remove numa configure option from hwloc 2+

[Flamefire]

(created using eb --new-pr)

Continuation of #19085 for the other 2.x ECs to avoid the configure warning (in preparation to turn it into an error)

[Flamefire]

Test report by @Flamefire
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 5 out of 5 (5 easyconfigs in total)
n1577 - Linux RHEL 8.7 (Ootpa), x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8470 (icelake), Python 3.8.13
See https://gist.github.com/Flamefire/414b32f359f0a7580b70ef43771bd2e8 for a full test report.

[Flamefire]

Test report by @Flamefire
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
n1577 - Linux RHEL 8.7 (Ootpa), x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8470 (icelake), Python 3.8.13
See https://gist.github.com/Flamefire/09fc16cd86e8b02dd6b5adde353135f3 for a full test report.

[Micket]

lgtm

[Micket]

@boegelbot please test @ generoso
EB_ARGS="hwloc-2.4.1-GCCcore-10.3.0.eb"

[boegelbot]

@Micket: Request for testing this PR well received on login1

PR test command 'EB_PR=19833 EB_ARGS="hwloc-2.4.1-GCCcore-10.3.0.eb" EB_CONTAINER= EB_REPO=easybuild-easyconfigs /opt/software/slurm/bin/sbatch --job-name test_PR_19833 --ntasks=4 ~/boegelbot/eb_from_pr_upload_generoso.sh' executed!

• exit code: 0
• output:

Submitted batch job 12881

Test results coming soon (I hope)...

- notification for comment with ID 1943444572 processed

Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me,
it is of no use to you (unless you think I have a bug, which I don't).

[boegelbot]

Test report by @boegelbot
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 1 out of 1 (1 easyconfigs in total)
cns1 - Linux Rocky Linux 8.9, x86_64, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2667 v3 @ 3.20GHz (haswell), Python 3.6.8
See https://gist.github.com/boegelbot/8f9c0b56d42d7a6d576c6400fd0bdd64 for a full test report.

[Micket]

Going in, thanks @Flamefire!