> On Feb. 21, 2018, 5:18 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote: > > 3rdparty/CMakeLists.txt > > Lines 169-182 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65720/diff/1/?file=1962933#file1962933line169> > > > > Could we generalize this a little bit to whether we are using a multi- > > or single config generator (e.g., with `GENERATOR_IS_MULTI_CONFIG` or > > similar). This should get us some way to address MESOS-7943.
Possibly... I'd need to see how similar the other multi-config generators are to Visual Studio with respect to output build paths. - Andrew ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/65720/#review197846 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 20, 2018, 11:32 a.m., Andrew Schwartzmeyer wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/65720/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 20, 2018, 11:32 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Akash Gupta, Benjamin Bannier, Jeff Coffler, and > Joseph Wu. > > > Bugs: MESOS-8599 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-8599 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > The Ninja generator does not emit binaries to "Debug" or "Release" > folders (unlike the Visual Studio generator), so we replace this > assumption with a pair of variables `CONFIG_DEBGUG` and > `CONFIG_RELEASE` which are correct for each generator. This is > somewhat ugly, but it's the cost of supporting multiple toolsets. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/CMakeLists.txt da605707b89bbe9b3db9e60bc0b0a26dac46e56e > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/65720/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Andrew Schwartzmeyer > >
