bump futures to use syn 2.0

[fee1-dead]

cc #109302

[rustbot]

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[rustbot]

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Random changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.
This was probably unintentional and should be reverted before this PR is merged.

If this was intentional then you can ignore this comment.

[Mark-Simulacrum]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 2c64688 has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 2c64688 with merge 657cd9cf9dd18afbae3c7c4a78421669302c0922...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[fee1-dead]

'client.read_exact(&mut header) failed with Connection reset by peer (os error 104)'

@bors retry

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job armhf-gnu failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

---- [ui] tests/ui/consts/issue-67640.rs stdout ----

error: test run failed!
status: exit status: 101
command: RUST_TEST_THREADS="16" "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage0-tools-bin/remote-test-client" "run" "0" "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/ui/consts/issue-67640/a"
uploaded "/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/ui/consts/issue-67640/a", waiting for result
------------------------------------------
--- stderr -------------------------------
thread 'main' panicked at 'client.read_exact(&mut header) failed with Connection reset by peer (os error 104)', src/tools/remote-test-client/src/main.rs:310:9

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 2c64688 with merge e4dae0d...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Mark-Simulacrum
Pushing e4dae0d to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (e4dae0d): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.3%	[1.3%, 1.3%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-1.1%, -0.5%]	4
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-1.1%, 1.3%]	5

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.8%	[-1.3%, -0.4%]	4
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.8%	[-1.3%, -0.4%]	4