Upating the app, ceee, chrome, ipc, media, and net directories to use the correct lock.h file.

Upating the app, ceee, chrome, ipc, media, and net directories to use the lock.h in base/synchronization/ instead of base/, and to explicitly scope the use of Lock and AutoLock to the 'base' namespace. Also identified several files including lock.h unnecessarily and removed the reference.

No tests as this results in no behavioral changes.

BUG=none
TEST=none

[brettw, 2011-01-10 19:23:20]

There are some .js, .cc, and .bat files in here. Are those on purpose? Did the
line endings change or something?

Did you run it through the trybots? Sometimes this type of change causes a
problem if some random file is implicitly getting the lock.h include from one of
the files you changed, and now isn't seeing the "using" line. Let me know if you
need help with trybot stuff.

[scherkus (not reviewing), 2011-01-10 20:06:36]

drive by: media looks good

[mad-corp, 2011-01-10 20:20:50]

I don't think the changes in the CEEE bat files are related to this, right?

BYE
MAD

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 2:23 PM, <brettw@chromium.org> wrote:

> There are some .js, .cc, and .bat files in here. Are those on purpose? Did
> the
> line endings change or something?
>
> Did you run it through the trybots? Sometimes this type of change causes a
> problem if some random file is implicitly getting the lock.h include from
> one of
> the files you changed, and now isn't seeing the "using" line. Let me know
> if you
> need help with trybot stuff.
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/6142009/
>

[leviw_travelin_and_unemployed, 2011-01-10 20:35:17]

No, you and Brett are correct -- some changes were picked up that shouldn't be
there. Oops! I'll fix these and reupload. Thanks for taking a look!

On 2011/01/10 20:20:50, mad-corp wrote:
> I don't think the changes in the CEEE bat files are related to this, right?
> 
> BYE
> MAD
> 
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 2:23 PM, <mailto:brettw@chromium.org> wrote:
> 
> > There are some .js, .cc, and .bat files in here. Are those on purpose? Did
> > the
> > line endings change or something?
> >
> > Did you run it through the trybots? Sometimes this type of change causes a
> > problem if some random file is implicitly getting the lock.h include from
> > one of
> > the files you changed, and now isn't seeing the "using" line. Let me know
> > if you
> > need help with trybot stuff.
> >
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/6142009/
> >

[leviw_travelin_and_unemployed, 2011-01-10 21:31:20]

That's looking much better...

On 2011/01/10 20:35:17, Levi wrote:
> No, you and Brett are correct -- some changes were picked up that shouldn't be
> there. Oops! I'll fix these and reupload. Thanks for taking a look!

[brettw, 2011-01-18 17:21:24]

Sorry I took so long to get back to you on this!

I patched this in and I get compile errors in base like
base/metrics/field_trial.h. Did you mean to remove lock.h? Can you do a clean
build to make sure this is ready to go?

[ZZZDONOTUSEMEZZZ, 2011-01-18 18:41:57]

I'll merge those two patches and validate. Thanks again for taking a look :)

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:21 AM, <brettw@chromium.org> wrote:

> Sorry I took so long to get back to you on this!
>
> I patched this in and I get compile errors in base like
> base/metrics/field_trial.h. Did you mean to remove lock.h? Can you do a
> clean
> build to make sure this is ready to go?
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/6142009/
>

[ZZZDONOTUSEMEZZZ, 2011-01-18 23:30:06]

This should be good to go now... but it looks like we need to message this
(I'm looking at you Brett :) as a lot of the issues I ran into were new
unscoped Lock and AutoLock uses popping up.

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Levi Weintraub <leviw@google.com> wrote:

> I'll merge those two patches and validate. Thanks again for taking a look
> :)
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:21 AM, <brettw@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> Sorry I took so long to get back to you on this!
>>
>> I patched this in and I get compile errors in base like
>> base/metrics/field_trial.h. Did you mean to remove lock.h? Can you do a
>> clean
>> build to make sure this is ready to go?
>>
>>
>> http://codereview.chromium.org/6142009/
>>
>
>