Fix native to IL line number mappings in SOS test scripts

[leculver]

Remove alternative line number matches (e.g., (53|57), (11|20)) that were needed for older runtime versions. Now that the IL conversion fix has landed, tests should expect the correct line numbers only.

Fixes #794

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This pull request removes alternative line number matches from SOS test scripts that were required to support older runtime versions. After a runtime fix for native-to-IL line number mappings landed, tests can now expect exact line numbers instead of patterns like (11|20) or (53|57).

Changes:

• Removed alternative line number patterns from six SOS test script files
• Updated expectations to use single, correct line numbers that match actual source code locations
• Aligned with the IL conversion fix referenced in issue #794

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 6 out of 6 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
TaskNestedException.script	Updated line numbers for RandomUserTask constructor (19→26) and InnerException (37→38)
StackTests.script	Updated NestedExceptionTest.Program.Main line number from (11|20) to 20
StackAndOtherTests.script	Updated line numbers for Foo2 (31→32) and Foo4 (53→57) across multiple ClrStack commands
OtherCommands.script	Updated line numbers for Foo2 (31→32) and Foo4 (37|57→37)
NestedExceptionTest.script	Updated NestedExceptionTest.Program.Main line number from (11|20) to 20
DivZero.script	Updated DivZero C.Main line number from (57|56) to 57

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[leculver]

Taking a look at the failures tomorrow.

[leculver]

For some reason I've lost my ability to log into the place where we can download the actual test failures. I'm trying to get that resolved, in the meanwhile, progress on this will be slow. I'm submitting passing local changes, failing in CI and I can't see the CI failures. I'll ping again when this is ready for re-review.

The new code seems fine, but the SOS tests are very difficult to get right without being able to see what's failing before I submit a change.