make browser_tests and interaction_ui_tests compile and link under use_aura=1 chromeos=0.

make browser_tests compile and link under use_aura=1 chromeos=0.


BUG=99362
TEST=None


Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=104574

[Emmanuel Saint-loubert-Bié, 2011-10-07 14:19:09]

LGTM, provided you address my comments. 
Next round of reviews can go to OWNERS (I think there will be a minimum of 2,
maybe 3)

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1/ui/base/clipboard/clipboard_aur...
File ui/base/clipboard/clipboard_aura.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1/ui/base/clipboard/clipboard_aur...
ui/base/clipboard/clipboard_aura.cc:64: uint32* fragment_start, uint32*
fragment_end) const {
One argument per line, like the other methods in this file. I also I happen top
have a pending CL with that same change, so resync before landing.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1/views/events/event_aura.cc
File views/events/event_aura.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1/views/events/event_aura.cc#newc...
views/events/event_aura.cc:39: // }
remove old code

[alicet1, 2011-10-07 15:30:31]

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1/ui/base/clipboard/clipboard_aur...
File ui/base/clipboard/clipboard_aura.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1/ui/base/clipboard/clipboard_aur...
ui/base/clipboard/clipboard_aura.cc:64: uint32* fragment_start, uint32*
fragment_end) const {
On 2011/10/07 14:19:10, Emmanuel Saint-loubert wrote:
> One argument per line, like the other methods in this file. I also I happen
top
> have a pending CL with that same change, so resync before landing.
ok.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1/views/events/event_aura.cc
File views/events/event_aura.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1/views/events/event_aura.cc#newc...
views/events/event_aura.cc:39: // }
On 2011/10/07 14:19:10, Emmanuel Saint-loubert wrote:
> remove old code

oh, actually, this file should not be included, sorry.

[alicet1, 2011-10-07 15:32:34]

thanks emmanuel. adding sky for approval.

thanx,
alice

[sky, 2011-10-07 16:05:28]

LGTM

[alicet1, 2011-10-07 16:09:41]

adding thestig@ for printing/... approval.

thanx,
alice

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2011-10-07 16:43:32]

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1002/chrome/test/base/ui_test_uti...
File chrome/test/base/ui_test_utils_linux.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1002/chrome/test/base/ui_test_uti...
chrome/test/base/ui_test_utils_linux.cc:7: #if !defined(USE_AURA)
Looks like it would make more sense to extract ui_test_utils_gtk and
ui_test_utils_aura. Could you do that?

[alicet1, 2011-10-07 17:22:29]

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1002/chrome/test/base/ui_test_uti...
File chrome/test/base/ui_test_utils_linux.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1002/chrome/test/base/ui_test_uti...
chrome/test/base/ui_test_utils_linux.cc:7: #if !defined(USE_AURA)
On 2011/10/07 16:43:32, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> Looks like it would make more sense to extract ui_test_utils_gtk and
> ui_test_utils_aura. Could you do that?

I'm not sure there is enough change here currently that requires that for now. I
can probably see that when we do implement the NOTIMPLEMENTED() branches at the
end of this file that we will need to. in the mean time, I think we want to get
this building first.

[Lei Zhang, 2011-10-07 19:03:25]

LGTM

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-10-07 20:17:08]

CQ is trying the patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/alicet@chromium.org/8190012/4006

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-10-07 21:54:24]

Change committed as 104574

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2011-10-10 19:22:56]

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1002/chrome/test/base/ui_test_uti...
File chrome/test/base/ui_test_utils_linux.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1002/chrome/test/base/ui_test_uti...
chrome/test/base/ui_test_utils_linux.cc:7: #if !defined(USE_AURA)
On 2011/10/07 17:22:29, alicet1 wrote:
> On 2011/10/07 16:43:32, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> > Looks like it would make more sense to extract ui_test_utils_gtk and
> > ui_test_utils_aura. Could you do that?
> 
> I'm not sure there is enough change here currently that requires that for now.
I
> can probably see that when we do implement the NOTIMPLEMENTED() branches at
the
> end of this file that we will need to. in the mean time, I think we want to
get
> this building first.

Hey, please do. If in doubt, look at chrome/test/OWNERS .

[alicet1, 2011-10-10 20:27:02]

On 2011/10/10 19:22:56, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
>
http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1002/chrome/test/base/ui_test_uti...
> File chrome/test/base/ui_test_utils_linux.cc (right):
> 
>
http://codereview.chromium.org/8190012/diff/1002/chrome/test/base/ui_test_uti...
> chrome/test/base/ui_test_utils_linux.cc:7: #if !defined(USE_AURA)
> On 2011/10/07 17:22:29, alicet1 wrote:
> > On 2011/10/07 16:43:32, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> > > Looks like it would make more sense to extract ui_test_utils_gtk and
> > > ui_test_utils_aura. Could you do that?
> > 
> > I'm not sure there is enough change here currently that requires that for
now.
> I
> > can probably see that when we do implement the NOTIMPLEMENTED() branches at
> the
> > end of this file that we will need to. in the mean time, I think we want to
> get
> > this building first.
> 
> Hey, please do. If in doubt, look at chrome/test/OWNERS .

sure, will send you a change.

thanx,
alice