* Invoke Google Update to do the exe rename.

- If the exe rename command fails try calling Google Update to do the same job. This works when we are logged into XP/Vista as limited rights user.
- Update Google Update idl file that has the recently added COM object.
- Add --system-level to the rename command that gets added to the registry.
- Remove all the code to uninstall Gears MSI. Now most of the user have been upgraded to Chrome installer that includes gears.dll.

BUG=1463346

[cpu_(ooo_6.6-7.5), 2008-11-19 18:40:35]

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/2
File chrome/browser/first_run.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/2#newcode230
Line 230: 
I think we should try the ReplaceFileW first if it is a per user install. It is
faster and works fine in the 20M current installs.

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/2#newcode249
Line 249: // Rename didn't work so try to rename by calling Google Update
nit: It would be cool if this COM stuff will be its own function on this same
file.

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/3
File chrome/installer/setup/install.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/3#newcode241
Line 241: if (reg_root == HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE) {
I am somewhat ignorant about this code but, isn't there a better signal for
'system level' than reg_root == HKLM ?

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/4
File chrome/installer/setup/main.cc (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/4#oldcode387
Line 387: 
Most awesome day! this code leaves.

[kuchhal, 2008-11-19 19:35:49]

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/2
File chrome/browser/first_run.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/2#newcode230
Line 230: 
In this new mechanism of renaming ideally we should also delete the 'opv' and
'rename' when doing the rename (even though it works without deletion as well
for backward compatibility). Unless we notice any performance regression we
probably should try to keep the code consistent. In my tests rename worked 100%
(since I never shutdown computer) of the time on Chrome shutdown. So most of the
users will not see any change on Chrome startup.


On 2008/11/19 18:40:35, cpu wrote:
> I think we should try the ReplaceFileW first if it is a per user install. It
is
> faster and works fine in the 20M current installs.
> 
>

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/2#newcode249
Line 249: // Rename didn't work so try to rename by calling Google Update
Fixed.

On 2008/11/19 18:40:35, cpu wrote:
> nit: It would be cool if this COM stuff will be its own function on this same
> file.

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/3
File chrome/installer/setup/install.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/3#newcode241
Line 241: if (reg_root == HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE) {
We currently do not pass system_level or options to this method. We can do that
by changing method signature but since we are already using HKEY check to
determine system level install at another place, I added this one as well.

On 2008/11/19 18:40:35, cpu wrote:
> I am somewhat ignorant about this code but, isn't there a better signal for
> 'system level' than reg_root == HKLM ?
> 
>

[cpu_(ooo_6.6-7.5), 2008-11-20 02:38:56]

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/2
File chrome/browser/first_run.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/1/2#newcode230
Line 230: 
But how do we notice this performance regressions? I don't think we execute this
code path in any perf test. 

I got lost in the registry opv part.. do you mean that we don't do this except
thru the COM invocation?


On 2008/11/19 19:35:49, kuchhal wrote:
> In this new mechanism of renaming ideally we should also delete the 'opv' and
> 'rename' when doing the rename (even though it works without deletion as well
> for backward compatibility). Unless we notice any performance regression we
> probably should try to keep the code consistent. In my tests rename worked
100%
> (since I never shutdown computer) of the time on Chrome shutdown. So most of
the
> users will not see any change on Chrome startup.
> 
> 
> On 2008/11/19 18:40:35, cpu wrote:
> > I think we should try the ReplaceFileW first if it is a per user install. It
> is
> > faster and works fine in the 20M current installs.
> > 
> > 
>

[cpu_(ooo_6.6-7.5), 2008-11-20 02:43:38]

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/11/211
File chrome/browser/first_run.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11255/diff/11/211#newcode102
Line 102: return false;
So this rename does also the opv key work?