cfg out uucore::signals on fuchsia

[xtqqczze]

Fuchsia does not have Unix-style signals.

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will improve performance by 3.88%

⚠️ Different runtime environments detected

Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.

Open the report in CodSpeed to investigate

⚡ 2 improved benchmarks
✅ 359 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 50 skipped benchmarks¹

Performance Changes

	Mode	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
⚡	Simulation	uniq_case_insensitive[10000]	3 ms	2.8 ms	+4.35%
⚡	Simulation	uniq_with_count[10000]	3.8 ms	3.7 ms	+3.42%

Tip

Curious why performance improved? Comment @codspeedbot explain why performance improved on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.

---

_{Comparing xtqqczze:signals-fuchsia (b57676f) with main (21b4f0a)²}

Footnotes

1. 50 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

2. No successful run was found on main (1d03876) during the generation of this report, so 21b4f0a was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/tail/tail-n0f (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/cut/bounded-memory (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/date/date-locale-hour (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

[sylvestre]

it would be nice to have fuchsia in the CI first

[xtqqczze]

it would be nice to have fuchsia in the CI first

We will have to fix compilation errors before adding CI. I'd suggest making incremental progress towards this.

[sylvestre]

i would prefer the opposite and have the job as expecting to fail

i don't know what i would approve here

[oech3]

I don' think someone actually want to use uutils on fuchsia.

[sylvestre]

I don' think someone actually want to use uutils on fuchsia.

i don't really mind this :)

[xtqqczze]

I don' think someone actually want to use uutils on fuchsia.

I don’t particularly intend to spend much time on this, but since Fuchsia doesn’t have Unix-style signals, these changes seem reasonable to me.

i would prefer the opposite and have the job as expecting to fail

I don’t see what value that would add. If we expect the job to fail, it seems like a waste of CI resources to run it in the first place, given that it doesn’t provide any useful signal beyond confirming the expected failure.