#1807: use gtest 1.11.0

[stmcgovern]

Fixes #1807. Updates fetch script and bundled gtest to version 1.11.0.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1824 (1b93dd7) into develop (3282949) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #1824      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    84.32%   84.32%   -0.01%     
===========================================
  Files          757      757              
  Lines        26685    26684       -1     
===========================================
- Hits         22502    22500       -2     
- Misses        4183     4184       +1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/vt/messaging/request_holder.h	69.23% <0.00%> (-7.70%)	⬇️
tests/unit/runtime/test_mpi_access_guards.cc	92.30% <0.00%> (+3.41%)	⬆️

[PhilMiller]

PR tests (intel icpx, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 98abadc

In file included from /vt/tests/extern/googletest/googletest/src/gtest-all.cc:41:
/vt/tests/extern/googletest/googletest/src/gtest.cc:1583:8: warning: comparison with NaN always evaluates to false in fast floating point modes [-Wtautological-constant-compare]
  if (!(std::isnan)(val1) && !(std::isnan)(val2) && abs_error > 0 &&
       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/vt/tests/extern/googletest/googletest/src/gtest.cc:1583:31: warning: comparison with NaN always evaluates to false in fast floating point modes [-Wtautological-constant-compare]
  if (!(std::isnan)(val1) && !(std::isnan)(val2) && abs_error > 0 &&
                              ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2 warnings generated.

Testing - passed

Build log

It seems that gtest is not getting our flags -fhonor-infinities -fhonor-nans passed through to it. Did we have a modified gtest CMake file to support that?

[stmcgovern]

PR tests (intel icpx, ubuntu, mpich)
Build for 98abadc

In file included from /vt/tests/extern/googletest/googletest/src/gtest-all.cc:41:
/vt/tests/extern/googletest/googletest/src/gtest.cc:1583:8: warning: comparison with NaN always evaluates to false in fast floating point modes [-Wtautological-constant-compare]
  if (!(std::isnan)(val1) && !(std::isnan)(val2) && abs_error > 0 &&
       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/vt/tests/extern/googletest/googletest/src/gtest.cc:1583:31: warning: comparison with NaN always evaluates to false in fast floating point modes [-Wtautological-constant-compare]
  if (!(std::isnan)(val1) && !(std::isnan)(val2) && abs_error > 0 &&
                              ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2 warnings generated.

Testing - passed

Build log

It seems that gtest is not getting our flags -fhonor-infinities -fhonor-nans passed through to it. Did we have a modified gtest CMake file to support that?

The warnings are still there (Build for a02c12a) using the existing CMake file (with version updated to 1.11.0). Note: The code lines that produce these warnings are new to gtest 1.11.0.

[github-actions]

Pipelines results

PR tests (gcc-6, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (clang-5.0, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (gcc-9, ubuntu, mpich, zoltan)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (clang-3.9, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (gcc-8, ubuntu, mpich, address sanitizer)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (gcc-10, ubuntu, openmpi, no LB)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (gcc-5, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (nvidia cuda 10.1, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (clang-13, alpine, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (clang-9, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (intel icpx, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (clang-13, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (clang-11, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (clang-12, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (nvidia cuda 11.0, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (gcc-11, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (gcc-12, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (clang-14, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (gcc-7, ubuntu, mpich, trace runtime, LB)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (intel icpc, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

PR tests (clang-10, ubuntu, mpich)

Build for 1b93dd7

Compilation - successful

Testing - passed

Build log

---

[cz4rs]

Looks good to me!

[cz4rs]

One question: LICENSE file gets removed in this PR. Is the license / copyright statement still present somewhere?

[stmcgovern]

One question: LICENSE file gets removed in this PR. Is the license / copyright statement still present somewhere?

They remove the LICENSE out of the googletest subfolder between versions. There is still a license at the top level googletest directory.
Compare:
https://github.com/google/googletest/tree/release-1.11.0/googletest
https://github.com/google/googletest/tree/release-1.10.0/googletest

[nlslatt]

I think we should pull the LICENSE file from the top-level directory, then. Does anyone think we need ot pull additional files in from there?

[cz4rs]

I think we should pull the LICENSE file from the top-level directory, then. Does anyone think we need ot pull additional files in from there?

LICENSE file should be enough. Looks good apart from that.

tests/extern/googletest/LICENSE is still present (only one copy is removed).

[cz4rs]

Looks good to me.

vt/tests/extern/googletest/LICENSE is still present, only the copy in vt/tests/extern/googletest/googletest/LICENSE is removed (these files are identical).

[nlslatt]

Looks good