[NaCl SDK] Remove create_nmf dependency on NACL_SDK_ROOT env var

[NaCl SDK] Remove create_nmf dependency on NACL_SDK_ROOT env var

create_nmf should determine the root of the SDK relative
to its own location.

The exception to this is when its run as part of the
chrome build, when it is not yet installed.  In this
case we pass --no-default-libpath and --objdump to
create_nmf to remove any use of the SDK root.

This is the second attempt at landing this change.
The first one was reverted:
https://codereview.chromium.org/737653003

CQ_EXTRA_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_nacl_sdk;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_nacl_sdk
BUG=none

Committed: https://crrev.com/d362de5b7d8aeb07523546f740244a24df85ab1d
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#325511}

[Sam Clegg, 2015-04-07 16:52:16]

sbc@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ binji@chromium.org, plundblad@chromium.org

[binji, 2015-04-07 19:44:02]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
File third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp:141: '--no-default-libpath',
it seems that this change is the only difference between this CL and the
previous reverted CL. Do the trybots test this path? It seems that they
succeeded before without this change, so I would assume not.

[Sam Clegg, 2015-04-07 20:11:53]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
File third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp:141: '--no-default-libpath',
On 2015/04/07 19:44:02, binji wrote:
> it seems that this change is the only difference between this CL and the
> previous reverted CL. Do the trybots test this path? It seems that they
> succeeded before without this change, so I would assume not.

No, I guess the bots don't test this otherwise the previous change would not
have landed.

I tested this by building this target locally.

[binji, 2015-04-07 21:15:42]

On 2015/04/07 20:11:53, Sam Clegg wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
> File third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
> third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp:141: '--no-default-libpath',
> On 2015/04/07 19:44:02, binji wrote:
> > it seems that this change is the only difference between this CL and the
> > previous reverted CL. Do the trybots test this path? It seems that they
> > succeeded before without this change, so I would assume not.
> 
> No, I guess the bots don't test this otherwise the previous change would not
> have landed.
> 
> I tested this by building this target locally.

lgtm

[binji, 2015-04-07 21:17:40]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
File third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp:142:
'--objdump=>(nacl_glibc_tc_root)/bin/x86_64-nacl-objdump',
does this need to be nacl_newlib_tc_root? Shouldn't make a difference I'd think,
but this build is newlib not glibc. Perhaps the toolchain won't be prepped if it
is built in isolation?

[Sam Clegg, 2015-04-09 00:26:01]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
File third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1066823003/diff/20001/third_party/liblouis/li...
third_party/liblouis/liblouis_nacl.gyp:142:
'--objdump=>(nacl_glibc_tc_root)/bin/x86_64-nacl-objdump',
On 2015/04/07 21:17:39, binji wrote:
> does this need to be nacl_newlib_tc_root? Shouldn't make a difference I'd
think,
> but this build is newlib not glibc. Perhaps the toolchain won't be prepped if
it
> is built in isolation?

It won't actually use the objdump executable unless the nexe is dynamically
linked, so I think we are good.

[Sam Clegg, 2015-04-09 00:26:05]

The CQ bit was checked by sbc@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-09 00:26:55]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1066823003/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-09 03:48:41]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-09 03:48:42]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromium_presub...)

[Peter Lundblad, 2015-04-16 17:36:23]

liblouis lgtm

[Sam Clegg, 2015-04-16 18:09:40]

The CQ bit was checked by sbc@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 18:11:49]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1066823003/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 18:30:21]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 18:30:23]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromium_presub...)

[Sam Clegg, 2015-04-16 18:52:44]

sbc@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ bbudge@chromium.org

[Sam Clegg, 2015-04-16 18:52:44]

+bbudge for ppapi/OWNERS

[bbudge, 2015-04-16 19:34:55]

lgtm

[Sam Clegg, 2015-04-16 20:21:00]

The CQ bit was checked by sbc@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 20:23:33]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1066823003/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 20:56:39]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 20:57:30]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/d362de5b7d8aeb07523546f740244a24df85ab1d
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#325511}