Security patterns and anti-patterns in embedded development
Security patterns and anti-patterns in embedded development
Posted Apr 30, 2024 22:27 UTC (Tue) by willy (subscriber, #9762)In reply to: Security patterns and anti-patterns in embedded development by atai
Parent article: Security patterns and anti-patterns in embedded development
When it's something I don't know like m4, cmake or Bazel, I'm screwed. And honestly when it's something like Bazel which appears to exist Because Google Is Better At Everything Than You Are, I am disinclined to learn.
Posted May 1, 2024 11:47 UTC (Wed)
by smurf (subscriber, #17840)
[Link] (1 responses)
Funnily enough, that last step often is looking for the precise flavor of the pthread[s] library, which habitually "fails" because the check for the 'wrong' variant prints an error message. A web search for pthreads "breaking" your cmake script yields a heap of confused examples.
Makefiles aren't exactly anti-pattern-free either. You can make them arbitrarily complex, if not NP-complete. Look at the Linux kernel's build system if you need an example.
Posted May 3, 2024 1:06 UTC (Fri)
by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)
[Link]
Posted May 3, 2024 9:40 UTC (Fri)
by mss (subscriber, #138799)
[Link]
Security patterns and anti-patterns in embedded development
Security patterns and anti-patterns in embedded development
meson seems to be this decade build system of choice for OSS projects.Security patterns and anti-patterns in embedded development
cmake was more like year 2010 thing.