Run tests in parallel with GNU parallel

[gsingh93]

Note: this isn't ready to be merged. The tests run in parallel, but I still need to figure out how to update the test failed/success count.

Also need to add parallel to the dev dependencies.

Fixes #1330

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #1332 (67044e4) into dev (168677d) will decrease coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev    #1332      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   54.92%   54.87%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         153      153              
  Lines       19363    19387      +24     
  Branches     1811     1815       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits        10636    10639       +3     
- Misses       8277     8298      +21     
  Partials      450      450              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pwndbg/heap/ptmalloc.py	55.53% <0.00%> (-1.04%)	⬇️
pwndbg/commands/heap.py	77.98% <0.00%> (+0.44%)	⬆️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

[gsingh93]

With the latest commit the test pass/fail count is fixed. But I still need to get the names of the failed tests, which is feature I just added that now doesn't work with this approach 😅.

Also, for some reason ~5 tests fail when run under parallel, I'm not sure why yet.

[gsingh93]

The latest commit fixes some issues where we used hardcoded /tmp paths in our tests, which obviously break with multiple tests using the same file. This was fixed by using tempfile.mktemp instead.

The last test failures look like this:

>       assert re.match(r"fd:\s+0x1 \((/dev/pts/\d+|pipe:\[\d+\])\)", line_fd)
E       AssertionError: assert None
E        +  where None = <function match at 0x7fbf446005e0>('fd:\\s+0x1 \\((/dev/pts/\\d+|pipe:\\[\\d+\\])\\)', 'fd:        0x1 (/tmp/parZ4YC4.par (deleted))')
E        +    where <function match at 0x7fbf446005e0> = re.match

[gsingh93]

Ok, all bugs are fixed now. This is ready for review and can be merged if it looks good.

It would also be good to only display the output of failing jobs, but I will make that in a followup PR, as that's new functionality.