do not trust download-rustc=if-unchanged on CI for now

[RalfJung]

See #131658.

Once #131831 lands this will be unnecessary, but until then, better safe than sorry.

r? @onur-ozkan
Cc @rust-lang/bootstrap

[onur-ozkan]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit e1d09a5 has been approved by onur-ozkan

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 1000. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened.

[RalfJung]

@bors p=1

[RalfJung]

Ah right I forgot, an empty if is not valid bash syntax 🤦

[RalfJung]

@bors r=onur-ozkan

[bors]

📌 Commit 146e744 has been approved by onur-ozkan

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 1000. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened.

[RalfJung]

@bors treeclosed-

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 146e744 with merge 1cbb252...

[rustbot]

This PR modifies tests/run-make/. If this PR is trying to port a Makefile
run-make test to use rmake.rs, please update the
run-make port tracking issue
so we can track our progress. You can either modify the tracking issue
directly, or you can comment on the tracking issue and link this PR.

cc @jieyouxu

[RalfJung]

@bors r=onur-ozkan retry

[bors]

📌 Commit 5c9cc0c has been approved by onur-ozkan

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 5c9cc0c with merge f5b6257...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: onur-ozkan
Pushing f5b6257 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (f5b6257): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - please read the text below

Our benchmarks found a performance regression caused by this PR.
This might be an actual regression, but it can also be just noise.

Next Steps:

• If the regression was expected or you think it can be justified,
  please write a comment with sufficient written justification, and add
  @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged to it, to mark the regression as triaged.
• If you think that you know of a way to resolve the regression, try to create
  a new PR with a fix for the regression.
• If you do not understand the regression or you think that it is just noise,
  you can ask the @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance working group for help (members of this group
  were already notified of this PR).

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

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.2%	[0.5%, 5.8%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.4%, secondary 1.3%)

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)	2.7%	[2.7%, 2.7%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.6%	[4.6%, 4.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.4%	[-3.4%, -3.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.0%	[-2.0%, -2.0%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-3.4%, 2.7%]	2

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: 787.115s -> 786.513s (-0.08%)
Artifact size: 335.35 MiB -> 335.31 MiB (-0.01%)

[Kobzol]

Noise, this only modified CI.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged