Encode lcms files as utf-8

Encode lcms files as utf-8

The diff isn't well displayed in Rietveld, and I had to do some interpretation
here, as it wasn't clear what code page these files were pretending to use.
The left quotes were 0x92, the right quote + \n had been converted to ?, and
the negative infinity was 0x96. (I assume maybe Mac something.)

In any case, I tried to interpret the comments and make them something sensible.
In the worst case, it's "only" comments that are broken, as no actual code was
modified.

R=tsepez@chromium.org, brucedawson@chroium.org
BUG=637203, 454858
Committed: https://pdfium.googlesource.com/pdfium/+/8b6a0a540563c6308fa03df34c90257e0bb65598

[scottmg, 2016-11-30 20:32:46]

The CQ bit was checked by scottmg@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-30 20:32:55]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-30 20:34:05]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-30 20:34:06]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux on master.tryserver.client.pdfium (JOB_FAILED,
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.client.pdfium/builders/linux/builds/3026)
  win_xfa_rel on master.tryserver.client.pdfium (JOB_FAILED,
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.client.pdfium/builders/win_xfa_rel/bui...)

[scottmg, 2016-11-30 20:34:23]

The CQ still can't handle these files, so they'll have to be `git cl land`ed.
But hopefully this change is better anyway.

[scottmg, 2016-12-01 20:33:20]

Description was changed from

==========
Encode lcms files as utf-8

R=brucedawson@chroium.org
BUG=637203,454858
==========

to

==========
Encode lcms files as utf-8

R=brucedawson@chroium.org
BUG=637203,454858
==========

[scottmg, 2016-12-01 20:33:20]

scottmg@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ tsepez@chromium.org

[scottmg, 2016-12-01 20:33:36]

Looks like Bruce, John, and Lei are all out this week.

Tom? :)

[scottmg, 2016-12-01 20:34:50]

Description was changed from

==========
Encode lcms files as utf-8

R=brucedawson@chroium.org
BUG=637203,454858
==========

to

==========
Encode lcms files as utf-8

The diff isn't well displayed in Rietveld, but and I had to do some
interpretation here, as it wasn't clear what code page these files were
pretending to use. The left quotes were 0x92, the right quote + \n had been
converted to ?, and the negative infinity was 0x96. (I assume maybe Mac
something.)

In any case, I tried to interpret the comments and make them something sensible.
In the worst case, it's "only" comments that are broken, as no actual code was
modified.

R=brucedawson@chroium.org
BUG=637203,454858
==========

[scottmg, 2016-12-01 20:35:13]

Description was changed from

==========
Encode lcms files as utf-8

The diff isn't well displayed in Rietveld, but and I had to do some
interpretation here, as it wasn't clear what code page these files were
pretending to use. The left quotes were 0x92, the right quote + \n had been
converted to ?, and the negative infinity was 0x96. (I assume maybe Mac
something.)

In any case, I tried to interpret the comments and make them something sensible.
In the worst case, it's "only" comments that are broken, as no actual code was
modified.

R=brucedawson@chroium.org
BUG=637203,454858
==========

to

==========
Encode lcms files as utf-8

The diff isn't well displayed in Rietveld, and I had to do some interpretation
here, as it wasn't clear what code page these files were pretending to use.
The left quotes were 0x92, the right quote + \n had been converted to ?, and
the negative infinity was 0x96. (I assume maybe Mac something.)

In any case, I tried to interpret the comments and make them something sensible.
In the worst case, it's "only" comments that are broken, as no actual code was
modified.

R=brucedawson@chroium.org
BUG=637203,454858
==========

[Tom Sepez, 2016-12-01 21:06:14]

LGTM otherwise.  Bots still red, looks like patch issue.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2545593002/diff/1/third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/c...
File third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/cmsvirt.c (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2545593002/diff/1/third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/c...
third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/cmsvirt.c:615: //If  R'sRGB,G'sRGB, B'sRGB < 0.04045
nit:  can we lose the ' here?

