Bump build number to force upload

[gqmelo]

It seems another package was uploaded with build number 1 with a different label:

From https://anaconda.org/conda-forge/gdb/files

conda | 4.8 MB | \|                              osx-64/gdb-9.2-py37h1339c39_1.tar.bz2 | 7 hours and 35 minutes ago | cf-staging | 0 | testing
  | conda | 4.8 MB | \|                              osx-64/gdb-9.2-py36h6b2b209_1.tar.bz2 | 7 hours and 36 minutes ago | cf-staging | 0 | testing
  | conda | 4.8 MB | \|                              osx-64/gdb-9.2-py38h73464fe_1.tar.bz2 | 7 hours and 36 minutes ago | cf-staging | 0 | testing
  | conda | 5.5 MB | \|                              linux-64/gdb-9.2-py38h4e60b95_1.tar.bz2 | 7 hours and 41 minutes ago | cf-staging | 0 | testing
  | conda | 5.5 MB | \|                              linux-64/gdb-9.2-py36ha856720_1.tar.bz2 | 7 hours and 42 minutes ago | cf-staging | 0 | testing
  | conda | 5.6 MB | \|                              linux-64/gdb-9.2-py37h7d4168f_1.tar.bz2 | 7 hours and 42 minutes ago | cf-staging | 0 |  

This seems to be preventing the version on master to be uploaded.

Checklist

• [ ] Used a fork of the feedstock to propose changes
• [ ] Bumped the build number (if the version is unchanged)
• [ ] Reset the build number to 0 (if the version changed)
• [ ] Re-rendered with the latest conda-smithy (Use the phrase code>@<space/conda-forge-admin, please rerender in a comment in this PR for automated rerendering)
• [ ] Ensured the license file is being packaged.

[conda-forge-linter]

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.

[phil-blain]

@gqmelo yes I pushed my changes in #23, along with 44e2e3b to the testing branch, to publish a macOS package to the testing label (to do manual tests before a final reviw of #23 ) (this was the approach suggested by @isuruf as I wrote in #26). I did not know that packages needed different build number even if they are in different labels... I guess it makes sense.

Sorry for the trouble!

[gqmelo]

No worries. I was not sure about this behaviour either. But it makes sense now, because i believe all packages are uploaded to the same place, so there can't be duplicates. Labels are just a way to filter some packages out, but someone with the proper permissions could remove and add labels after the upload (adding the main label to those testing packages for example).

I think that bumping the build number to a ridiculously high value like you suggested works fine.