Backporting coreutils.sh gnu test

[ChrisDryden]

Exclude coreutils.sh from the search and replace for abs_top_builddir in Perl tests because it causes the coreutils header file to be skipped. This was the cause of the regression of the coreutils gnu test in the following PR: #10840

[oech3]

Are you talking about coreutils/coreutils#189 ?

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skipping an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)

[ChrisDryden]

Whoops wrong line

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

Skip an intermittent issue tests/tail/inotify-dir-recreate (fails in this run but passes in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/shuf/shuf-reservoir (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Skipping an intermittent issue tests/sort/sort-stale-thread-mem (passes in this run but fails in the 'main' branch)
Congrats! The gnu test tests/misc/coreutils is now passing!

[oech3]

merged. Backport coreutils/coreutils@7f592ad instead.

[github-actions]

GNU testsuite comparison:

GNU test failed: tests/seq/seq-epipe. tests/seq/seq-epipe is passing on 'main'. Maybe you have to rebase?
Congrats! The gnu test tests/factor/t33 is no longer failing!
Congrats! The gnu test tests/factor/t36 is no longer failing!
Note: The gnu test tests/cp/link-heap is now being skipped but was previously passing.
Congrats! The gnu test tests/misc/coreutils is now passing!
Congrats! The gnu test tests/printf/printf-surprise is now passing!

[oech3]

CI did not like the script commented out by me.

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 6.7%

❌ 2 regressed benchmarks
✅ 286 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 38 skipped benchmarks¹

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

	Mode	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
❌	Simulation	unexpand_many_lines[100000]	189.7 ms	203.4 ms	-6.7%
❌	Simulation	unexpand_large_file[10]	397.7 ms	426.3 ms	-6.7%

---

_{Comparing gnu-coreutils-skip (eb07f23) with main (ed05c6e)²}

Footnotes

1. 38 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 (aadb7d6) during the generation of this report, so ed05c6e was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