[RFC] Fetch gflags dynamically #11285
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jathu
added
ciflow/trunk
ciflow/binaries
release notes: none
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/pytorch/executorch/11285
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ❌ 22 New Failures, 1 Unrelated FailureAs of commit 0ca8d22 with merge base 09a4b9d ( NEW FAILURES - The following jobs have failed:
FLAKY - The following job failed but was likely due to flakiness present on trunk:
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
facebook-github-bot
added
the
CLA Signed
jathu
force-pushed
the
jathu/no-gflags
branch
3 times, most recently
from
5fb5c1b to
1203bce
Compare
larryliu0820
force-pushed
the
jathu/no-gflags
branch
from
1203bce to
5cb2e4b
Compare
larryliu0820
requested review from
GregoryComer,
cccclai,
kirklandsign,
larryliu0820 and
shoumikhin
as code owners
larryliu0820
approved these changes
Jun 6, 2025
jathu
commented
Jun 6, 2025
third-party/CMakeLists.txt
Outdated
|
|
||
| FetchContent_gflags() | ||
| # Create a symlink from the gflags source directory to third-party/gflags | ||
| message(STATUS "gflags source dir: ${gflags_SOURCE_DIR}") |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: lets not log, it's too noisy — do we really need to tell them every time?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is very helpful for debugging
Contributor
|
Why add such as complication? What are we optimizing for? What are the trade-offs? gflags doesn't seem very large (if you're optimizing for disk space) |
Contributor
|
See some previous context here: #7305 |
Contributor
Author
|
Discussed with @larryliu0820 offline and we decided to punt on this until our buck workflow is removed from cmake. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
I recently learned about FetchContent. This seems like a nicer solution than using submodules. Thoughts?
Test plan
CI