Move ui/gfx/resources to ui/base/native_theme/resources Step2.

Move ui/gfx/resources to ui/base/native_theme/resources 
Step2. 
- Move ui/gfx/gfx_resources.grd to ui/base/native_theme/native_theme_resources.grd 
-Updated gyp/DEPS/py files to use new target. 
-Removed old files.

I had to keep the gfx_resources.pak as DumpRendererTree depends on it. I'll update DumpRendererTree first and then remove copy of gfx_resources.pak.

BUG=none 
TEST=none

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=137527

[oshima, 2012-05-15 22:50:36]

tvl, can you review the changes in check_grd_for_unused_strings.py?

[TVL, 2012-05-15 23:48:35]

http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/5004/chrome/tools/check_grd_for_...
File chrome/tools/check_grd_for_unused_strings.py (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/5004/chrome/tools/check_grd_for_...
chrome/tools/check_grd_for_unused_strings.py:152:
os.path.join(ui_base_native_theme_dir, 'resources',
since ui_base_native_theme_dir is only used this once, why not just add in
"resources" also?

[oshima, 2012-05-16 00:02:45]

http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/5004/chrome/tools/check_grd_for_...
File chrome/tools/check_grd_for_unused_strings.py (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/5004/chrome/tools/check_grd_for_...
chrome/tools/check_grd_for_unused_strings.py:152:
os.path.join(ui_base_native_theme_dir, 'resources',
On 2012/05/15 23:48:36, TVL wrote:
> since ui_base_native_theme_dir is only used this once, why not just add in
> "resources" also?

Done.

[TVL, 2012-05-16 00:05:10]

lgtm

script changes lgtm

[oshima, 2012-05-16 17:05:28]

ben for owners review

[Ben Goodger (Google), 2012-05-16 19:48:40]

lgtm

[oshima, 2012-05-16 20:58:16]

tony -> webkit

[tony, 2012-05-16 21:15:48]

LGTM

http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/views/views.gyp
File ui/views/views.gyp (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/views/views.gyp#newcode547
ui/views/views.gyp:547:
'<(SHARED_INTERMEDIATE_DIR)/ui/native_theme/native_theme_resources.rc',
As a follow up cleanup, we should see if this unittest binary can use pak files
instead of .rc files.  Otherwise the tests won't work on non-Windows.

http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/views/views.gyp#newcode705
ui/views/views.gyp:705:
'<(SHARED_INTERMEDIATE_DIR)/ui/native_theme/native_theme_resources.rc',
Same here.

[oshima, 2012-05-16 21:35:17]

+joi for his opinion. should we replace these rc entries to pak?

http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/views/views.gyp
File ui/views/views.gyp (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/views/views.gyp#newcode547
ui/views/views.gyp:547:
'<(SHARED_INTERMEDIATE_DIR)/ui/native_theme/native_theme_resources.rc',
On 2012/05/16 21:15:49, tony wrote:
> As a follow up cleanup, we should see if this unittest binary can use pak
files
> instead of .rc files.  Otherwise the tests won't work on non-Windows.

IIRC, rc files are generated for all platforms, so this works on other
platforms.

[tony, 2012-05-16 21:38:54]

On 2012/05/16 21:35:17, oshima wrote:
> +joi for his opinion. should we replace these rc entries to pak?
> 
> http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/views/views.gyp
> File ui/views/views.gyp (right):
> 
>
http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/views/views.gyp#newcode547
> ui/views/views.gyp:547:
> '<(SHARED_INTERMEDIATE_DIR)/ui/native_theme/native_theme_resources.rc',
> On 2012/05/16 21:15:49, tony wrote:
> > As a follow up cleanup, we should see if this unittest binary can use pak
> files
> > instead of .rc files.  Otherwise the tests won't work on non-Windows.
> 
> IIRC, rc files are generated for all platforms, so this works on other
> platforms.

Sure, the rc files are generated, but if you try to load a resource on
Linux/Mac, it's not going to find it in the binary.  I suspect we hit a CHECK or
tests that need resources only run on Windows.

[oshima, 2012-05-16 22:17:34]

On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 2:38 PM, <tony@chromium.org> wrote:

> On 2012/05/16 21:35:17, oshima wrote:
>
>> +joi for his opinion. should we replace these rc entries to pak?
>>
>
> 
http://codereview.chromium.**org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/**views/views.gyp<http...
>> File ui/views/views.gyp (right):
>>
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.**org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/**
>
views/views.gyp#newcode547<http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/diff/1140/ui/views/views.gyp#newcode547>
>
>> ui/views/views.gyp:547:
>> '<(SHARED_INTERMEDIATE_DIR)/**ui/native_theme/native_theme_**
>> resources.rc',
>> On 2012/05/16 21:15:49, tony wrote:
>> > As a follow up cleanup, we should see if this unittest binary can use
>> pak
>> files
>> > instead of .rc files.  Otherwise the tests won't work on non-Windows.
>>
>
>  IIRC, rc files are generated for all platforms, so this works on other
>> platforms.
>>
>
> Sure, the rc files are generated, but if you try to load a resource on
> Linux/Mac, it's not going to find it in the binary.  I suspect we hit a
> CHECK or
> tests that need resources only run on Windows.
>
>
This works as a dependency to compile grd file, not to load these files and
that's why it works
on other platforms. Don't get me wrong. I'm perfectly fine to change this
to pak. I just wanted to
say it's working now, and hear joi's opinion before making this change.

