Depend on LGPL builds of libarchive>=3.8

[jjerphan]

Description

As a way to test:

• Rebuild for libarchive 3.8 - 1.x conda-forge/mamba-feedstock#319
• Rebuild for libarchive 3.8 -- prerelease conda-forge/mamba-feedstock#320
• Rebuild for libarchive 3.8 -- 2.2 conda-forge/mamba-feedstock#322

Type of Change

• Bugfix
• Feature / enhancement
• CI / Documentation
• Maintenance

Checklist

• My code follows the general style and conventions of the codebase, ensuring consistency
• I have performed a self-review of my code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have run pre-commit run --all locally in the source folder and confirmed that there are no linter errors.
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing tests pass locally with my changes

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 63.58%. Comparing base (f771e52) to head (bff3a99).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3982   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   63.58%   63.58%           
=======================================
  Files         300      300           
  Lines       38200    38200           
  Branches     2853     2852    -1     
=======================================
+ Hits        24288    24289    +1     
+ Misses      13845    13844    -1     
  Partials       67       67           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[jjerphan]

I am unsure about merging this PR, but if all the tests here pass, we can merge the ones on the feedstock.

What do you think?

[JohanMabille]

We should merge it to keep the feedstock and the dev environments consistent.