Promote libtommath to SPECS

[Sumynwa]

Merge Checklist

All boxes should be checked before merging the PR (just tick any boxes which don't apply to this PR)

• [x] The toolchain has been rebuilt successfully (or no changes were made to it)
• [x] The toolchain/worker package manifests are up-to-date
• [x] Any updated packages successfully build (or no packages were changed)
• [x] Packages depending on static components modified in this PR (Golang, *-static subpackages, etc.) have had their Release tag incremented.
• [x] Package tests (%check section) have been verified with RUN_CHECK=y for existing SPEC files, or added to new SPEC files
• [x] All package sources are available
• [x] cgmanifest files are up-to-date and sorted (./cgmanifest.json, ./toolkit/tools/cgmanifest.json, ./toolkit/scripts/toolchain/cgmanifest.json, .github/workflows/cgmanifest.json)
• [x] LICENSE-MAP files are up-to-date (./SPECS/LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/data/licenses.json, ./SPECS/LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/LICENSES-MAP.md, ./SPECS/LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/LICENSE-EXCEPTIONS.PHOTON)
• [x] All source files have up-to-date hashes in the *.signatures.json files
• [x] sudo make go-tidy-all and sudo make go-test-coverage pass
• [x] Documentation has been updated to match any changes to the build system
• [x] Ready to merge

---

Summary

Promote libtommath to meet build dependency for package libtomcrypt.

Change Log

• move from SPECS-EXTENDED to SPECS
• add as build dependency for libtomcrypt
• lint spec

Does this affect the toolchain?

NO

Associated issues

• #xxxx

Links to CVEs

• https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-YYYY-XXXX

Test Methodology

• Pipeline build id: 213527

[Sumynwa]

Bumped the release version. Spec linted. Checked all parameters listed above.

[PawelWMS]

Bumped the release version. Spec linted. Checked all parameters listed above.

Thank you for doing that! I think we still need to lint the spec a bit more because I see that the Summary tag is not the first one anymore, which is standard after running the linter. I should have mentioned more details about linting the spec. Here's more details about how to configure the one we're using (just 3 short steps). That's also what the "Spec Linting" PR check is running. The linter might change a few things in the wrong way (that's why the PR check is not required btw.) but in general it's reliable and I'll help you out with anything that the linter might get wrong. We're still tweaking it a bit.

[Sumynwa]

Linted spec file using steps mentioned in https://dev.azure.com/mariner-org/mariner/_wiki/wikis/mariner.wiki/125/Introduction-to-SPEC-Files?anchor=spec-linter

Changes verified via Buddy Build: https://dev.azure.com/mariner-org/mariner/_build/results?buildId=239707&view=results