- oshima


>
http://codereview.chromium.**org/10377155/<http://codereview.chromium.org/103...
>

[Jói, 2012-05-16 22:40:53]

Tony's suggestion to switch the unit tests to use .pak files in a follow-up
change sounds good to me.

In a separate review thread (earlier today?) I think the decision was made for
naming of scaled resources to be like xyz_100_percent, xyz_140_percent,
xyz_200_percent, but in this change we have directories named touch_100 and
touch_200.  Should they be renamed touch_100_percent and touch_200_percent?

Cheers,
Jói

[oshima, 2012-05-16 22:43:27]

On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:40 PM, <joi@chromium.org> wrote:

> Tony's suggestion to switch the unit tests to use .pak files in a follow-up
> change sounds good to me.
>
>
Ok, i'll change them to pak file.


> In a separate review thread (earlier today?) I think the decision was made
> for
> naming of scaled resources to be like xyz_100_percent, xyz_140_percent,
> xyz_200_percent, but in this change we have directories named touch_100 and
> touch_200.  Should they be renamed touch_100_percent and touch_200_percent?
>

I'll do that in separate CLs.

- oshima


> Cheers,
> Jói
>
>
>
http://codereview.chromium.**org/10377155/<http://codereview.chromium.org/103...
>

[Jói, 2012-05-16 22:47:11]

>> Tony's suggestion to switch the unit tests to use .pak files in a
>> follow-up
>> change sounds good to me.
>>
>
> Ok, i'll change them to pak file.

I think this can also be a separate change.

Cheers,
Jói


On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, oshima <oshima@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:40 PM, <joi@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> Tony's suggestion to switch the unit tests to use .pak files in a
>> follow-up
>> change sounds good to me.
>>
>
> Ok, i'll change them to pak file.
>
>>
>> In a separate review thread (earlier today?) I think the decision was made
>> for
>> naming of scaled resources to be like xyz_100_percent, xyz_140_percent,
>> xyz_200_percent, but in this change we have directories named touch_100
>> and
>> touch_200.  Should they be renamed touch_100_percent and
>> touch_200_percent?
>
>
> I'll do that in separate CLs.
>
> - oshima
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jói
>>
>>
>> http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/
>
>

[oshima, 2012-05-16 22:51:32]

On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Jói Sigurðsson <joi@chromium.org> wrote:

> >> Tony's suggestion to switch the unit tests to use .pak files in a
> >> follow-up
> >> change sounds good to me.
> >>
> >
> > Ok, i'll change them to pak file.
>
> I think this can also be a separate change.
>

Yes, that's my plan. Thanks.

- oshima

>
> Cheers,
> Jói
>
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, oshima <oshima@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:40 PM, <joi@chromium.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Tony's suggestion to switch the unit tests to use .pak files in a
> >> follow-up
> >> change sounds good to me.
> >>
> >
> > Ok, i'll change them to pak file.
> >
> >>
> >> In a separate review thread (earlier today?) I think the decision was
> made
> >> for
> >> naming of scaled resources to be like xyz_100_percent, xyz_140_percent,
> >> xyz_200_percent, but in this change we have directories named touch_100
> >> and
> >> touch_200.  Should they be renamed touch_100_percent and
> >> touch_200_percent?
> >
> >
> > I'll do that in separate CLs.
> >
> > - oshima
> >
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Jói
> >>
> >>
> >> http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/
> >
> >
>

[oshima, 2012-05-17 21:30:43]

bcc-ing everyone else.

Looks like gyp is using .rc for good reason. I tried to use .pak instead of
.rc,
but windows failed to load resources.

http://codereview.chromium.org/10332217/

Looks like it has to be .rc for win and other platforms are piggybacking to
compile grd file. Joi, do you have any suggestion or should we keep it as
is?

- oshima

On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:51 PM, oshima <oshima@chromium.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Jói Sigurðsson <joi@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>>  >> Tony's suggestion to switch the unit tests to use .pak files in a
>> >> follow-up
>> >> change sounds good to me.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Ok, i'll change them to pak file.
>>
>> I think this can also be a separate change.
>>
>
> Yes, that's my plan. Thanks.
>
> - oshima
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jói
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, oshima <oshima@chromium.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:40 PM, <joi@chromium.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Tony's suggestion to switch the unit tests to use .pak files in a
>> >> follow-up
>> >> change sounds good to me.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Ok, i'll change them to pak file.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> In a separate review thread (earlier today?) I think the decision was
>> made
>> >> for
>> >> naming of scaled resources to be like xyz_100_percent, xyz_140_percent,
>> >> xyz_200_percent, but in this change we have directories named touch_100
>> >> and
>> >> touch_200.  Should they be renamed touch_100_percent and
>> >> touch_200_percent?
>> >
>> >
>> > I'll do that in separate CLs.
>> >
>> > - oshima
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Jói
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> http://codereview.chromium.org/10377155/
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>