This PR builds on top of prior work from:
- @lightclient at ethereum#6385

The signature malleability issue in the original PR is addressed by
reusing the consensus `compute_signing_root` mechanism to link each
hash with the transaction's underlying `chain_id` and `tx_type`.

Note that this makes the transaction hashes different from the plain
`hash_tree_root` values. This means that if the `transactions_root` MPT
is replaced with SSZ (EIP-6404), that the `transaction_hash` would need
to be tracked separately, same as for legacy RLP-based transactions.
This is mainly a cosmetic issue, not a practical one. In an SSZ tx tree,
we could simply include both the HTR as well as the perpetual tx hash.

Cryptographic analysis may be necessary to determine the amount by which
the hash collision probability is increased, if we use different hashing
algorithms for transactions. On the other hand, using different algo for
SSZ transactions reduces the impact of a custom network defining 0x05 as
a RLP transaction that might serialize same as the blob SSZ transaction.

Co-authored-by: g11tech <develop@g11tech.io>