pkg/pillar: bump eve-libs to pick up SFTP scheme-qualified host fix

[milan-zededa]

Description

Bump the pkg/pillar eve-libs dependency to include
lf-edge/eve-libs#90 (and update the vendor folder accordingly via
go mod tidy && go mod vendor).

That fix makes getSftpClient accept a scheme-qualified host
(sftp://host:port) in addition to the bare host:port form. Since
#5588, EVE's datastore Fqdn is always scheme-qualified for every
datastore type, including SFTP, which broke getSftpClient's naive
strings.Split(host, ":") assumption: the first element became the
literal scheme sftp instead of the real host, so SFTP downloads
failed with:

sftpclient failed for sftp://my-server:22: lookup sftp on 127.0.0.1:53: no such host

PR dependencies

None.

How to test and validate this PR

1. Configure an SFTP datastore (sftp://<host>:<port>) and an image
   that downloads from it.
2. Before this change, the download fails immediately with a DNS
   lookup error on the literal sftp scheme (see log snippet above).
3. After this change, the download proceeds normally and resolves the
   real host.

Covered by evetest TestSFTPDatastore.

Changelog notes

Fixed SFTP datastore downloads, which were failing because the
scheme-qualified datastore URL was being misparsed as the hostname.

PR Backports

• 17.0-stable: To be backported (has the scheme-qualified Fqdn change from pillar: make URL joins use url.JoinPath #5588).
• 16.0-stable: To be backported (has the scheme-qualified Fqdn change from pillar: make URL joins use url.JoinPath #5588).
• 14.5-stable: To be backported (has the scheme-qualified Fqdn change from pillar: make URL joins use url.JoinPath #5588).
• 13.4-stable: No, predates pillar: make URL joins use url.JoinPath #5588 so SFTP datastores there are unaffected.

Checklist

• I've provided a proper description
• I've added the proper documentation
• I've tested my PR on amd64 device
• I've tested my PR on arm64 device
• I've written the test verification instructions
• I've set the proper labels to this PR
• I've checked the boxes above, or I've provided a good reason why I didn't check them.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 24.66%. Comparing base (52bbeae) to head (47a324e).
⚠️ Report is 9 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6294      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   24.31%   24.66%   +0.35%     
==========================================
  Files         512      522      +10     
  Lines       93853    95569    +1716     
==========================================
+ Hits        22817    23570     +753     
- Misses      69221    70002     +781     
- Partials     1815     1997     +182     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[eriknordmark]

LGTM