Enable Pointer Lock for packaged apps using ShellWindow.

chrome/chrome_tests_unit.gypi

 # Copyright 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.
 {
   'targets': [
     {
       # This target contains mocks and test utilities that don't belong in
       # production libraries but are used by more than one test executable.
       'target_name': 'test_support_common',
       'type': 'static_library',
@@ skipping 87 matching lines @@
         'browser/chromeos/settings/device_settings_test_helper.h',
         'browser/chromeos/settings/mock_owner_key_util.cc',
         'browser/chromeos/settings/mock_owner_key_util.h',
         'browser/chromeos/system/mock_statistics_provider.cc',
         'browser/chromeos/system/mock_statistics_provider.h',
         # The only thing used from browser is Browser::Type.
         'browser/download/download_test_file_chooser_observer.cc',
         'browser/download/download_test_file_chooser_observer.h',
         'browser/download/test_download_shelf.cc',
         'browser/download/test_download_shelf.h',
+        'browser/extensions/extension_apitest.cc',
+        'browser/extensions/extension_apitest.h',
+        'browser/extensions/extension_browsertest.cc',
+        'browser/extensions/extension_browsertest.h',

[asargent_no_longer_on_chrome, 2012/11/28 20:32:13]

These classes have a bunch of pretty browser-specific functionality that doesn't
make sense in, say, unit_tests, so it seems unfortunate to have to move them
here.

I assume you're doing this so that you can run your test in the
interactive_ui_tests binary instead of the browser_tests one? I'm not as
familiar with interactive_ui_tests, but is there a reason we can't just have its
target just depend on browser_tests instead of doing this?

[scheib, 2012/11/28 20:58:12]

Yes, moved so the test can run in interactive_ui_tests, which should really just
be named 'browser_tests_that_run_one_at_a_time' vs browser_tests which run in
parallel and fight over focus.

I didn't duplicate the files between the tests because I believe the current
practice to be to include a source file in only one target. Also, duplicating
increases total build time if you are building all the tests, e.g. on continuous
builders.

Thoughts? Do you propose duplicating?

         'browser/extensions/mock_extension_special_storage_policy.cc',
         'browser/extensions/mock_extension_special_storage_policy.h',
         'browser/extensions/test_extension_prefs.cc',
         'browser/extensions/test_extension_prefs.h',
         'browser/extensions/test_extension_service.cc',
         'browser/extensions/test_extension_service.h',
         'browser/extensions/test_extension_system.cc',
         'browser/extensions/test_extension_system.h',
         'browser/extensions/test_management_policy.cc',
         'browser/extensions/test_management_policy.h',
@@ skipping 2175 matching lines @@
             'unit_tests.isolate',
           ],
           'sources': [
             'unit_tests.isolate',
           ],
         },
       ],
     }],
   ],  # 'conditions'
 }