Bump the version number to 1.98.0

[cuviper]

https://forge.rust-lang.org/release/process.html#bump-the-stable-version-number-friday-the-week-before

r? cuviper

[cuviper]

@bors r+ rollup=never

[rust-bors]

📌 Commit dd63bda has been approved by cuviper

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: cuviper
Duration: 3h 35m 48s
Pushing 62f36da to main...

[github-actions]

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 3bf5c6d (parent) -> 62f36da (this PR)

Test differences

Show 1 test diff

Stage 2

• [run-make] tests/run-make/compressed-debuginfo-zstd: pass -> ignore (ignored if LLVM wasn't build with zstd for ELF section compression or LLVM is not the default codegen backend) (J0)

Job group index

• J0: x86_64-gnu-nopt

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 62f36da19c68978143da7ccc3e0926f90173a286 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

1. pr-check-1: 33m 12s -> 47m 56s (+44.3%)
2. i686-gnu-2: 1h 12m -> 1h 45m (+44.0%)
3. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 54m 25s -> 1h 15m (+38.8%)
4. dist-aarch64-apple: 1h 43m -> 2h 22m (+37.3%)
5. optional-x86_64-gnu-parallel-frontend: 2h 28m -> 3h 24m (+37.2%)
6. test-various: 2h -> 2h 38m (+31.6%)
7. pr-check-2: 44m 53s -> 58m 39s (+30.7%)
8. x86_64-gnu-tools: 1h 6m -> 1h 24m (+27.3%)
9. dist-x86_64-apple: 1h 57m -> 2h 27m (+25.0%)
10. armhf-gnu: 1h 14m -> 1h 32m (+24.7%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (62f36da): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.2%	[0.2%, 0.2%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary 6.1%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	6.1%	[6.1%, 6.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

Results (primary 0.1%, secondary 0.1%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.1%]	75
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.1%]	28
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.1%	[0.0%, 0.1%]	75

Bootstrap: 513.065s -> 510.755s (-0.45%)
Artifact size: 400.58 MiB -> 400.62 MiB (0.01%)