update RLS and rustfmt

[calebcartwright]

Fixes #81582 and fixes #81583

r? @Xanewok

I was originally surprised by the size of lockfile diff, though after looking at the RLS changes it makes a bit more sense to me now

[rust-highfive]

⚠️ Warning ⚠️

• These commits modify submodules.

[calebcartwright]

Since RLS has removed the backtrace dep, this is now coming from

rust/Cargo.toml

Lines 109 to 113 in dab3a80

	# This crate's integration with libstd is a bit wonky, so we use a submodule
	# instead of a crates.io dependency. Make sure everything else in the repo is
	# also using the submodule, however, so we can avoid duplicate copies of the
	# source code for this crate.
	backtrace = { path = "library/backtrace" }

I wasn't sure if that entry should be removed from the root Cargo.toml given the presence of the submodule and a few other references (looked like the RA submodule has it, but feature gated) so left in for now and just removed it from the permitted dep lists in the tidy check to get rid of the error.

[Xanewok]

I think it's fine to leave it for now, especially if RA still uses it conditionally (I assume we dist it without this feature enabled?).

cc @alexcrichton just in case (06d565c)

[alexcrichton]

If nothing in rust-lang/rust is using the backtrace crate then this should be fine to remove. I thought Cargo at least would be using it through anyhow, but I was mistaken.

I think everything is using the dependency through the standard library now so it should be safe to remove.

[calebcartwright]

I assume we dist it without this feature enabled?

Actually I guess it's completely disabled (at least at the moment)

https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/blob/80ab753d7e0bf59b81df317d6ddda43cb919ec83/crates/stdx/Cargo.toml#L12-L19

[dependencies]
backtrace = { version = "0.3.44", optional = true }
always-assert = { version = "0.1.2", features = ["log"] }
# Think twice before adding anything here

[features]
# Uncomment to enable for the whole crate graph
# default = [ "backtrace" ]

I think everything is using the dependency through the standard library now so it should be safe to remove.

SGTM 👍 if something changes in that RA crate or elsewhere which brings backtrace back then the patch can be restored accordingly

[calebcartwright]

Looks like bors will get to this before I get back to my dev machine. If so will open a followup PR to remove the patch

[calebcartwright]

It's unclear to me why the other two jobs were cancelled, seemingly mid-run with everything succeeding up to that point 🤷‍♂️

[Xanewok]

Looks like an instance of #81783.

I think it's worth getting it into the queue:

@bors r+ p=1 (sweeping lockfile changes)

[bors]

📌 Commit d43ffff3e6b3722a3f773164d231b405481aa3e9 has been approved by Xanewok

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit d43ffff3e6b3722a3f773164d231b405481aa3e9 with merge 0fcf134521aba2dbfa8344e7e470f348c24634bc...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[calebcartwright]

Looks like we got caught between the stabilization of int_bits_const and the subsequent reversion in #81727. Will have to restart the auto publish crate update cycle

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #81132) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[calebcartwright]

Rebased and updated to the v705 crate versions 🤞 I opted to keep the removal of the backtrace references in a separate commit on the off chance it needs to be reverted, but please lmk if you think everything should be squashed into one.

[Xanewok]

Looks good, thanks for doing this!

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 0a47a38 has been approved by Xanewok

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 0a47a38 with merge 218bf8d...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Xanewok
Pushing 218bf8d to master...

[rust-highfive]

📣 Toolstate changed by #81768!

Tested on commit 218bf8d.
Direct link to PR: #81768

🎉 rls on windows: build-fail → test-pass (cc @Xanewok).
🎉 rls on linux: build-fail → test-pass (cc @Xanewok).
🎉 rustfmt on windows: build-fail → test-pass (cc @topecongiro @calebcartwright).
🎉 rustfmt on linux: build-fail → test-pass (cc @topecongiro @calebcartwright).