[arlosi]

Vulnerable dependencies:

• bumpalo 3.12.1 (yanked)
  • updated to 3.13.0
• tokio 1.8.4 - https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2023-0001
  • updated to 1.28.2
• remove_dir_all 0.5.3 - https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2023-0018
  • removed by using the standard library function in rust-installer instead and updating to tempfile@3.5.0 (which also removes the dependency).

The new dependencies come from tempfile@3.5.0 which adds the dependency on rustix

[rustbot]

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[rustbot]

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

[Mark-Simulacrum]

I am a little worried about the remove_dir_all change, but I'm going to go ahead with this and we'll see if we get reports of breakage. (The semantics of the standard library implementation are a little different, AFAIK, particularly on Windows; std tries less hard to clean things up).

@bors r+ rollup=iffy

[bors]

📌 Commit 4d9b476 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 4d9b476 with merge dff88b2...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing dff88b2 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (dff88b2): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

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)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.6%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

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
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.9%	[4.9%, 4.9%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.1%	[-3.1%, -3.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results

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)	1.3%	[1.3%, 1.3%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.3%	[1.3%, 1.3%]	1

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 644.74s -> 648.734s (0.62%)