Update skia and ui GN builds

Update skia and ui GN builds

Change some targets to source sets. These are small ones that are currently depended on by other source sets. This avoids some duplicate symbols.
duplicated.

Fix some conditions around the touch_device in ui/base.

Lots of Skia build fixes. It turns out our skia library does not use the "util" target, and some of the files in "util" reference functions that it seems are never defined in any file. This removes the ones in our list that weren't in skia_library.gypi to make accessibility_unittests link.

Update gesture recogniser file lists.

BUG=377890
TBR=scottmg

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=274022

[tfarina, 2014-05-30 05:23:27]

https://codereview.chromium.org/305993002/diff/100001/ui/base/BUILD.gn
File ui/base/BUILD.gn (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/305993002/diff/100001/ui/base/BUILD.gn#newcod...
ui/base/BUILD.gn:258: sources += [ "touch/touch_device_win.cc" ]
why is that? aren't the exclusion rules working?

GYP does this through build/filename_rules.gypi

I think always listing it in the common list and excluding where necessary is
better than adding case-by-case. At least this was the way we were doing in GYP.
Are we going to do different in GN?

Did you actually get any error?

Sorry, I'm just trying to understand what is going on here, and the motivation
behind this change.

[brettw, 2014-05-30 19:58:26]

I went back and changed this to keep most of the current static libraries
pending some re-evaluation of the source set vs static library issue. I kept a
few of the source set changes and all of the build fixes.

[tfarina, 2014-05-30 20:17:23]

https://codereview.chromium.org/305993002/diff/160001/ui/base/BUILD.gn
File ui/base/BUILD.gn (left):

https://codereview.chromium.org/305993002/diff/160001/ui/base/BUILD.gn#oldcod...
ui/base/BUILD.gn:324: "touch/touch_device_ozone.cc",
we shouldn't have to do this, if we had an exclusion rule for use_ozone.

https://codereview.chromium.org/305993002/diff/160001/ui/base/BUILD.gn#oldcod...
ui/base/BUILD.gn:443: "touch/touch_device_aurax11.cc",
same here.

https://codereview.chromium.org/305993002/diff/160001/ui/base/BUILD.gn
File ui/base/BUILD.gn (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/305993002/diff/160001/ui/base/BUILD.gn#newcod...
ui/base/BUILD.gn:259: sources += [ "touch/touch_device_win.cc" ]
not that I don't like this. I like it, it seems cleaner. But the question and
thus the need for an answer still stands.

[brettw, 2014-05-30 20:34:46]

https://codereview.chromium.org/305993002/diff/160001/ui/base/BUILD.gn
File ui/base/BUILD.gn (left):

https://codereview.chromium.org/305993002/diff/160001/ui/base/BUILD.gn#oldcod...
ui/base/BUILD.gn:324: "touch/touch_device_ozone.cc",
On 2014/05/30 20:17:23, tfarina wrote:
> we shouldn't have to do this, if we had an exclusion rule for use_ozone.

I don't think we should have inclusion rules for uze_ozone, aurax11, etc. The
GYP filename rules are out of control (there's one for ozone DRM which affects 5
files in the entire tree, which requires us to apply two nontrivial regular
expressions to every source file encountered in the build.

So the policy I outlined in BUILDCONFIG is that the filtering is for toplevel
platforms only (linux, mac, etc.) There are only 34 _ozone.cc files so it really
isn't a big deal.

[brettw, 2014-05-31 04:40:29]

Committed patchset #10 manually as r274022 (presubmit successful).