wip: cleanup: simpler GoogleTest dependency management #1699
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: federico-sysdig The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
federico-sysdig
force-pushed
the
cleanup-googletest-library-dependency
branch
from
cb06364
to
7f54d4d
Compare
federico-sysdig
changed the title
|
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Provide feedback via https://github.com/falcosecurity/community. /lifecycle stale |
Signed-off-by: Federico Aponte <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Federico Aponte <[email protected]>
federico-sysdig
force-pushed
the
cleanup-googletest-library-dependency
branch
from
7f54d4d
to
05ae700
Compare
|
/remove-lifecycle stale |
|
This is an old PR that I did not follow for a while. It's going stale, but I'd like to give it another try. |
|
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Provide feedback via https://github.com/falcosecurity/community. /lifecycle stale |
|
/remove-lifecycle stale |
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
Any specific area of the project related to this PR?
/area build
/area tests
Does this PR require a change in the driver versions?
No
What this PR does / why we need it:
Simplify the way the 3rd party library GoogleTest is found or retrieved.
Usage of the CMake mechanisms
FetchContent, for the "bundled" approach, andfind_package, for the rest, makes possible to use target aliasesGTest::gtestandGTest::gtest_mainthat bring all needed properties (binary to link to, include paths, etc.) to the linked test target.Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?