test: [M3-8526] - Update remaining Linode Create Cypress tests run against Linode Create v2

[bnussman-akamai]

Description 📝

• Updates remaining Cypress test to run against Linode Create v2 rather than Linode Create v1 🧪
• This PR will allow be to begin deleting Linode Create v1

How to test 🧪

• Verify Cypress tests pass ✅
• Verify all Linode Create related tests run against Linode Create v2

As an Author I have considered 🤔

• 👀 Doing a self review
• ❔ Our contribution guidelines
• 🤏 Splitting feature into small PRs
• ➕ Adding a changeset
• 🧪 Providing/Improving test coverage
• 🔐 Removing all sensitive information from the code and PR description
• 🚩 Using a feature flag to protect the release
• 👣 Providing comprehensive reproduction steps
• 📑 Providing or updating our documentation
• 🕛 Scheduling a pair reviewing session
• 📱 Providing mobile support
• ♿ Providing accessibility support

[github-actions]

Coverage Report: ✅
Base Coverage: 86.4%
Current Coverage: 86.4%

[bnussman-akamai]

@jdamore-linode Are we good to delete this? Do I need to move any of these tests out into new ones?

[jdamore-linode]

@bnussman-akamai I think we might want to yank out the region select test into its own spec, if we can. This should only be temporary since we have a component test for the region select, but as long as we don't have component tests running in CI I'd like to hang onto that

[mjac0bs]

Looks good overall - tests pass and are using v2. I left a couple comments in the legacy test file but will defer to Joe for final thoughts on what, if anything, is necessary to keep.

[bnussman-akamai]

Okay, I essentially extracted out some tests from packages/manager/cypress/e2e/core/linodes/legacy-create-linode.spec.ts into new files like create-linode-with-disk-encryption.spec.ts and create-linode-with-dc-specific-pricing.spec.ts so we can retain the coverage @mjac0bs

[jdamore-linode]

Nice work @bnussman-akamai!

I did get one failure the first time I ran create-linode-with-firewall.spec.ts where it apparently failed to find the "Firewall Assigned" text, but not sure why and I didn't have any luck reproducing after that -- no reason to think it was caused by this PR, but I'll keep an eye on that once this is merged!