Migrate run-make/issue-11908 to new rmake.rs format

[Oneirical]

Part of #121876 and the associated Google Summer of Code project.

Set as draft, because I have a few concerns:

• I am not sure if target().contains("darwin") is a good way of checking that the target is on OSX.
• I find it strange that the dylib part of the test adapts to different target platforms, but not the rlib part. Is rlib named the same on all platforms?

[rustbot]

r? @jieyouxu

rustbot has assigned @jieyouxu.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[jieyouxu]

wtf? This seems rather fragile?

[jieyouxu]

Is this comment even accurate anymore?

[Oneirical]

Tentatively, it seems like the test author, in this commit, implemented the directory moving commands to fix the collision, but didn't remove the comment. I have removed the comment, but let me know if you think it should be kept in some way, since we are not 100% sure.

[jieyouxu]

Unless this fails because of liburl, the comment seems outdated

[rustbot]

The run-make-support library was changed

cc @jieyouxu

Some changes occurred in run-make tests.

cc @jieyouxu

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #125120) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[jieyouxu]

Thanks, r=me after CI is green

@bors delegate+

[bors]

✌️ @Oneirical, you can now approve this pull request!

If @jieyouxu told you to "r=me" after making some further change, please make that change, then do @bors r=@jieyouxu

[jieyouxu]

Yeah, -Clto seems better because that flag can take no value (default) or thin/fat

[Oneirical]

@bors r=@jieyouxu

[bors]

📌 Commit 81f7e54 has been approved by jieyouxu

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 81f7e54 with merge 9e7aff7...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jieyouxu
Pushing 9e7aff7 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (9e7aff7): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.4%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.5%	[2.5%, 2.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.9%	[-2.7%, -1.2%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-2.7%, 2.5%]	3

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 679.642s -> 679.01s (-0.09%)
Artifact size: 315.96 MiB -> 315.99 MiB (0.01%)