Default `leq` method for `Real`s seems inconsistent with docstring

[jishnub]

julia> struct A <: Real end

julia> Base.:(==)(::A, ::A) = false

julia> Base.:(<)(::A, ::A) = false

julia> x = A(); y = x;

julia> (x < y) | (x == y)
false

julia> x <= y
ERROR: <= not defined for A
Stacktrace:
 [1] error(::String, ::String, ::Type)
   @ Base ./error.jl:44
 [2] no_op_err(name::String, T::Type)
   @ Base ./promotion.jl:484
 [3] <=(x::A, y::A)
   @ Base ./promotion.jl:501
 [4] top-level scope
   @ REPL[11]:1

help?> <=
search: <=

  <=(x, y)
  ≤(x,y)

  Less-than-or-equals comparison operator. Falls back to (x < y) | (x == y).
[...]

julia> versioninfo()
Julia Version 1.9.0-DEV.1120
Commit 95cbb9f6184 (2022-08-12 00:44 UTC)
Platform Info:
  OS: Linux (x86_64-linux-gnu)
  CPU: 8 × 11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-1135G7 @ 2.40GHz
  WORD_SIZE: 64
  LIBM: libopenlibm
  LLVM: libLLVM-14.0.5 (ORCJIT, tigerlake)
  Threads: 1 on 8 virtual cores
Environment:
  LD_LIBRARY_PATH = :/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/gtk-3.0/modules
  JULIA_EDITOR = subl

As per the docstring, <= should fall back to using < and ==.

[mgkuhn]

It seems the line

<=(x, y) = (x < y) | (x == y)

in base/operators.jl is less specific than the line

(<=)(x::T, y::T) where {T<:Real} = no_op_err("<=", T)

in base/promotion.jl, so the latter overrides the former.