Update harfbuzz to 0.9.37

Update harfbuzz to 0.9.37

We were at 0.9.35 with a few cherry-picks from the upstream. It's time
to catch up with the upstream.

BUG=445658
TEST=blink layout tests

Committed: https://crrev.com/5a1c8035967936fe590391a5068f9c91bc2a7fc8
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#310115}

[jungshik at Google, 2014-12-18 19:28:20]

jshin@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ behdad@chromium.org

[jungshik at Google, 2014-12-18 19:28:21]

This will be landed after a cherry-pick is baked in the trunk/canary/dev for a
while.

[behdad_google, 2014-12-18 23:16:37]

behdad@google.com changed reviewers:
+ behdad@google.com

[behdad_google, 2014-12-18 23:16:38]

This can't possibly be correct.  Why are you deleting all the autogenerated
headers?

[behdad_google, 2014-12-18 23:17:21]

On 2014/12/18 23:16:38, behdad_google wrote:
> This can't possibly be correct.  Why are you deleting all the autogenerated
> headers?

We should actually remove hb-uniscribe.cc.

[jungshik at Google, 2014-12-19 11:08:18]

On 2014/12/18 23:17:21, behdad_google wrote:
> On 2014/12/18 23:16:38, behdad_google wrote:
> > This can't possibly be correct.  Why are you deleting all the autogenerated
> > headers?

Because I was temporarily out of mind ;-)

 
> We should actually remove hb-uniscribe.cc.

Thanks. Updated README.chromium as well.

[jungshik at Google, 2014-12-19 17:46:18]

On 2014/12/19 11:08:18, Jungshik Shin wrote:
> On 2014/12/18 23:17:21, behdad_google wrote:
> > On 2014/12/18 23:16:38, behdad_google wrote:
> > > This can't possibly be correct.  Why are you deleting all the
autogenerated
> > > headers?
> 
> Because I was temporarily out of mind ;-)
> 

Oops. PS #4 is strange. I didn't mean to delete *machine*hh and *deserialize*hh.
I'll update the CL. 

>  
> > We should actually remove hb-uniscribe.cc.
> 
> Thanks. Updated README.chromium as well.

[jungshik at Google, 2014-12-19 17:50:26]

On 2014/12/19 17:46:18, Jungshik Shin wrote:
> On 2014/12/19 11:08:18, Jungshik Shin wrote:
> > On 2014/12/18 23:17:21, behdad_google wrote:
> > > On 2014/12/18 23:16:38, behdad_google wrote:
> > > > This can't possibly be correct.  Why are you deleting all the
> autogenerated
> > > > headers?
> > 
> > Because I was temporarily out of mind ;-)
> > 
> 
> Oops. PS #4 is strange. I didn't mean to delete *machine*hh and
*deserialize*hh.
> I'll update the CL. 

They're not deleted, but riedvelt somehow still mark them as 'D' even after I
added them in PS #3.

[behdad_google, 2014-12-19 18:46:25]

On 2014/12/19 17:50:26, Jungshik Shin wrote:
> On 2014/12/19 17:46:18, Jungshik Shin wrote:
> > On 2014/12/19 11:08:18, Jungshik Shin wrote:
> > > On 2014/12/18 23:17:21, behdad_google wrote:
> > > > On 2014/12/18 23:16:38, behdad_google wrote:
> > > > > This can't possibly be correct.  Why are you deleting all the
> > autogenerated
> > > > > headers?
> > > 
> > > Because I was temporarily out of mind ;-)
> > > 
> > 
> > Oops. PS #4 is strange. I didn't mean to delete *machine*hh and
> *deserialize*hh.
> > I'll update the CL. 
> 
> They're not deleted, but riedvelt somehow still mark them as 'D' even after I
> added them in PS #3.

Right.  Thanks.  The changes in those files were not intentional, but harmless.

[jungshik at Google, 2014-12-31 01:01:59]

Behdad, do you see any problem with the latest patch set?

[jungshik at Google, 2014-12-31 01:02:21]

jshin@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ bashi@chromium.org

[behdad_google, 2014-12-31 01:03:40]

On 2014/12/31 01:01:59, jshin(ooo till jan 4) wrote:
> Behdad, do you see any problem with the latest patch set?

lgtm.  Thanks.

[jungshik at Google, 2015-01-06 01:12:25]

The CQ bit was checked by jshin@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-06 01:13:15]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/810153004/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-06 01:13:17]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-06 01:13:18]

No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
Even if an LGTM may have been provided, it was from a non-committer,
_not_ a full super star committer.
See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.

[bashi, 2015-01-06 01:15:56]

On 2015/01/06 01:13:18, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
> Even if an LGTM may have been provided, it was from a non-committer,
> _not_ a full super star committer.
> See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
> Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.

rubber-stamp LGTM

[jungshik at Google, 2015-01-06 17:56:08]

The CQ bit was checked by jshin@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-06 17:57:12]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/810153004/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-06 19:16:38]

Committed patchset #4 (id:60001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-06 19:17:27]

Patchset 4 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/5a1c8035967936fe590391a5068f9c91bc2a7fc8
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#310115}