fix(ci): rename the codegen script to script/Build.sol

[thedavidmeister]

What this fixes

The whole copy-artifacts job on main, which fails at its first real step:

::error::src/generated/ is committed but script/Build.sol was not found,
so the committed sources cannot be currency checked here.
The codegen script must be script/Build.sol.

rainix's rainix-copy-artifacts.yaml matches the codegen script name
exactly, on purpose: a repo that renames or drops it should go red rather
than skip regeneration and still report a green currency check. This repo's
script is script/BuildPointers.sol, so the job dies at the gate and the
currency check never runs at all.

This is not a regression in this repo — nothing here changed. The gate is new,
and copy-artifacts last passed on 2026-07-15 only because the gate did not
exist then.

What changed

script/BuildPointers.sol → script/Build.sol, and the contract inside it
BuildPointers → Build. Plus the one stale reference in CLAUDE.md.

src/generated/LogTables.pointers.sol is not regenerated by this PR and
does not need to be. Its header

// THIS FILE IS AUTOGENERATED BY ./script/BuildPointers.sol

still names the old path because that string is hardcoded in
rain-sol-codegen-0.1.0's LibCodeGen.filePrefix() — it is not derived from
the script's filename. So regeneration after the rename is byte-identical.
Hand-editing that header to say Build.sol would be the thing that breaks the
currency check, not the thing that fixes it.

QA

• Discriminating tests: n/a - no unit test covers a CI job's own gating step. The discriminating check is the copy-artifacts job itself, which fails on base at the "Regenerate generated sources" step with the error quoted above (observed on PR fix(test): drop vm.skip from the tagged deploy constants check #265, run 32508961076, job 96855392758) and is expected to get past it here. This PR's own copy-artifacts run is the verification.
• Mutations applied: n/a - a file/contract rename with no behavioural logic to mutate. The one falsifiable claim (that regeneration is byte-identical after the rename, i.e. the autogen header is a hardcoded string rather than derived from the filename) was tested directly rather than by mutation: see Oracle.
• Oracle: rainix's own workflow source, replayed locally against this exact commit rather than taken on trust. Ran the full rainix-copy-artifacts.yaml sequence at rainix SHA 3d1c85eca08ef5a852215f77c8f3684c8313a8b3 - name gate, forge script ./script/Build.sol, forge build, forge script ./script/CopyArtifacts.sol --ffi, forge fmt, git diff --exit-code. Result: gate PASS, codegen rc=0, and the currency check clean (DIFF-RC=0, no untracked files), which confirms the regenerated LogTables.pointers.sol is byte-identical to the committed one.
• Category check: no issue - this is one of several independently diagnosed causes of red CI on main. Covers exactly one: the copy-artifacts name gate. It does not touch the deploy constants or the agent-context cap, which are separate causes with their own PRs.

Overlap with #256 and #268

⚠️#256 already contains this exact rename as one commit inside a larger PR.
This PR is the same fix isolated; the two will conflict.

This PR's one-line CLAUDE.md edit is in the ### Scripts section, which
#268 (the agent-context byte cap fix) deletes outright. If both land, take
#268's deletion.

Scope

A rename. No behaviour, no generated output, no test changed.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@thedavidmeister, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in:40 minutes

Limit details: You’ve used the included review currently available.

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

How can I continue?

Wait for the limit to reset, then comment @coderabbitai review or push new commits to the PR.

An organization admin can change what happens after included review limits in Billing.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits within each organization.

For paid Pro and Pro+ reviews, CodeRabbit uses a developer's included PR review attempts over the past 7 days to set the current hourly allowance. At typical activity levels, the full plan allowance applies. Higher sustained activity can lower the allowance until earlier attempts leave the 7-day window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 82ef2ee1-bed4-4cb7-97ed-d9597d9c13d6

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d3fb611 and 4173aff.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• CLAUDE.md
• script/Build.sol

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}