Updates to DownloadItemGtk for supporting download items marked as DANGEROUS_CONTENT.

Updates to DownloadItemGtk for supporting download items marked as DANGEROUS_CONTENT.

ownloads that are flagged as malicious based on content will have a danger type of DANGEROUS_CONTENT.

BUG=102540
TEST=Downloading a binary identified as malicious by the Safe Browsing service shows a warning dialog in the download shelf.

[Randy Smith (Not in Mondays), 2011-11-21 01:38:13]

Evan, could you take a look?  I don't know the GTK code very well.

Minor comments below.

http://codereview.chromium.org/8588037/diff/5001/chrome/browser/ui/gtk/downlo...
File chrome/browser/ui/gtk/download/download_item_gtk.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8588037/diff/5001/chrome/browser/ui/gtk/downlo...
chrome/browser/ui/gtk/download/download_item_gtk.cc:524:
l10n_util::GetStringUTF16(IDS_PROMPT_UNSAFE_DOWNLOAD_URL);
Noe': Do we want the prompts to be the same for content and url?

http://codereview.chromium.org/8588037/diff/5001/chrome/browser/ui/gtk/downlo...
File chrome/browser/ui/gtk/download/download_item_gtk.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8588037/diff/5001/chrome/browser/ui/gtk/downlo...
chrome/browser/ui/gtk/download/download_item_gtk.h:219:
scoped_ptr<ui::SlideAnimation> danger_prompt_animation_;
Is there a reason we don't have the contrary animation (from dangerous to safe)
already?  Why the assymetry?

[Randy Smith (Not in Mondays), 2011-12-07 21:00:16]

What's the status of this CL?  Is it going in with low priority since this case
won't happen in the near term on Linux, or is it DOA?

[asanka, 2011-12-07 21:05:43]

On 2011/12/07 21:00:16, rdsmith wrote:
> What's the status of this CL?  Is it going in with low priority since this
case
> won't happen in the near term on Linux, or is it DOA?

On hold for now.  The current patchset implements the older malicious download
UI.  I'll resurrect it with the new UI once things stabilize on Windows.