[scottmg, 2016-12-01 21:13:56]

Are you able to land? Or give me permission to git cl land? I don't think these
characters will work through the CQ which is why the bots are red.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2545593002/diff/1/third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/c...
File third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/cmsvirt.c (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2545593002/diff/1/third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/c...
third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/cmsvirt.c:615: //If  R'sRGB,G'sRGB, B'sRGB < 0.04045
On 2016/12/01 21:06:14, Tom Sepez wrote:
> nit:  can we lose the ' here?

I thought it was supposed to be how Rprime was used to drive R. Does that seem
right to you?

[Tom Sepez, 2016-12-02 17:44:49]

On 2016/12/01 21:13:56, scottmg wrote:
> Are you able to land? Or give me permission to git cl land? I don't think
these
> characters will work through the CQ which is why the bots are red.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2545593002/diff/1/third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/c...
> File third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/cmsvirt.c (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2545593002/diff/1/third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/c...
> third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/cmsvirt.c:615: //If  R'sRGB,G'sRGB, B'sRGB < 0.04045
> On 2016/12/01 21:06:14, Tom Sepez wrote:
> > nit:  can we lose the ' here?
> 
> I thought it was supposed to be how Rprime was used to drive R. Does that seem
> right to you?

Ok, RsRGB' then?  As you like. 
You appear to be a pdfium committer, git cl land --bypass-hooks not working for
you?

[scottmg, 2016-12-02 18:39:14]

Description was changed from

==========
Encode lcms files as utf-8

The diff isn't well displayed in Rietveld, and I had to do some interpretation
here, as it wasn't clear what code page these files were pretending to use.
The left quotes were 0x92, the right quote + \n had been converted to ?, and
the negative infinity was 0x96. (I assume maybe Mac something.)

In any case, I tried to interpret the comments and make them something sensible.
In the worst case, it's "only" comments that are broken, as no actual code was
modified.

R=brucedawson@chroium.org
BUG=637203,454858
==========

to

==========
Encode lcms files as utf-8

The diff isn't well displayed in Rietveld, and I had to do some interpretation
here, as it wasn't clear what code page these files were pretending to use.
The left quotes were 0x92, the right quote + \n had been converted to ?, and
the negative infinity was 0x96. (I assume maybe Mac something.)

In any case, I tried to interpret the comments and make them something sensible.
In the worst case, it's "only" comments that are broken, as no actual code was
modified.

R=tsepez@chromium.org, brucedawson@chroium.org
BUG=637203,454858

Committed:
https://pdfium.googlesource.com/pdfium/+/8b6a0a540563c6308fa03df34c90257e0bb6...
==========

[scottmg, 2016-12-02 18:39:15]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1) manually as
8b6a0a540563c6308fa03df34c90257e0bb65598 (presubmit successful).

[scottmg, 2016-12-02 18:39:26]

On 2016/12/02 17:44:49, Tom Sepez wrote:
> On 2016/12/01 21:13:56, scottmg wrote:
> > Are you able to land? Or give me permission to git cl land? I don't think
> these
> > characters will work through the CQ which is why the bots are red.
> > 
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2545593002/diff/1/third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/c...
> > File third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/cmsvirt.c (right):
> > 
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2545593002/diff/1/third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/c...
> > third_party/lcms2-2.6/src/cmsvirt.c:615: //If  R'sRGB,G'sRGB, B'sRGB <
0.04045
> > On 2016/12/01 21:06:14, Tom Sepez wrote:
> > > nit:  can we lose the ' here?
> > 
> > I thought it was supposed to be how Rprime was used to drive R. Does that
seem
> > right to you?
> 
> Ok, RsRGB' then?  As you like. 
> You appear to be a pdfium committer, git cl land --bypass-hooks not working
for
> you?

Oops, I'm a goof. I just assumed I wasn't. Yes, landing worked fine, thanks.