Add numactl RPM requirement

[portante]

Both the pbench-uperf and pbench-linpack commands offer interfaces that rely on numactl.

[portante]

@ndokos asked elsewhere: "Why not modify pbench-uperf and pbench-linpack to complain and abort the run as with tools?"

The answer is that those benchmark convenience scripts are not tools. They are part of the interface provided by the pbench-agent, and all the dependencies for those interfaces to work properly should be provided by direct pbench-agent RPM dependencies.

If we take the logic that we are applying to tools, that is that the dependencies for tools are not applied to the pbench-agent RPM, then the pbench-agent RPM would have NO dependencies at all.

Further, the numactl command does not fall in the category of a "tool", since it does not gather metrics or other data about a program or the system. Rather, it offers controls over the system. It's sibling, the numastat command, is a tool, though it is provided by the numactl RPM.

[portante]

FYI, the numactl RPM was removed in PR #1887 (commit 73ccffc).

[portante]

Remove the Fedora 36 changes from this PR.

[ndokos]

But one could argue that the pbench-uperf interface also depends on uperf, and we don't make pbench-agent depend on uperf.

[dbutenhof]

BTW: While using the branch name to link to Jira clearly works, it also means the final main git history won't include the Jira number, while putting it in the message will. I like having it in the history for future reference. (Granted, we can always edit the log on merge; but if we put it there in the first place, we don't have to.)

[webbnh]

👍

[portante]

I am not convinced of the Jira integration yet. Being able to search in Jira using the GitHub ID is sufficient. No need to litter GitHub with Jira references that nobody outside Red Hat can access.