Improve Python binary scanning

[kzantow]

What would you like to be added:
Use shared libraries to determine python binary versions and remove patchlevel.h scanning.

Why is this needed:
Python binary files are not currently being detected when they reference shared libraries, because there is nothing in the binary bytes that contains the version.

Additional context:
Python binary scanning today is split up into 3 separate classifiers:

• python binary
• python binary library
• cpython source

Often the python binary library classifier finds appropriate python binary information, but this does not have any reference to the actual python executable because the binary itself is just loading the shared library. Additionally, Syft sometimes surfaces the patchlevel.h files from the cpython source, without any location of the actual binary. We need to examine the shared libraries referenced in python binaries and look up the contents of the shared library to determine the version of python installed.

This is related to: #661

[witchcraze]

Maybe, that will also useful fot ruby

Docker official image ruby:latest

# which ruby
/usr/local/bin/ruby
# ruby -v
ruby 3.2.1 (2023-02-08 revision 31819e82c8) [x86_64-linux]

# strings /usr/local/bin/ruby | grep '3\.2'
libruby.so.3.2

# ls -al /usr/local/lib/libruby*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       16 Mar  1 17:14 /usr/local/lib/libruby.so -> libruby.so.3.2.1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       16 Mar  1 17:14 /usr/local/lib/libruby.so.3.2 -> libruby.so.3.2.1
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 18327896 Mar  1 17:13 /usr/local/lib/libruby.so.3.2.1

# strings /usr/local/lib/libruby.so.3.2 | grep '3\.2\.1'
/usr/local/include/ruby-3.2.0/x86_64-linux/rb_mjit_min_header-3.2.1.h
ruby 3.2.1 (2023-02-08 revision 31819e82c8) +YJIT [x86_64-linux]
ruby 3.2.1 (2023-02-08 revision 31819e82c8) +MJIT [x86_64-linux]
ruby 3.2.1 (2023-02-08 revision 31819e82c8) [x86_64-linux]
3.2.1

related PR
#1580

[kzantow]

@witchcraze I think you're right:

# ldd /usr/local/bin/ruby 
	libruby.so.3.2 => /usr/local/lib/libruby.so.3.2 (0x00007fa8e0965000)

Do you mind opening a separate ticket for similarly improving ruby scanning?