This was mostly done by clippy via `clippy::doc_markdown`.
I then reviewed it to fix words that shouldn't have it or where `--fix`
put the backtick in the wrong location.
I'm unsure how we should be replacing these use cases, so I'm exploring
keeping them but making them use snapbox under the hood.
Part of the intent of snapbox is that it provides you the building
blocks to make what you need.
test(gc): Update remaining unordered tests to snapbox
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This gets rid of the last unordered tests and removes the functions from `cargo-test-support` as part of #14039
Some tests are being less specific than they were before but in talking to ehuss, it sounded like that was ok.
### How should we test and review this PR?
### Additional information
Add transactional semantics to `rustfix`
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This PR adds transactional semantics to `rustfix::Data`, enabling `rustfix::CodeFix` to apply `Suggestion`s as atomic units and rollback partially-applied changes when they conflict with existing ones. The basic approach and goals are discussed [in a comment on issue 14699](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/14699#issuecomment-2427501232). In that comment, I proposed a solution which extended the existing `State` enumeration, but described an alternative that simplifies the overall tracking of incoming changes; this PR implements the latter.
### How should we test and review this PR?
I've added an additional test and updated the existing ones. The tests in `parse_and_replace` already cover this case, particularly thanks to https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/14765 added by `@weihanglo.` It's still a good idea to experiment with `cargo clippy --fix` on repos that match the cases described in these open issues.
### Additional information
Fixes#14699
Fixes rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/13549
DirectorySourceOptions is marked as #[non_exhaustive], and only
exposes the Default trait, so we need to instantiate a mutable
instance using default(), and then change tpl_extension to the
value we want.
fix(util): Respect all `..`s in `normalize_path`
### What does this PR try to resolve?
The fact that `normalize_path` was only designed for absolute paths bit us when working out #14497 and so I decided to make sure it worked. The other alternative I considered was having it assert that the path was absolute.
Since I did try out the assert and Cargo tests hit it, this likely fixes something but I haven't dug through to be able to say what.
### How should we test and review this PR?
### Additional information
Encodes the version information into Cargo's fingerprint dep-info files,
so that when the format encoding changes in the future,
Cargo understands a dep-info file was outdated and doesn't bother parsing it.
Since there was no version info encoded in the old format (call it v0),
to be compatible with older cargoes,
this PR works around it with a horrible hack.
It is explained in the doc comment of `EncodedDepInfo`.
test(install): Verify 2024 edition / resolver=3 doesn't affect resolution
### What does this PR try to resolve?
I was worried there might be bugs related to this. With this out of the way, I think we'll be ready to stabilize `resolver = "3"`.
### How should we test and review this PR?
### Additional information
Added unstable-schema generation for Cargo.toml
### What does this PR try to resolve?
Added unstable-schema feature that generates JsonSchema for Cargo.toml
See #12883
finished first step of [plan](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/12883#issuecomment-2407648385)
### Information
In cargo-util-schemas, run cargo test --feature unstable-schema . If there have been any changes to manifest.schema.json, rerun with env variable SNAPSHOTS=overwrite and it will update them.
### How should we test and review this PR?
In cargo-util-schemas run cargo test --features unstable-schema and it will generate manifest.schema.json
test: add fixes in the sat resolver
### What does this PR try to resolve?
This is a follow-up of https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/14614.
### How should we test and review this PR?
Commit 1 removes duplicate variables in the sat resolver.
Commit 2 removes useless clones in the sat resolver.
r? Eh2406
