09-22-2014 12:03 AM
Which is the best method to calculate the CRC checksum of Labview executable .Since I am facing CRC check sum is calculated differently every time when i do create the executable with out any change ,and I calculate the CRC checksum then I am getting different CRC checksum .
Basically I should be getting same CRC checksum every time. when I create exe with out anychange /any update .
Please let me know is there any other best methods which suits Labview executable othere than MD5
09-22-2014 12:45 AM
09-22-2014 12:48 AM
Is there any why where i can ignore the build date and time and check for the checksum , So that i get the get some same when i create build with out any update/change
09-22-2014 12:58 AM
09-22-2014 01:23 AM
@prajwal.prithviraj wrote:
Is there any why where i can ignore the build date and time and check for the checksum , So that i get the get some same when i create build with out any update/change
Is there any specific reason why you have this type of requirement?
09-22-2014 02:24 AM
@prajwal.prithviraj wrote:
Which is the best method to calculate the CRC checksum of Labview executable .Since I am facing CRC check sum is calculated differently every time when i do create the executable with out any change ,and I calculate the CRC checksum then I am getting different CRC checksum .
Basically I should be getting same CRC checksum every time. when I create exe with out anychange /any update .
Please let me know is there any other best methods which suits Labview executable othere than MD5
If you are using the checksum to certify software on a tester it SHOULD fail certification if you rebuild the executable and use the old certification information. I know the DoD would come down on top of you like a ton of bricks if your certification didn't catch that.
09-22-2014 06:27 AM
This issue of rebuilding giving a different executable is an issue for every compiler I have ever touched. At the very least, there is date/time information in there that changes from build to build. If you are looking for the rebuildablity of your code, what I have done in the past is just do a direct binary comparison between the released build and the test build and check for something like 80% identical. And yes, that was the spec we made for programs written in C++ as well.
09-22-2014 09:09 AM
@crossrulz wrote:
This issue of rebuilding giving a different executable is an issue for every compiler I have ever touched. At the very least, there is date/time information in there that changes from build to build.
Because of this we actually store the EXE built in SCC. Many will say that's not what SCC is for, it isn't source. And this is true, but this is the easiest way for me to keep track of EXEs and roll back to the bit-for-bit version previously used. If I get a report back and it says it failed a step and the software used was 1.0.2.123, I want to know that I can roll back to that exact EXE, and exact source. I could roll back source to that version, and build a new EXE but that won't be the same 1.0.2.123 it will be a different one that we assume will function the same.
Unofficial Forum Rules and Guidelines
Get going with G! - LabVIEW Wiki.
16 Part Blog on Automotive CAN bus. - Hooovahh - LabVIEW Overlord