Hello all,
On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 16:00 +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> > My take a way is that software needs to become less complex. Do
> > we really still need complex build systems such as autoconf?
>
> (And, FWIW, testing for features isn't "complex". And have you looked at
> other build syste
On Tue, Apr 9, 2024, 10:57 Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Apr 09 2024, anderson.jonath...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > - This xz backdoor injection unpacked attacker-controlled files and ran
> them during `configure`. Newer build systems implement a build abstraction
> (aka DSL) that acts similar to a sand
On Tue, 2024-04-09 at 16:11 -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
>
> On Apr 9, 2024, at 3:59 PM, Jonathon Anderson via Gcc
> <[gcc@gcc.gnu.org](mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org)> wrote:
>
> > CMake has its own sandbox and rules and escapes (granted, much more of
> > them). But regardles
On Tue, 2024-04-09 at 14:50 -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 4/9/24 14:40, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>
> > Code provenance and code integrity was not enforced. Part of the
> > problem is the Autotools design. It is from a bygone era.
>
>
> No, Andreas is right. This isn't an Autotools-vs-Meson thing.
