Fix a lint issue with MediaResourceGetterTest.java.

Fix a lint issue with MediaResourceGetterTest.java.

Currently, the lint warns against using the hardcoded "sdcard" strings. We
should use Environment.getExternalStorageDirectory().getPath() instead of it,
but the path could be inconsistent depending upon the state of the real or
emulated device upon which we are testing. So this CL adds @SuppressLint to
suppress the warnings.

BUG=327768
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=274376

[Sungmann Cho, 2014-05-28 06:54:06]

Please take a look. Thanks!

[jdduke (slow), 2014-05-28 16:50:13]

Hmm, I see a suppression for this in build/android/lint/supressions.xml:

  <issue id="SdCardPath">
    <ignore
path="content/public/android/java/src/org/chromium/content/browser/MediaResourceGetter.java"/>
  </issue>

Is that not sufficient?

[Sungmann Cho, 2014-05-28 19:28:43]

On 2014/05/28 16:50:13, jdduke wrote:
> Hmm, I see a suppression for this in build/android/lint/supressions.xml:
> 
>   <issue id="SdCardPath">
>     <ignore
>
path="content/public/android/java/src/org/chromium/content/browser/MediaResourceGetter.java"/>
>   </issue>
> 
> Is that not sufficient?

It's for MediaResourceGetter.java but this CL is for
MediaResourceGetterTest.java.
By the way, which one is preferred for this purpose: @SuppressLint vs
suppressions.xml?

[jdduke (slow), 2014-05-28 19:32:36]

On 2014/05/28 19:28:43, Sungmann Cho wrote:
> On 2014/05/28 16:50:13, jdduke wrote:
> > Hmm, I see a suppression for this in build/android/lint/supressions.xml:
> > 
> >   <issue id="SdCardPath">
> >     <ignore
> >
>
path="content/public/android/java/src/org/chromium/content/browser/MediaResourceGetter.java"/>
> >   </issue>
> > 
> > Is that not sufficient?
> 
> It's for MediaResourceGetter.java but this CL is for
> MediaResourceGetterTest.java.

Of course you're right, I should learn to read...

> By the way, which one is preferred for this purpose: @SuppressLint vs
> suppressions.xml?

I'm not sure which is preferred, although it might be good to match the
suppression that already exists.  yfriedman@, is there a preference here?

[Sungmann Cho, 2014-05-31 01:07:58]

yfriedman@ ping...

[jdduke (slow), 2014-06-02 15:07:37]

Ted, is there a preference here between using @SuppressLint and explicitly
adding the exception to the lint suppressions? I believe we do the latter for
MediaResourceGetter.java.

[Yaron, 2014-06-02 16:02:56]

On 2014/06/02 15:07:37, jdduke wrote:
> Ted, is there a preference here between using @SuppressLint and explicitly
> adding the exception to the lint suppressions? I believe we do the latter for
> MediaResourceGetter.java.

lgtm

I don't know if there is an agreed upon approach, but I prefer to localize it as
is done here. This seems reasonable for test

[Ted C, 2014-06-02 17:46:59]

On 2014/06/02 16:02:56, Yaron wrote:
> On 2014/06/02 15:07:37, jdduke wrote:
> > Ted, is there a preference here between using @SuppressLint and explicitly
> > adding the exception to the lint suppressions? I believe we do the latter
for
> > MediaResourceGetter.java.
> 
> lgtm
> 
> I don't know if there is an agreed upon approach, but I prefer to localize it
as
> is done here. This seems reasonable for test

lgtm and sgtm for a best practice as well.

[Sungmann Cho, 2014-06-02 20:19:22]

The CQ bit was checked by sungmann.cho@navercorp.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-02 20:20:28]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/sungmann.cho@navercorp.com/304633003/1

[Sungmann Cho, 2014-06-02 20:58:31]

I think we could apply the same approach to MediaResourceGetter.java. In
MediaResourceGetter, the problematic part is only getRawAcceptableDirectories().
So we could remove MediaResourceGetter.java from suppressions.xml and localize
it as is done here.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-02 23:53:11]

Change committed as 274376