Switched dynamic_annotations.gyp from using the DEPTH attribute to a relative directory.

Switched dynamic_annotations.gyp from using the DEPTH attribute to a relative directory.
The DEPTH attribute works fine as long as you're building the base library from the chrome src
directory (which the vast majority of people do).  If, however, you're trying to build it as a dependency
in another project (as I am for the webtest-plugin project), the DEPTH attribute does not work.
The relative path builds correctly in both situations.

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=53809

[Michael Williamson, 2010-07-27 00:37:10]

Tony, looks like you added the file; mind doing the review?
Thanks,
Mike

[tony, 2010-07-27 16:24:01]

I see, so you have something like:

myproject/myproject.gyp
myproject/chromium/base/*
myproject/chromium/base/third_party/dynamic_annotations

It would be nicer for chromium if you were able to remove the chromium directory
and put everything next to your root gyp file.  The benefit of being able to use
<(DEPTH) is that it makes it easy to move subdirectories around without having
to edit the gyp files.  If you plan on using more of chromium, you'll find we
use <(DEPTH) like this a lot.

Anyway, since this is just two places, LGTM.

[Michael Williamson, 2010-07-27 16:56:40]

Also, I don't have commiting access.  Mind pushing this for me?

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Michael Williamson <
michaelwill@chromium.org> wrote:

> Thanks for the review Tony.
>
> Originally, I actually tried to do what you suggested, but we eventually
> decided that it would be better to separate our stuff from the chrome
> codebase as much as possible.  We're strictly a project for testing, and it
> didn't seem prudent to bloat the main codebase with our stuff.
>
> I don't actually depend on dynamic_annotations directly, I'm just trying to
> reuse the base and ipc libraries.  dynamic_annotations was the only library
> that I had a problem with, as everything else builds correctly.
>
> Anyway, I might have to rethink this if I run into more situations like
> these.
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 9:24 AM, <tony@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> I see, so you have something like:
>>
>> myproject/myproject.gyp
>> myproject/chromium/base/*
>> myproject/chromium/base/third_party/dynamic_annotations
>>
>> It would be nicer for chromium if you were able to remove the chromium
>> directory
>> and put everything next to your root gyp file.  The benefit of being able
>> to use
>> <(DEPTH) is that it makes it easy to move subdirectories around without
>> having
>> to edit the gyp files.  If you plan on using more of chromium, you'll find
>> we
>> use <(DEPTH) like this a lot.
>
>
>> Anyway, since this is just two places, LGTM.
>>
>>
>> http://codereview.chromium.org/2868068/show
>>
>
>

[Michael Williamson, 2010-07-27 17:05:09]

Thanks for the review Tony.

Originally, I actually tried to do what you suggested, but we eventually
decided that it would be better to separate our stuff from the chrome
codebase as much as possible.  We're strictly a project for testing, and it
didn't seem prudent to bloat the main codebase with our stuff.

I don't actually depend on dynamic_annotations directly, I'm just trying to
reuse the base and ipc libraries.  dynamic_annotations was the only library
that I had a problem with, as everything else builds correctly.

Anyway, I might have to rethink this if I run into more situations like
these.


On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 9:24 AM, <tony@chromium.org> wrote:

> I see, so you have something like:
>
> myproject/myproject.gyp
> myproject/chromium/base/*
> myproject/chromium/base/third_party/dynamic_annotations
>
> It would be nicer for chromium if you were able to remove the chromium
> directory
> and put everything next to your root gyp file.  The benefit of being able
> to use
> <(DEPTH) is that it makes it easy to move subdirectories around without
> having
> to edit the gyp files.  If you plan on using more of chromium, you'll find
> we
> use <(DEPTH) like this a lot.


> Anyway, since this is just two places, LGTM.
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/2868068/show
>

[tony, 2010-07-27 18:16:04]

Ok, I will land this for you.

Since you're only using base and ipc, it's probably easy for you to move them
next to your main gyp file.  But anyway, since it's a small change, I'll go
ahead and land it.