[release/7.0] Remove VersionSuffix from servicing builds

[am11]

Backport of #83311.

Customer Impact

In servicing, we don't append version suffix to the Product Version. This centralized fix is applied to all shipping components alike. Currently, we only omit suffix in some assemblies like System.Private.CoreLib.dll but not crossgen2.dll etc.

Testing

Manual testing using ./build.sh clr+libs+packs -ci -p:OfficialBuildId=22606.5 to make sure that VersionSuffix isn't added to the Product Version of crossgen2; which is reported by crossgen2 --version.

Risk

Low.

[ghost]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-infrastructure-libraries
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

---

Backport of #83311.

Customer Impact

In servicing, we don't append version suffix to the Product Version. This centralized fix is applied to all shipping components alike. Currently, we only omit suffix in some assemblies like System.Private.CoreLib.dll but not crossgen2.dll etc.

Testing

Manual testing using ./build.sh clr+libs+packs -ci -p:OfficialBuildId=22606.5 to make sure that VersionSuffix isn't added to the Product Version of crossgen2; which is reported by crossgen2 --version.

Risk

Low.

Author:	am11
Assignees:	-
Labels:	area-Infrastructure-libraries, community-contribution
Milestone:	-

[ViktorHofer]

Currently, we only omit suffix in some assemblies like System.Private.CoreLib.dll but not crossgen2.dll etc.

Do you know why there is a behavior difference here between CoreLib and other assemblies?

In general, do you feel strongly about backporting this change? I haven't heard any customer complains yet and I wonder if we need to backport this if it's just for cosmetic reasons.

[ViktorHofer]

Any idea why VersionSuffix is even set during servicing builds? Arcade unsets it here: https://github.com/dotnet/arcade/blob/cb64095ec45ac34378a1a26db9932a3b561f9e4e/src/Microsoft.DotNet.Arcade.Sdk/tools/Version.BeforeCommonTargets.targets#L85-L90

[carlossanlop]

Discussed this with @ViktorHofer offline - If we decide to take this, we would like it to go into the May release.

[leecow]

Not a sufficient impact to address in a short-lived servicing release.