Detect integers 7889 v9

[catenacyber]

Link to ticket: https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/7889

Describe changes:

• Move a bunch of keywords to using generic integers framework, allowing negation, >=, hexadecimal notation, etc..

Still one left to do : ip_proto

SV_BRANCH=OISF/suricata-verify#2737

#14071 with nits ntohs fix + new commit with upgrade note

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 85.50725% with 30 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 84.17%. Comparing base (a16e87b) to head (7c47c8d).
⚠️ Report is 81 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #14181      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.18%   84.17%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1013     1012       -1     
  Lines      262231   261946     -285     
==========================================
- Hits       220747   220482     -265     
+ Misses      41484    41464      -20     

Flag	Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus	63.33% <67.76%> (-0.05%)	⬇️
livemode	18.75% <5.92%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
pcap	44.67% <17.10%> (+0.07%)	⬆️
suricata-verify	64.90% <51.65%> (+0.05%)	⬆️
unittests	59.18% <63.10%> (-0.03%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[suricata-qa]

Information: QA ran without warnings.

Pipeline = 28117

[jufajardini]

We've decided that for 9, this is the best approach. Removing the decision-required label.

[catenacyber]

@victorjulien should I do a new rebased PR to run CI with new SV PR ?

[victorjulien]

@victorjulien should I do a new rebased PR to run CI with new SV PR ?

We can try without and see if passes :)

[victorjulien]

Merged in #14286, thanks!