Bundle the network service in the shell on Android.

Bundle the network service in the shell on Android.

Also, remove the profile service that was only used by the network
service because it couldn't access the path service on android.

R=darin@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=283730

[darin (slow to review), 2014-07-16 17:16:30]

I don't think we want to kill off the profile service. That is still useful for
the non-Android case where we can run the network service as a proper Mojo app.

[darin (slow to review), 2014-07-16 17:19:53]

On 2014/07/16 17:16:30, darin wrote:
> I don't think we want to kill off the profile service. That is still useful
for
> the non-Android case where we can run the network service as a proper Mojo
app.

Hmm, actually I'm torn on this... let me think about it some more...

[darin (slow to review), 2014-07-16 17:38:33]

LGTM

(we can always resurrect the profile service later if needed.)

[darin (slow to review), 2014-07-16 17:40:25]

The CQ bit was checked by darin@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-16 17:42:50]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/qsr@chromium.org/395163002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-16 17:58:10]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
The failing builders are:
  android_aosp on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_aosp/builds/9...)
  android_chromium_gn_compile_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_chromium_gn_c...)
  android_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_clang_dbg/bui...)
  android_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_dbg/builds/20...)
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/chromium_presubmit/bu...)
  ios_dbg_simulator on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_dbg_simulator/bui...)
  ios_rel_device on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_rel_device/builds...)
  ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_rel_device_ninja/...)
  linux_chromium_chromeos_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_chrome...)
  linux_chromium_chromeos_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_chrome...)
  linux_chromium_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_clang_...)
  linux_chromium_gn_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_gn_rel...)
  linux_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_rel/bu...)
  mac_chromium_compile_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/mac_chromium_compile_...)
  mac_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/mac_chromium_rel/buil...)
  win8_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win8_chromium_rel/bui...)
  win_chromium_compile_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_compile_...)
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)
  win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_x64_rel/...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-16 18:04:54]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-16 18:04:56]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  ios_dbg_simulator on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_dbg_simulator/bui...)
  ios_rel_device on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_rel_device/builds...)
  ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_rel_device_ninja/...)
  mac_chromium_compile_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/mac_chromium_compile_...)
  mac_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/mac_chromium_rel/buil...)
  win8_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win8_chromium_rel/bui...)
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)

[qsr, 2014-07-17 07:49:23]

The CQ bit was checked by qsr@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-17 07:50:41]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/qsr@chromium.org/395163002/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-17 09:51:39]

Change committed as 283730

[tim (not reviewing), 2014-07-19 21:10:04]

On 2014/07/17 09:51:39, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> Change committed as 283730

We might want to consider this for non-android; it would help the static build. 
See https://codereview.chromium.org/397733003/. tl;dr is that even today, it is
not possible to shut down the network service gracefully on desktop static
builds because it unloads it's copy of base:: before the thread is killed off
(and TLS dtors fire pointing to that copy of base). If it were bundled, we'd be
okay.  I have an alternative static-build only fix in the above mentioned CL,
but I'm not sure which solution I prefer.

[darin (slow to review), 2014-07-19 21:14:32]

On 2014/07/19 21:10:04, timsteele wrote:
> On 2014/07/17 09:51:39, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> > Change committed as 283730
> 
> We might want to consider this for non-android; it would help the static
build. 
> See https://codereview.chromium.org/397733003/. tl;dr is that even today, it
is
> not possible to shut down the network service gracefully on desktop static
> builds because it unloads it's copy of base:: before the thread is killed off
> (and TLS dtors fire pointing to that copy of base). If it were bundled, we'd
be
> okay.  I have an alternative static-build only fix in the above mentioned CL,
> but I'm not sure which solution I prefer.

It's a goal to support using base in statically linked DSO builds of Mojo Apps.
The
base used by such an app could differ from the base used by mojo_shell. We might
choose to link some Mojo Apps into mojo_shell, when not strictly required, for
performance reasons. Or, maybe we will just combine a bunch of them into a
single
DSO that ships with the system. Those should only be optimization
considerations--
not requirements.

[tim (not reviewing), 2014-07-19 22:07:39]

On 2014/07/19 21:14:32, darin wrote:
> On 2014/07/19 21:10:04, timsteele wrote:
> > On 2014/07/17 09:51:39, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> > > Change committed as 283730
> > 
> > We might want to consider this for non-android; it would help the static
> build. 
> > See https://codereview.chromium.org/397733003/. tl;dr is that even today, it
> is
> > not possible to shut down the network service gracefully on desktop static
> > builds because it unloads it's copy of base:: before the thread is killed
off
> > (and TLS dtors fire pointing to that copy of base). If it were bundled, we'd
> be
> > okay.  I have an alternative static-build only fix in the above mentioned
CL,
> > but I'm not sure which solution I prefer.
> 
> It's a goal to support using base in statically linked DSO builds of Mojo
Apps.
> The
> base used by such an app could differ from the base used by mojo_shell. We
might
> choose to link some Mojo Apps into mojo_shell, when not strictly required, for
> performance reasons. Or, maybe we will just combine a bunch of them into a
> single
> DSO that ships with the system. Those should only be optimization
> considerations--
> not requirements.

OK, thanks for the clarifications. Will continue with other cl!