Bump gdal-src to 3.10.0

[lnicola]

• I agree to follow the project's code of conduct.
• I added an entry to CHANGES.md if knowledge of this change could be valuable to users.

---

[lnicola]

@weiznich quick question, how do you think we should version gdal-src? Maybe 0.3.10? Because I think GDAL sometimes has breaking changes in minor bumps.

[ChristianBeilschmidt]

What is the idea behind using beta versions for gdal-src? Wouldn't it be better to use the latest stable one?

[lnicola]

I'll upgrade this to 3.10 when it comes out. I just wanted to be ready for the release and spot any potential issues.

[weiznich]

quick question, how do you think we should version gdal-src? Maybe 0.3.10? Because I think GDAL sometimes has breaking changes in minor bumps.

Crates like curl-sys and openssl-src use the build metadata part of the version for this.

That would mean we will end up with something like 0.1.1+gdal.3.10.0beta1 as version specifier.

[lnicola]

Hmm, not sure what to do about the layout tests. I can generate FILE and VSIStatBuf as opaque types, but that just kicks the problem down the road with pub type FILE = [u64; 27usize];. And there's a bunch of functions that use those, like VSIFOpen.

[lnicola]

Looking into the timespec error, it's a struct with two c_longs, that's (understandably) 16 bytes on Linux and 8 bytes on Windows. For now, we can either omit those structs or disable the layout tests.