Update Go to 1.25.5

[copybara-service]

Update Go to 1.25.5

• checkescape: improve error output
  The output now includes stderr on failure e.g.:

  checkescape: tools/checkescape/test2/test2.go:98:6: stack: possible split on function entry (2 omitted) → (possible, error running "external/rules_go++go_sdk+main___download_0/bin/go tool objdump bazel-out/k8-fastbuild-ST-04c87098fb12/bin/tools/checkescape/test2/test2.a": exit status 2 (go: no such tool "objdump")) (GOOARCH=amd64, GOOS=linux)
  

  Simplify various bits of the implementation while I'm here:

  • Use a set of strings rather than a list to avoid some O(n) operations.
  • Use CommandContext to ensure proper cleanup.
  • Remove stderr pipe and goroutine by setting Stderr to a
    bytes.Buffer.
  • Use bufio.Scanner instead of manually calling
    (*bufio.Reader).ReadString and handling errors.
  • Remove NextLine loop label.

• go_stateify: plumb go binary to goimports
  This avoids go_stateify relying on go being available outside of the
  bazel sandbox.

• Update Go to 1.25.5
  Reduce duplication of the version information in various places:

  • Use go_sdk.from_file instead of repeating the version encoded in
    go.mod in MODULE.bazel.

  Add a workaround to allow objdump to be lazily compiled in the manner
  introduced in https://go.dev/issue/71867 when invoked under bazel in
  checkescape.

FUTURE_COPYBARA_INTEGRATE_REVIEW=#12452 from tamird:update-go 6c7f640

[tamird]

@avagin looks like internal changes are causing 077098a to be discarded :(

[tamird]

@avagin how come images/gpu/cuda-tests-12-8/install_go.sh is restored relative to #12365 ?

[tamird]

@avagin how come all this is needed? shall I add a commit to my PR so that we have something in the history explaining it?

[avagin]

This pr removes golang from the default image, but here a custom golang is compiled and this process requires a "bootstrap" compiler.

[tamird]

Ah thanks for explaining. I pulled this into my PR, could we keep the diff between this and that small please?

[tamird]

I've also moved it to the proper commit and updated the message.

[tamird]

@avagin how come images/gpu/cuda-tests-12-8/install_go.sh is restored relative to #12365 ?

This is still the case - is it necessary? I'd prefer to avoid removing it in my commit and then having it reappear in the merge commit.

[avagin]

@avagin how come images/gpu/cuda-tests-12-8/install_go.sh is restored relative to #12365 ?

This is still the case - is it necessary? I'd prefer to avoid removing it in my commit and then having it reappear in the merge commit.

I reverted it. Let's do that in another pr, otherwise we will never merged this one.

[tamird]

@avagin how come images/gpu/cuda-tests-12-8/install_go.sh is restored relative to #12365 ?

This is still the case - is it necessary? I'd prefer to avoid removing it in my commit and then having it reappear in the merge commit.

I reverted it. Let's do that in another pr, otherwise we will never merged this one.

Since we're still hitting failures, I sent this as a separate change in #12458.