Base: FileEnumerator should not follow reparse points.

Base: FileEnumerator should not follow reparse points.

Following reparse points by default is dangerous because it can easily result
in infinite loops.

BUG=260360
TEST=base_unittests

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=215407

R=brettw@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=217634

[rvargas (doing something else), 2013-08-02 00:55:03]

I've been going over the need to expose another flag to let the consumer decide
if they want to see reparse points or not. I tend to think that no caller will
actually bother to do all the proper checks to enable a safe recursive
enumeration in the presence of reparse points, so the safest thing is to skip
that entry.

I can see only one caller of concern: third_party/zlib/google/zip.cc (and it's
evil twin chrome/test/chromedriver/chrome/zip.cc), but I honestly would not know
how would they use a flag if we create one (hence my position of not adding
one).

[brettw, 2013-08-02 06:03:21]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-02 18:04:09]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rvargas@chromium.org/20610004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-02 18:10:44]

Step "update" is always a major failure.
Look at the try server FAQ for more details.
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=android_db...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-02 23:54:39]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rvargas@chromium.org/20610004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-02 23:59:06]

Change committed as 215407

[rvargas (doing something else), 2013-08-05 18:30:44]

Brett, do you mind taking another look?

I'm skipping one test on XP because it seems like the OS is taking its time to
propagate the FS changes... to be fair, I think it can also happen on other
OSes, but I want to see if the test is flaky as is or not (it doesn't flake on
my machine)

[rvargas (doing something else), 2013-08-07 22:41:58]

On 2013/08/05 18:30:44, rvargas wrote:
> Brett, do you mind taking another look?
> 
> I'm skipping one test on XP because it seems like the OS is taking its time to
> propagate the FS changes... to be fair, I think it can also happen on other
> OSes, but I want to see if the test is flaky as is or not (it doesn't flake on
> my machine)

ping?

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-09 18:10:57]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rvargas@chromium.org/20610004/31001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-08-10 02:45:32]

Retried try job too often on win_rel for step(s) browser_tests
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=win_rel&nu...

[rvargas (doing something else), 2013-08-14 20:46:14]

Committed patchset #2 manually as r217634 (presubmit successful).