Convert apk obfuscation to python

Convert apk obfuscation to python

For the apk specific java files, we now run proguard on the jar instead of the classes.

BUG=375324, 359249
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=276377

[Yaron, 2014-06-07 07:02:38]

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/android/gyp/apk_ob...
File build/android/gyp/apk_obfuscate.py (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/android/gyp/apk_ob...
build/android/gyp/apk_obfuscate.py:96: if 'Release' in
options.configuration_name and options.proguard_enabled:
why "in"? isn't configuration_name just a single string and not a list? why not
do straight equality check?

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/android/gyp/apk_ob...
build/android/gyp/apk_obfuscate.py:112: proguard_cmd += ['-printseeds',
options.obfuscated_jar_path + '.seeds']
nit: can just do commas the whole way, even across lines. Also, why not merge
with the definition of proguard_cmd? Does it need to be after "-include"?

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/android/gyp/apk_ob...
build/android/gyp/apk_obfuscate.py:127: os.remove(f)
Why do you need to remove it if you're going to touch below? There's no risk of
Release->Debug contamination, right (i.e. it had text and now needs to be
empty)?

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/java_apk.gypi
File build/java_apk.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/java_apk.gypi#newc...
build/java_apk.gypi:639: # test_jar_path
?

[cjhopman, 2014-06-10 17:10:16]

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/android/gyp/apk_ob...
File build/android/gyp/apk_obfuscate.py (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/android/gyp/apk_ob...
build/android/gyp/apk_obfuscate.py:96: if 'Release' in
options.configuration_name and options.proguard_enabled:
On 2014/06/07 07:02:38, Yaron wrote:
> why "in"? isn't configuration_name just a single string and not a list? why
not
> do straight equality check?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/android/gyp/apk_ob...
build/android/gyp/apk_obfuscate.py:112: proguard_cmd += ['-printseeds',
options.obfuscated_jar_path + '.seeds']
On 2014/06/07 07:02:38, Yaron wrote:
> nit: can just do commas the whole way, even across lines. Also, why not merge
> with the definition of proguard_cmd? Does it need to be after "-include"?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/android/gyp/apk_ob...
build/android/gyp/apk_obfuscate.py:127: os.remove(f)
On 2014/06/07 07:02:38, Yaron wrote:
> Why do you need to remove it if you're going to touch below? There's no risk
of
> Release->Debug contamination, right (i.e. it had text and now needs to be
> empty)? 
In this case the expected output is an empty file and I just want to make sure
that it is correct. I guess we shouldn't ever really see debug<->release, but
you could hit that case when changing proguard_enabled. I figured there's almost
no cost to removing the file first and it's (a little bit) more correct.

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/java_apk.gypi
File build/java_apk.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/40001/build/java_apk.gypi#newc...
build/java_apk.gypi:639: # test_jar_path
On 2014/06/07 07:02:38, Yaron wrote:
> ?

Done.

[Yaron, 2014-06-11 00:11:04]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/100001/build/java_apk.gypi
File build/java_apk.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/322443005/diff/100001/build/java_apk.gypi#new...
build/java_apk.gypi:600: 'action_name': 'ant_obfuscate_<(_target_name)',
nit: drop "ant_"

[cjhopman, 2014-06-11 01:46:46]

The CQ bit was checked by cjhopman@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-11 01:51:01]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/cjhopman@chromium.org/322443005/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-11 13:19:54]

Change committed as 276377