sync: update CI config files

[galargh]

No description provided.

[welcome]

Thank you for submitting this PR!
A maintainer will be here shortly to review it.
We are super grateful, but we are also overloaded! Help us by making sure that:

• The context for this PR is clear, with relevant discussion, decisions
  and stakeholders linked/mentioned.

• Your contribution itself is clear (code comments, self-review for the
  rest) and in its best form. Follow the code contribution
  guidelines
  if they apply.

Getting other community members to do a review would be great help too on complex PRs (you can ask in the chats/forums). If you are unsure about something, just leave us a comment.
Next steps:

• A maintainer will triage and assign priority to this PR, commenting on
  any missing things and potentially assigning a reviewer for high
  priority items.

• The PR gets reviews, discussed and approvals as needed.

• The PR is merged by maintainers when it has been approved and comments addressed.

We currently aim to provide initial feedback/triaging within two business days. Please keep an eye on any labelling actions, as these will indicate priorities and status of your contribution.
We are very grateful for your contribution!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #159 (a411b3e) into main (5aceeb9) will increase coverage by 0.53%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #159      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   29.52%   30.06%   +0.53%     
==========================================
  Files         100      100              
  Lines       11237    11339     +102     
==========================================
+ Hits         3318     3409      +91     
- Misses       7548     7551       +3     
- Partials      371      379       +8     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
bitswap/internal/testutil/testutil.go	14.10% <0.00%> (ø)
gateway/handler.go	65.84% <0.00%> (+3.80%)	⬆️

[galargh]

peerSeq is only ever incremented in GeneratePeers. Was the plan to use it as peer id (instead of i)?

https://github.com/ipfs/go-libipfs/blob/df98127afa4cbac74eedde9b405439f149abd11b/bitswap/internal/testutil/testutil.go#L56-L67

[galargh]

I replaced i with peerSeq. Might be worth checking if that was the reason why all the tests that use GeneratePeers were marked as flaky. I'm going to merge this at EOD if there are no objections.