Rebuild for PyPy3.9: FAILS on PyO3 version - WON"T FIX

[regro-cf-autotick-bot]

This PR has been triggered in an effort to update pypy38.

Notes and instructions for merging this PR:

1. Please merge the PR only after the tests have passed.
2. Feel free to push to the bot's branch to update this PR if needed.

Please note that if you close this PR we presume that the feedstock has been rebuilt, so if you are going to perform the rebuild yourself don't close this PR until the your rebuild has been merged.

---

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/7910831323, please use this URL for debugging.}

[conda-forge-webservices]

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) and found it was in an excellent condition.

[MementoRC]

@carterbox I seem to need to update the version of PyO3 in order to build for PYPY
Well, this version would require to patch the library itself. Psted and issue:
polkascan/py-bip39-bindings#16

[carterbox]

Does upstream officially support pypy? It doesn't look like you have any passing builds with pypy here.

[MementoRC]

No, upstream does not support PYPY

Does upstream officially support pypy? It doesn't look like you have any passing builds with pypy here.

Right, the source would need to be patched replacing the ValueError with a different error handling. I have these patches ready, but it seems to be crossing the line, just for a pypy support that noone is having currently with the Pypi package anyway. Just wanted your input, I can make this PR pass, but at the cost of patching the core of upstream

Also, I read in the doc that I should never close these PRs, did I understand correctly?

[carterbox]

If upstream doesn't support PYPY, then don't try to publish a pypy version of this package.

• Convert this PR to a draft
• Leave a note stating that upstream doesn't support PYPY
• Label the PR as wontfix or something
• Leave the PR open indefinitely; whomever started the migration may or may not come along to see why it stalled. They can then choose to work on the migration or not.

[MementoRC]

If upstream doesn't support PYPY, then don't try to publish a pypy version of this package.

• Convert this PR to a draft
• Leave a note stating that upstream doesn't support PYPY
• Label the PR as wontfix or something
• Leave the PR open indefinitely; whomever started the migration may or may not come along to see why it stalled. They can then choose to work on the migration or not.

This PR fails to build due to PyO3 v0.11.1not defining PyUnicode_AsUTF8AndSize (requires >0.15.2). WIth that version, the upstream code fails due to deprecated error handling