Rename use_nss to use_nss_certs in gyp and grit.

Rename use_nss to use_nss_certs in gyp and grit.

This matches the gn name and is less confusing with use_openssl and
use_openssl_certs both existing. The preprocessor flag will follow
in another CL. For now, the old name is still defined, but not used
within Chromium.

A follow-up CL will remove deprecated use_nss and USE_NSS #defines
together which will then cause downstream churn. Though from a grep
of known downstreams, the churn seems to be fairly minimal. The
removal is split from this CL so that, if we need to revert, the
CL to revert is small.

BUG=462040
TBR=wez@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/0ee13e37acf707e703a380a9c1a03f0b494dd6a6
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#325541}

[davidben, 2015-04-14 19:52:01]

davidben@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ rsleevi@chromium.org

[davidben, 2015-04-14 19:52:02]

Hopefully this will make the chimera easier to review later. :-)

[tfarina, 2015-04-14 21:58:26]

tfarina@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ tfarina@chromium.org

[tfarina, 2015-04-14 21:58:27]

gn docs lgtm

[Ryan Sleevi, 2015-04-16 01:45:37]

LGTM - but do any buildbots need to be updated? Please make sure infra doesn't
have anything that needs touching.

When this breaks downstream embedders, how will it break them? Is there a way to
call their attention to this breakage?

[davidben, 2015-04-16 04:13:39]

On 2015/04/16 01:45:37, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> LGTM - but do any buildbots need to be updated? Please make sure infra doesn't
> have anything that needs touching.

I doubt it, but I'll double-check the infra repos tomorrow before landing.
(use_nss is computed from the OS gyp flags, so it shouldn't be passed as input
in general.)

> When this breaks downstream embedders, how will it break them? Is there a way
to
> call their attention to this breakage?

I would expect their builds to break on this and the preprocessor change. If gyp
flags on unknown variables (I'll check tomorrow), it'll be more reliable. But I
wouldn't expect builds to continue working. (We use #if defined(FOO), so that
definitely won't fail a priori, but I would expect builds to break.)

I'll send out a PSA on chromium-dev when these land to be sure.

[davidben, 2015-04-16 16:12:47]

davidben@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dbeam@chromium.org, thakis@chromium.org, wez@chromium.org

[davidben, 2015-04-16 16:12:52]

+thakis for build/OWNERS
+dbeam for chrome/browser/resources/options/OWNERS
+wez for remoting/OWNERS

I've confirmed nothing in the infra repo cares about this. There will be some
turbulence in downstream repos, but fairly small as far as I can tell.

gyp seems to blow up on unknown variable names, so those will be caught easily.
It's true that our #ifdef pattern will not, but I would expect very visible
compile or link failures.

The OpenSSL/NSS chimera Intent to Implement mentioned this change, but I will
send a separate PSA to chromium-dev when the changes have landed, so downstream
repositories will notice. (Though from experience with past BoringSSL switches,
not all of our downstreams pay as much attention to chromium-dev as they
should... <_<)

So downstreams only have one mass rename rather than two, I plan on landing this
and https://codereview.chromium.org/1082123003/ right after each other, which
means they'll need to be reverted together. (I'll put together a combined CL to
run try jobs right after this.)

[Nico, 2015-04-16 16:49:09]

lgtm

[davidben, 2015-04-16 17:58:17]

Tweaked this, mirroring Nico's suggestion on the preprocessor one, to continue
defining use_nss. A follow-up CL will remove both gyp and preprocessor use_nss
in one go which will hopefully be easier to land and revert.

[Dan Beam, 2015-04-16 19:01:24]

lgtm

[davidben, 2015-04-16 22:13:59]

TBRing wez@chromium.org per OWNERS policy, since this is just a global rename.
(I always forget it has that provision...)

[davidben, 2015-04-16 22:21:23]

The CQ bit was checked by davidben@chromium.org

[davidben, 2015-04-16 22:21:24]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
tfarina@chromium.org, thakis@chromium.org, rsleevi@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1085923002/#ps60001
(title: "wrapping")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 22:25:37]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1085923002/60001

[davidben, 2015-04-16 22:32:41]

The CQ bit was unchecked by davidben@chromium.org

[davidben, 2015-04-16 22:34:36]

The CQ bit was checked by davidben@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 22:39:09]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1085923002/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 23:23:22]

Committed patchset #4 (id:60001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-16 23:24:24]

Patchset 4 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/0ee13e37acf707e703a380a9c1a03f0b494dd6a6
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#325541}

[Wez, 2015-04-17 00:47:11]

Rubbery-stampy LGTM