refactor: replace lazy_static with std::sync::LazyLock

[39555]

The functionality of lazy_static now in the core since 1.80 rust-lang/rust#121377

[github-actions]

Performance Benchmark Report

Benchmark name	Baseline (μs)	Test/PR (μs)	Delta (μs)	Delta %
expand_one_string	3.33 μs	3.33 μs	-0.00 μs	⚪ Unchanged
instantiate_shell	60.71 μs	59.29 μs	-1.42 μs	🟢 -2.34%
instantiate_shell_with_init_scripts	29238.12 μs	28906.44 μs	-331.68 μs	🟢 -1.13%
parse_bash_completion	2737.26 μs	2696.84 μs	-40.43 μs	🟢 -1.48%
parse_sample_script	4.00 μs	3.96 μs	-0.04 μs	⚪ Unchanged
run_echo_builtin_command	92.70 μs	89.44 μs	-3.26 μs	🟢 -3.52%
run_one_builtin_command	108.71 μs	105.78 μs	-2.93 μs	🟢 -2.69%
run_one_external_command	1958.90 μs	1906.28 μs	-52.62 μs	🟢 -2.69%
run_one_external_command_directly	1010.91 μs	1011.85 μs	0.93 μs	⚪ Unchanged

Code Coverage Report: Only Changed Files listed

Package	Base Coverage	New Coverage	Difference
brush-core/src/builtins/declare.rs	🟢 81.64%	🟢 81.99%	🟢 0.35%
brush-core/src/keywords.rs	🟢 96.88%	🟢 94.12%	🔴 -2.76%
brush-core/src/namedoptions.rs	🟠 54.33%	🟢 99.72%	🟢 45.39%
brush-core/src/shell.rs	🟢 81.68%	🟢 81.56%	🔴 -0.12%
brush-core/src/sys/unix/signal.rs	🟠 72.13%	🟢 75.41%	🟢 3.28%
brush-shell/src/main.rs	🟢 90.26%	🟢 90.32%	🟢 0.06%
Overall Coverage	🟢 75.12%	🟢 76.74%	🟢 1.62%

Minimum allowed coverage is 70%, this run produced 76.74%

[reubeno]

Nice!

Our current MSRV is 1.75, which was initially released about 10 months ago, and this would force us to move that forward. What would you see as the benefits of doing so now vs. later?

More broadly, we need to establish a general procedure for when we upgrade the MSRV. I'll need to do some research to see what other projects do, but am very open to input here.

[39555]

We can do it later. There are no huge benefits