Don't allow restarting to apply custom flags when supervised user creation flow is active

Don't allow restarting to apply custom flags when supervised user creation flow is active

BUG=422918
Committed: https://crrev.com/dcf3361d1fa47114c6d3be7ad29fd5e98fa845af
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#299881}

[Nikita (slow), 2014-10-15 18:12:47]

nkostylev@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ antrim@chromium.org

[Nikita (slow), 2014-10-15 18:12:49]

https://codereview.chromium.org/654173005/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/logi...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/login/supervised/supervised_user_login_flow.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/654173005/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/logi...
chrome/browser/chromeos/login/supervised/supervised_user_login_flow.cc:51:
return true;
Supervised user login is actually guarded here:
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/chrome/browser/chr...

Not sure why supervised users are not allowed to set custom flags.
I guess if we allow restart to apply flags, we'll use this call:

SupervisedUserLoginFlow::LaunchExtraSteps()

Do you agree that we should return false here too?

[Nikita (slow), 2014-10-16 09:45:06]

https://codereview.chromium.org/654173005/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/logi...
File chrome/browser/chromeos/login/supervised/supervised_user_login_flow.cc
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/654173005/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/logi...
chrome/browser/chromeos/login/supervised/supervised_user_login_flow.cc:51:
return true;
On 2014/10/15 18:12:48, Nikita Kostylev wrote:
> Do you agree that we should return false here too?

I've changed this to false in second patchset.

[Denis Kuznetsov (DE-MUC), 2014-10-16 11:59:14]

On 2014/10/16 09:45:06, Nikita Kostylev wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/654173005/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/logi...
> File chrome/browser/chromeos/login/supervised/supervised_user_login_flow.cc
> (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/654173005/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/logi...
> chrome/browser/chromeos/login/supervised/supervised_user_login_flow.cc:51:
> return true;
> On 2014/10/15 18:12:48, Nikita Kostylev wrote:
> > Do you agree that we should return false here too?
> 
> I've changed this to false in second patchset.

Yes, that seems right.

[Denis Kuznetsov (DE-MUC), 2014-10-16 11:59:15]

On 2014/10/16 09:45:06, Nikita Kostylev wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/654173005/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/logi...
> File chrome/browser/chromeos/login/supervised/supervised_user_login_flow.cc
> (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/654173005/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/logi...
> chrome/browser/chromeos/login/supervised/supervised_user_login_flow.cc:51:
> return true;
> On 2014/10/15 18:12:48, Nikita Kostylev wrote:
> > Do you agree that we should return false here too?
> 
> I've changed this to false in second patchset.

Yes, that seems right.

[Denis Kuznetsov (DE-MUC), 2014-10-16 11:59:22]

lgtm

[Nikita (slow), 2014-10-16 12:23:25]

The CQ bit was checked by nkostylev@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-16 12:24:12]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/654173005/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-16 12:49:01]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-10-16 12:49:47]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/dcf3361d1fa47114c6d3be7ad29fd5e98fa845af
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#299881}