Replace most uses of asset_location with android_assets() template

Replace most uses of asset_location with android_assets() template

Using the android_assets() template enables the removal of duplicated asset copying logic.

BUG=547162
Committed: https://crrev.com/8c7027d471210dcf1beeada6d247fdaf01be8a71
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#359059}

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-09 17:02:27]

Patchset #1 (id:1) has been deleted

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-09 17:03:21]

Description was changed from

==========
Use android_assets() where asset_location is used

BUG=547162
==========

to

==========
Remove most uses of asset_location with android_assets() template

BUG=547162
==========

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-09 17:05:00]

Description was changed from

==========
Remove most uses of asset_location with android_assets() template

BUG=547162
==========

to

==========
Remove most uses of asset_location with android_assets() template

Using the android_assets() template enables the removal of duplicated asset
copying logic.

BUG=547162
==========

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-09 18:30:47]

pkotwicz@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ agrieve@chromium.org, brettw@chromium.org

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-09 18:30:49]

brettw@ can you please take a look?
- I don't understand why content_unittests.isolate was the way that it was

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-09 18:39:46]

Description was changed from

==========
Remove most uses of asset_location with android_assets() template

Using the android_assets() template enables the removal of duplicated asset
copying logic.

BUG=547162
==========

to

==========
Replace most uses of asset_location with android_assets() template

Using the android_assets() template enables the removal of duplicated asset
copying logic.

BUG=547162
==========

[agrieve, 2015-11-09 20:08:04]

On 2015/11/09 18:30:49, pkotwicz wrote:
> brettw@ can you please take a look?
> - I don't understand why content_unittests.isolate was the way that it was

lgtm - much nicer!

[agrieve, 2015-11-09 20:08:46]

On 2015/11/09 20:08:04, agrieve wrote:
> On 2015/11/09 18:30:49, pkotwicz wrote:
> > brettw@ can you please take a look?
> > - I don't understand why content_unittests.isolate was the way that it was
> 
> lgtm - much nicer!

Frow what I can tell content_unittests.isolate was at least correct before, but
what you've done is a simplification since it's just using the file in its
pre-copied-to-an-assets-directory location.

[brettw, 2015-11-10 22:11:05]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/1421473010/diff/20001/content/shell/android/B...
File content/shell/android/BUILD.gn (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1421473010/diff/20001/content/shell/android/B...
content/shell/android/BUILD.gn:93: disable_compression = true
This sticks out to me as weird. Maybe add a comment about why we don't want
compression for this target?

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-10 22:20:08]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1421473010/diff/20001/content/shell/android/B...
File content/shell/android/BUILD.gn (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1421473010/diff/20001/content/shell/android/B...
content/shell/android/BUILD.gn:93: disable_compression = true
We no longer compress .pak files in the APK since
https://codereview.chromium.org/1181953002

Not compressing the .pak file here is consistent with the default value of
'extensions_to_not_compress' in java_apk.gypi

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-10 22:29:27]

The CQ bit was checked by pkotwicz@chromium.org

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-10 22:29:27]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from brettw@chromium.org,
agrieve@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1421473010/#ps40001
(title: " ")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-10 22:30:38]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1421473010/40001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1421473010/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-11 01:26:45]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-11 01:26:46]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.win (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)

[pkotwicz, 2015-11-11 03:48:55]

The CQ bit was checked by pkotwicz@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-11 03:50:30]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1421473010/40001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1421473010/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-11 06:30:28]

Committed patchset #2 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-11 06:31:16]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/8c7027d471210dcf1beeada6d247fdaf01be8a71
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#359059}