Android backend: allow targets to have unmangled names.

Android backend: allow targets to have unmangled names.

The Android backend mangles gyp target names because the Android build
system requires that they be globally unique. This is fine for most targets,
but for the final build products that are being used by other Android
components it's annoying to refer to long mangled names. Add a
generator-specific flag to denote that a target should have an unmangled
name, which can be set on the targets that are important after verifying
that no existing module in Android has the same name.
Committed: https://code.google.com/p/gyp/source/detail?r=1520

[Torne, 2012-10-11 14:56:11]

Nico, would you mind looking at this, or would someone else be better?
steveblock is not working on the Chrome for Android project any more, so I'm all
on my own :)

Is adding a generator-specific spec the right way to do this kind of thing? I
need to be able to designate one target for special handling in
gyp.generator.android..

[Nico, 2012-10-15 19:32:05]

What target types do you need this for? If only static libraries: we recently
added a flag to mark static libraries as "standalone", could this be keyed off
that? ( http://code.google.com/p/gyp/source/detail?r=1516 )

[Torne, 2012-10-15 21:35:30]

On 2012/10/15 19:32:05, Nico wrote:
> What target types do you need this for? If only static libraries: we recently
> added a flag to mark static libraries as "standalone", could this be keyed off
> that? ( http://code.google.com/p/gyp/source/detail?r=1516 )

Shared libraries and potentially executables in future.

[Nico, 2012-10-15 23:35:13]

https://codereview.chromium.org/11088078/diff/1/pylib/gyp/generator/android.py
File pylib/gyp/generator/android.py (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11088078/diff/1/pylib/gyp/generator/android.p...
pylib/gyp/generator/android.py:589: if spec.get('android_unmangled_name'):
This is true for targets that say

  'android_unmangled_name': '0'

too, which is a bit unintuitive

[Torne, 2012-10-16 10:34:31]

https://codereview.chromium.org/11088078/diff/1/pylib/gyp/generator/android.py
File pylib/gyp/generator/android.py (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/11088078/diff/1/pylib/gyp/generator/android.p...
pylib/gyp/generator/android.py:589: if spec.get('android_unmangled_name'):
On 2012/10/15 23:35:13, Nico wrote:
> This is true for targets that say
> 
>   'android_unmangled_name': '0'
> 
> too, which is a bit unintuitive

Done.

[Nico, 2012-10-16 21:07:44]

lgtm

Since it sounds like this will be used in production soon / is already used
there: Any thoughts on testing? There should probably a bot with an android
toolchain installed?

[Torne, 2012-10-17 10:38:34]

On 2012/10/16 21:07:44, Nico wrote:
> lgtm
> 
> Since it sounds like this will be used in production soon / is already used
> there: Any thoughts on testing? There should probably a bot with an android
> toolchain installed?

This is on my todo list; once I have our build going for my team I am going to
look at getting gyp testing done properly next. Sorry this hasn't happened
already; we have had crazy deadlines :p

[Nico, 2012-10-17 17:02:28]

On 2012/10/17 10:38:34, Torne wrote:
> On 2012/10/16 21:07:44, Nico wrote:
> > lgtm
> > 
> > Since it sounds like this will be used in production soon / is already used
> > there: Any thoughts on testing? There should probably a bot with an android
> > toolchain installed?
> 
> This is on my todo list; once I have our build going for my team I am going to
> look at getting gyp testing done properly next.

Sounds good. I forget, is there a tracking bug for this already? If not, can you
file one?

> Sorry this hasn't happened
> already; we have had crazy deadlines :p

[Torne, 2012-10-18 09:13:06]

On 2012/10/17 17:02:28, Nico wrote:
> On 2012/10/17 10:38:34, Torne wrote:
> > On 2012/10/16 21:07:44, Nico wrote:
> > > lgtm
> > > 
> > > Since it sounds like this will be used in production soon / is already
used
> > > there: Any thoughts on testing? There should probably a bot with an
android
> > > toolchain installed?
> > 
> > This is on my todo list; once I have our build going for my team I am going
to
> > look at getting gyp testing done properly next.
> 
> Sounds good. I forget, is there a tracking bug for this already? If not, can
you
> file one?

http://code.google.com/p/gyp/issues/detail?id=275

> > Sorry this hasn't happened
> > already; we have had crazy deadlines :p