numpy v2.4.4

[regro-cf-autotick-bot]

It is very likely that the current package version for this feedstock is out of date.

Checklist before merging this PR:

• Dependencies have been updated if changed: see upstream
• Tests have passed
• Updated license if changed and license_file is packaged

Information about this PR:

1. Feel free to push to the bot's branch to update this PR if needed.
2. The bot will almost always only open one PR per version.
3. The bot will stop issuing PRs if more than 3 version bump PRs generated by the bot are open. If you don't want to package a particular version please close the PR.
4. If you want these PRs to be merged automatically, make an issue with @conda-forge-admin,please add bot automerge in the title and merge the resulting PR. This command will add our bot automerge feature to your feedstock.
5. If this PR was opened in error or needs to be updated please add the bot-rerun label to this PR. The bot will close this PR and schedule another one. If you do not have permissions to add this label, you can use the phrase @conda-forge-admin, please rerun bot in a PR comment to have the conda-forge-admin add it for you.

_{This PR was created by the regro-cf-autotick-bot. The regro-cf-autotick-bot is a service to automatically track the dependency graph, migrate packages, and propose package version updates for conda-forge. Feel free to drop us a line if there are any issues! This PR was generated by https://github.com/regro/cf-scripts/actions/runs/23712971416 - please use this URL for debugging.}

[conda-forge-admin]

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe/recipe.yaml) and found it was in an excellent condition.

[cbrnr]

Looks like the failures could be due to BLAS/LAPACK - does anyone know if the findings from #377 would help get this fixed?

[h-vetinari]

The analysis from #377 doesn't really help; one potential source of divergence is that we're on a different openblas version (0.3.32 now vs. 0.3.30 in #377; though actually 0.3.33 should already be getting pulled in).

The failures can be pretty substantial:

 │ E       First 5 mismatches are at indices:
 │ E        [0, 0, 0, 0]: 0.0 (ACTUAL), 1.0 (DESIRED)
 │ E        [0, 0, 0, 1]: 1.875 (ACTUAL), 0.0 (DESIRED)
 │ E        [0, 0, 1, 0]: 1.875 (ACTUAL), 0.0 (DESIRED)
 │ E        [0, 0, 1, 1]: 0.0 (ACTUAL), 1.0 (DESIRED)
 │ E        [0, 0, 2, 2]: 14660154687488.0 (ACTUAL), 1.0 (DESIRED)             !!!!
 │ E       Max absolute difference among violations: 1.46601547e+13
 │ E       Max relative difference among violations: 1.46601547e+13

[cbrnr]

Looks like tests are passing now. So the solution was to bump the BLAS/LAPACK versions? Or the switch to native ARM builds?

[h-vetinari]

It looks like openblas 0.3.32 had some regressions; 0.3.30 and 0.3.33 are fine it appears.