Try to reduce space usage in dist CI

[workingjubilee]

We have had recurrent CI problems as a result of GitHub adding a new version of Xcode to its runners¹, which has consumed ~40GB of space which served as padding. Try to reduce the number of Xcodes on our systems, because we only use Xcode 14 in actual practice. Also, try to move files instead of pointlessly copy them when we're at the end of the job.

I could not resist addressing a few shellcheck lints while I was at it.

Footnotes

1. https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/10511↩

[workingjubilee]

@bors try

[workingjubilee]

huh.

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit da4cb91 with merge 9a97493...

[workingjubilee]

Oh there we go.

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[workingjubilee]

Neat.

@bors try

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 005f3fc with merge 450ed18...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[workingjubilee]

@bors try

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 0b61e33 with merge 8916429...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[workingjubilee]

@bors try

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 0fbd6bb with merge 7c567d6...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 10752a0 with merge ca05929...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[workingjubilee]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 8da1c00 has been approved by workingjubilee

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 8da1c00 with merge fa72f07...

[workingjubilee]

dist-aarch64-apple has gone green!

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: workingjubilee
Pushing fa72f07 to master...

[xvln]

Suggested change

	echo"Using Xcode 16? Please fix xcode-select.sh"
	echo"Using Xcode 16? Please fix select-xcode.sh"

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (fa72f07): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.0%	[0.6%, 2.8%]	5
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.4%	[0.3%, 0.6%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.3%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.8%	[-0.6%, 2.8%]	6

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.0%, secondary -0.5%)

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)	0.9%	[0.4%, 2.4%]	24
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.6%	[0.4%, 1.4%]	20
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.8%	[-1.7%, -0.4%]	27
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.8%	[-2.0%, -0.4%]	66
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.0%	[-1.7%, 2.4%]	51

Cycles

Results (primary 0.7%, secondary 0.3%)

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)	1.4%	[0.4%, 6.2%]	18
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.1%	[0.4%, 4.0%]	66
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-1.9%, -0.4%]	9
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.0%	[-5.0%, -0.4%]	45
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.7%	[-1.9%, 6.2%]	27

Binary size

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)	0.4%	[0.4%, 0.4%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[0.4%, 0.4%]	1

Bootstrap: 788.226s -> 789.792s (0.20%)
Artifact size: 338.74 MiB -> 338.69 MiB (-0.01%)

[workingjubilee]

...fascinating.

[RalfJung]

Given that self-approved PRs are not really a thing we do outside of tool updates (to my knowledge), would be good to link to some context here. I think that context is this.

[Kobzol]

...fascinating.

The tree being closed coincided with the collector borking measurement of the previous master commit. I believe that this perf. result is an artifact of that.