> On July 23, 2018, 12:35 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> > > It is not yet known if the Autotools system will also need this patch. Do 
> > > we want it added there anyway?
> > 
> > I'd vote for enabling this on all platforms to simplify the build setup.

Ah, but that doesn't simplify it, it complicates it :P (I've never added a 
patch to Autotools).


> On July 23, 2018, 12:35 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> > 3rdparty/googletest-release-1.8.0.patch
> > Lines 1 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/67916/diff/1/?file=2059402#file2059402line1>
> >
> >     This patch has landed upstream so let's just use the patch from 
> > upstream `f66ab00704cd47e4e63ef6d425ca14b9192aaebb` instead of referencing 
> > a PR. If we do that we should also update our commit message.
> >     
> >     `f66ab00704c` applied cleanly with some fuzziness for me, so if 
> > possible just use the actual upstream patch.

I believe that I did cherry-pick the merged upstream patch. This diff was 
generated from the cherry-picked commit, which is why the hash is not 
`f66ab00704cd47e4e63ef6d425ca14b9192aaebb`.


> On July 23, 2018, 12:35 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> > 3rdparty/googletest-release-1.8.0.patch
> > Lines 1-10 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/67916/diff/1/?file=2059402#file2059402line1>
> >
> >     Thanks for including the git metadata with the patch! This is much 
> > easier to maintain than bare diffs we have in many other patches.

The commit hash isn't useful since it was a cherry-pick, but the message I 
thought was nice to have :) I think I just generated with `git format-patch`... 
how else do people generate patches?


- Andrew


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/67916/#review206332
-----------------------------------------------------------


On July 13, 2018, 2:04 p.m., Andrew Schwartzmeyer wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/67916/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 13, 2018, 2:04 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Bannier, Joseph Wu, and Till Toenshoff.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-8990
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-8990
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Per MESOS-8990, our Google Test dependency needs a patch from
> upstream, https://github.com/google/googletest/pull/1620, in order to
> continue building with the next version of MSVC (and potentially other
> compilers).
> 
> This patch file was generated by cherry-picking `f66ab00` from
> `master` onto `release-1.8.0` in the Google Test repo, and resolving
> the merge conflict.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/CMakeLists.txt b58996d2ed7521e42d6298d174cc8c494b84eb8f 
>   3rdparty/googletest-release-1.8.0.patch PRE-CREATION 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/67916/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Clean build on Windows using CMake (which is the only place this patch 
> currently applies). It is not yet known if the Autotools system will also 
> need this patch. Do we want it added there anyway?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andrew Schwartzmeyer
> 
>

Reply via email to