Add command line flag and associated prefs to allow run-time enable of geoloc...

Add command line flag and associated prefs to allow run-time enable of geolocaiton features.
Once this is landed we can enable GEOLOCATION in WebKit at build time, allowing proper tests
to be written that utilize this flag.

BUG=29182
TEST=Manually enabled GEOLOCATION in WebKit and passed the command line flag.

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=34257

[joth, 2009-12-02 18:16:09]

NOTE this change depends on WebKit change
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32066

The try-bots will fail until that one is landed & rolled in.

[joth, 2009-12-08 16:56:05]

On 2009/12/02 18:16:09, jothchrome wrote:
> NOTE this change depends on WebKit change
> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32066
> 
> The try-bots will fail until that one is landed & rolled in.

Webkit patch landed and try bots are now green, so this is ready for review.
Thanks,

[dglazkov, 2009-12-08 17:45:13]

http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5005
File chrome/common/render_messages.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5005#newcode1851
chrome/common/render_messages.h:1851: return false;
This seems unrelated. Can you split this into a separate clean-up patch?

http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5003
File ipc/ipc_message_macros.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5003#newcode28
ipc/ipc_message_macros.h:28: // at a later time.  This is transparent from the
sender's side.  The receiver
Ditto.

[joth, 2009-12-08 18:21:16]

Will do x 2
I was wanted my patch to have zero lint warnings, but this is probably
clearer in  another CL as you say.



2009/12/8 <dglazkov@chromium.org>

>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5005
> File chrome/common/render_messages.h (right):
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5005#newcode1851
> chrome/common/render_messages.h:1851: return false;
> This seems unrelated. Can you split this into a separate clean-up patch?
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5003
> File ipc/ipc_message_macros.h (right):
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5003#newcode28
> ipc/ipc_message_macros.h:28: // at a later time.  This is transparent
> from the sender's side.  The receiver
> Ditto.
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/460020
>

[joth, 2009-12-08 18:36:40]

On 2009/12/08 18:21:16, jothchrome wrote:
> Will do x 2
Done.
Thanks!

> I was wanted my patch to have zero lint warnings, but this is probably
> clearer in  another CL as you say.
> 
> 
> 
> 2009/12/8 <mailto:dglazkov@chromium.org>
> 
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5005
> > File chrome/common/render_messages.h (right):
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5005#newcode1851
> > chrome/common/render_messages.h:1851: return false;
> > This seems unrelated. Can you split this into a separate clean-up patch?
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5003
> > File ipc/ipc_message_macros.h (right):
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/460020/diff/4001/5003#newcode28
> > ipc/ipc_message_macros.h:28: // at a later time.  This is transparent
> > from the sender's side.  The receiver
> > Ditto.
> >
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/460020
> >
>

[dglazkov, 2009-12-08 18:38:35]

LGTM.

[joth, 2009-12-08 19:05:57]

Great, thanks. Could you commit it for me?
Cheers!

2009/12/8 <dglazkov@chromium.org>

> LGTM.
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/460020
>

[joth, 2009-12-10 11:55:46]

Dimitri, Is it possible for you to commit this one now? If not, please let me
know.

Thanks!

[dglazkov, 2009-12-10 16:32:39]

Sure. Will try to land today,