e2e-tests: fix Google device code regex capturing label instead of code

[adombeck]

When GDM renders the qrcode layout it displays the 'Login code:' label and the actual code as separate UI widgets, so they appear on separate lines in the GDM dialog. When OCR of the GDM screen also drops the colon (a common OCR failure), the alternation in DEVICE_URL_REGEX falls through to the \s* branch, and the capture group — which included a literal space — greedily matched the two-word label 'Login code', producing 'LOGINCODE' instead of the real code.

Two changes close the gap:

1. Make the colon optional (:?) and allow a newline (\n?) between the label and the code, so 'Login code\nWXYZ-ABCD' is handled correctly.
2. Remove the space from the capture group ([A-Za-z-]+ instead of [A-Za-z- ]+), so that even if the \s* fallback is taken the multi-word label cannot be swallowed as the device code.

Closes #1719
UDENG-10984

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR updates the Google broker device-code extraction regex used by the e2e test suite to avoid OCR occasionally capturing the “Login code” label instead of the actual device code during GDM-driven device-code login flows.

Changes:

• Adjust Google DEVICE_URL_REGEX to make the colon optional and tolerate the code appearing on the next line.
• Tighten the captured code character class to prevent swallowing multi-word labels when OCR drops punctuation.

---

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

[adombeck]

Waiting for CI before marking as ready for review

[adombeck]

CI is failing because of #1730. Waiting until that's fixed.

[adombeck]

CI is failing because of #1730. Waiting until that's fixed.

Actually, #1730 only affects the authd-msentraid tests and this change only affects the authd-google tests, so we don't have to wait.

Looking at the test results, the regex change from 9fdc626 was not good, it included other GDM UI text in the match. Copilot came up with an even more convoluted regex to avoid that. It's not pretty but IMO if it works reliably then it's fine.