Start refactoring to reduce executable type knowledge.

Start refactoring to reduce executable type knowledge.

This creates executable detection functions, a globally shared enum for
describing an executable type, and reduces the number of classes and
locations with executable specific knowledge.

These changes, along with moving architecture specific classes into their
own files should make it easier to produce special purpose clients that
only contain the code required to apply their own form of patch.

DisassemblerWin32EXE, ImagePE, CourgetteWin32X86PatchGenerator, and
CourgetteWin32X86Patcher, and ensemble handling are all heavily affected here.

This should have no effect on the behavior of the system yet, and is instead
all prep-work.

BUG=None
TEST=Unittests


Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=103879

[dgarrett, 2011-09-16 02:49:04]

This CL isn't yet ready, but it'll be big enough that I wanted to show some of
the steps broken out (should have started that a little sooner, actually).

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2011-09-16 18:34:34]

Drive-by with a testing nit. No need to wait for me.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7920004/diff/1/courgette/versioning_unittest.cc
File courgette/versioning_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7920004/diff/1/courgette/versioning_unittest.c...
courgette/versioning_unittest.cc:43: EXPECT_TRUE(!"Could not read test data");
Huh? Why not EXPECT_TRUE(file_util::ReadFileToString(...)) above?

[dgarrett, 2011-09-22 02:20:46]

http://codereview.chromium.org/7920004/diff/1/courgette/versioning_unittest.cc
File courgette/versioning_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7920004/diff/1/courgette/versioning_unittest.c...
courgette/versioning_unittest.cc:43: EXPECT_TRUE(!"Could not read test data");
On 2011/09/16 18:34:34, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> Huh? Why not EXPECT_TRUE(file_util::ReadFileToString(...)) above?

Honestly, because I copied that block from another similar unittest. There are a
couple of helper methods like that which should probably be pulled into a single
location and shared.

I'll probably get to that later on in this refactor process.

[sra1, 2011-09-22 02:58:17]

LGTM

http://codereview.chromium.org/7920004/diff/1/courgette/versioning_unittest.cc
File courgette/versioning_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7920004/diff/1/courgette/versioning_unittest.c...
courgette/versioning_unittest.cc:43: EXPECT_TRUE(!"Could not read test data");
On 2011/09/16 18:34:34, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> Huh? Why not EXPECT_TRUE(file_util::ReadFileToString(...)) above?


This is an old habit of mine.  Fix it if you want to, but I find that when the
test is failing, the string expression is more meaningful that the boolean
expression.  !"string" is always false.

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2011-09-26 17:08:21]

http://codereview.chromium.org/7920004/diff/1/courgette/versioning_unittest.cc
File courgette/versioning_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7920004/diff/1/courgette/versioning_unittest.c...
courgette/versioning_unittest.cc:43: EXPECT_TRUE(!"Could not read test data");
On 2011/09/22 02:58:17, sra1 wrote:
> On 2011/09/16 18:34:34, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> > Huh? Why not EXPECT_TRUE(file_util::ReadFileToString(...)) above?
> 
> 
> This is an old habit of mine.  Fix it if you want to, but I find that when the
> test is failing, the string expression is more meaningful that the boolean
> expression.  !"string" is always false.

Please note you can EXPECT_TRUE(ReadFileToString(...)) << "Could not read test
data";

if you want. GTest is quite smarter than the traditional "assert" solution.

Could you please fix all usages of that? I'd like this pattern not to
proliferate throughout our codebase.

[dgarrett, 2011-09-29 21:02:39]

Okay, I think this is ready to go in now.

I've removed the backwards compatibility unittest which I will add in a seperate
CL when I have a way to test/debug it on Windows.

There will be a follow on CL dedicated to moving executable format specific
changes out of ImagePE and into the appropriate disassembler.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-10-03 18:51:56]

CQ is trying the patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/dgarrett@chromium.org/7920004/10001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-10-03 19:09:50]

Try job failure for 7920004-10001 (retry) on win_rel for step "compile" (clobber
build).
It's a second try, previously, step "compile" failed.
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=win_rel&nu...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-10-03 21:15:28]

CQ is trying the patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/dgarrett@chromium.org/7920004/10003

[dgarrett, 2011-10-03 23:38:00]

LGTM - The only change was a tweak to fix a windows compiler warning.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-10-04 13:43:27]

Change committed as 103879