Add skeleton of content shell for android.

content/shell/android/content_shell.gypi

+# Copyright (c) 2012 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+# Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+# found in the LICENSE file.
+
+{
+  'conditions': [
+    ['OS=="android"', {
+      'targets': [
+        {
+          'target_name': 'content_shell_apk',
+          'message': 'building content shell package',
+          'type': 'none',
+          'actions': [
+            {
+              'action_name': 'content_shell_apk',
+              'inputs': [
+                '<(DEPTH)/content/shell/android/content_shell_apk.xml',
+                '<!@(find shell/android/java -name "*.java")',

[Ted C, 2012/03/27 17:16:23]

Not sure if we should start including other dependencies yet, but should we also
include:
base/android/java/* as well

Although, I'm not sure what our approach long term will be.  Are we going to
include all the .java files explicitly here or are we going to you other gyp
targets to build .jar files and we include the jar files?

[Satish, 2012/03/27 20:15:28]

Ideally base/android/java should be listed as a dependency instead of including
the java files here. But I haven't tried so don't know if that will work. In
this CL base/android/java isn't used yet and in a future CL where we start using
it I'll add it the right way.

+              ],
+              'outputs': [
+                # Awkwardly, we build a Debug APK even when gyp is in
+                # Release mode.  I don't think it matters (e.g. we're
+                # probably happy to not codesign) but naming should be
+                # fixed.
+                '<(PRODUCT_DIR)/ContentShell-debug.apk',
+              ],
+              'action': [
+                'ant',
+                '-DPRODUCT_DIR=<(PRODUCT_DIR)',
+                '-buildfile',
+                '<(DEPTH)/content/shell/android/content_shell_apk.xml',
+              ]
+            }
+          ],
+        },
+      ],
+    }]
+  ]
+}