometimes is needed because of performance.

 

For example here:

https://github.com/s...r/iptvsubparser

 

is module written by me to speed up parsing external subtitles.

 

There is simple make.sh written in bash which call cross compiler directly .

I think it is easy to understand and learn how it is working from A to Z.

 

Regards,

SSS

Edited by samsamsam, 18 August 2017 - 14:51.

[MiLo]

Security through obscurity is no security at all. 
However, library written in the C sometimes is needed because of performance.

No argument with that. But that's not what the OP was doing.
 

There is simple make.sh written in bash which call cross compiler directly .
I think it is easy to understand and learn how it is working from A to Z.

For Python modules there's distutils. Use it.

[samsamsam]

There is many different utilities, but I will use what I like. 

I most like to call compiler directly. 

 

Regards,

SSS

[MiLo]

Sure, do as you please. Just don't make other people think that's a recommended way of doing things.

I like to build a steam engine. That doesn't mean that I'd recommend everyone to put one in their car...

[pcd]

You built a car with a steam engine ? WOW !!!