It's OS_MACOSX, not OS_MAC.

It's OS_MACOSX, not OS_MAC.

Introduced here: http://codereview.chromium.org/9570012/
I codesearched for "\bOS_MAC\b" to make sure this is the only place
where we get this wrong.

BUG=90078
TEST=Add "-all_load" to linker command lines.
__Z24ShowOneClickSigninDialogP7ProfileRKSsS2_S2_ doesn't show up in the
list of undefined symbols.
TBR=pkasting

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=127389

[Nico, 2012-03-17 20:01:14]

(looks like macorteau / yujie.mao aren't full committers yet, so I picked you
randomly)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-03-17 20:02:10]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/thakis@chromium.org/9716017/1

[Peter Kasting, 2012-03-17 20:46:21]

LGTM

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-03-17 22:45:07]

Try job failure for 9716017-1 (retry) on win_rel for step "browser_tests".
It's a second try, previously, steps "ui_tests, browser_tests,
installer_util_unittests" failed.
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=win_rel&nu...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-03-17 22:55:03]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/thakis@chromium.org/9716017/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-03-18 00:17:53]

Try job failure for 9716017-1 (retry) on win_rel for .
It's a second try, previously, step "browser_tests" failed.
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=win_rel&nu...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-03-18 00:28:41]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/thakis@chromium.org/9716017/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-03-18 01:52:08]

Change committed as 127389

[Peter Mayo, 2012-03-18 02:06:30]

Any chance you can do the same check for OS_CHROME rather than OS_CHROMEOS?
  (http://codereview.chromium.org/9582011/ took far too long to diagnose)

Just in case your search-FU is greater than mine.

[Nico, 2012-03-18 02:49:16]

On 2012/03/18 02:06:30, Peter Mayo wrote:
> Any chance you can do the same check for OS_CHROME rather than OS_CHROMEOS?
>   (http://codereview.chromium.org/9582011/ took far too long to diagnose)
> 
> Just in case your search-FU is greater than mine.

http://code.google.com/p/chromium/source/search?q=%5CbOS_CHROME%5Cb&origq=%5C...
<- looks good as far as I can tell