Using external / imported python extension module DSOs with py_test, py_binary

# 🚀 feature request

### Relevant Rules

This describes a modifcation to the `py_executable`-based rules and intersects with

- `py_test`
- `py_binary`
- `py_library`
- `cc_import` / `cc_library`

### Description

When a `py_test` depends on a python extension module that was not built within bazel, the `DT_NEEDED` entries cannot be resolved in a hermetic environment because the imported extension module (DSO) will be missing or have an incorrect runpath / rpath.

I believe this is substantially different from #2562 such that it warrants its own feature request.

I've provided a minimal test case here: https://github.com/wade-arista/bazel-demo/tree/min-py-ext-case#overview where it _simulates_ the external dynamic libs by using `chrpath` to remove RPATH and then re-imports the built libs. I also brought it up [on slack](https://bazelbuild.slack.com/archives/CA306CEV6/p1737601588845769).

### Describe the solution you'd like

Given some new `py_xxx` argument or `--@rules_python//python/config_settings` flag, we would inspect `cc_info.linking_context.linker_inputs.to_list()` from inside [`_create_run_environment_info()`](https://github.com/bazelbuild/rules_python/blob/466da1d9710289bfb01061b9be7bb124132996e0/python/private/py_executable.bzl#L1707) and inject / extend `LD_LIBRARY_PATH` in the `RunEnvironmentInfo.environment` with the path(s) to the dependent dynamic libraries (see the "Sample Patch" below for details).

Sample Patch

```python
diff --git a/python/private/py_executable.bzl b/python/private/py_executable.bzl
index da7127e0..1247b445 100644
--- a/python/private/py_executable.bzl
+++ b/python/private/py_executable.bzl
@@ -1628,7 +1628,7 @@ def _create_providers(
),
),
create_instrumented_files_info(ctx),
- _create_run_environment_info(ctx, inherited_environment),
+ _create_run_environment_info(ctx, inherited_environment, cc_info),
PyExecutableInfo(
main = main_py,
runfiles_without_exe = runfiles_details.runfiles_without_exe,
@@ -1701,8 +1701,9 @@ def _create_providers(
providers.extend(extra_providers)
return providers

-def _create_run_environment_info(ctx, inherited_environment):
+def _create_run_environment_info(ctx, inherited_environment, cc_info):
expanded_env = {}
+ ld_library_path = {}
for key, value in ctx.attr.env.items():
expanded_env[key] = _py_builtins.expand_location_and_make_variables(
ctx = ctx,
@@ -1710,6 +1711,21 @@ def _create_run_environment_info(ctx, inherited_environment):
expression = value,
targets = ctx.attr.data,
)
+
+ for inp in cc_info.linking_context.linker_inputs.to_list():
+ for lib in inp.libraries:
+ dl = lib.dynamic_library
+ if not dl:
+ continue
+ lib_path = dl.short_path.removesuffix(dl.basename).rstrip("/")
+ ld_library_path[lib_path] = True
+
+ if ld_library_path:
+ parts = []
+ parts += [expanded_env["LD_LIBRARY_PATH"]] if "LD_LIBRARY_PATH" in expanded_env else []
+ parts += sorted(ld_library_path.keys())
+ expanded_env["LD_LIBRARY_PATH"] = ":".join(parts)
+
return RunEnvironmentInfo(
environment = expanded_env,
inherited_environment = inherited_environment,
```

### Describe alternatives you've considered

1. I think this would also be doable using a wrapper-generating rule, but it's not super clear to me how well it would interact with the existing sh / python wrapper script for py executable rules.
2. Instead of setting `RunEnvironmentInfo.environment`, this could be added to the existing wrapper (shell or python depending on `bootstrap_impl`).

Bắt đầu với python/private/py_executable.bzl, đặc biệt là _create_run_environment_info(), và tái hiện trường hợp kiểm thử tối thiểu được liên kết trong issue. Theo dõi cách py_test và py_binary xử lý cc_info và các DSO của phần mở rộng bên ngoài; hoàn thành có nghĩa là các thư viện DT_NEEDED của chúng được phân giải trong một môi trường hermetic mà không có runpath sai hoặc bị thiếu.

Do mô hình lập chỉ mục viết ra từ nội dung của issue.