FATES API35 parameter file update

[glemieux]

Description of changes

This updates the default FATES parameter file and should be coordinated with NGEET/fates#1128. The fates externals tag updates also brings with it a number of fates scientific updates and bug fixes since tag sci.1.72.2_api.34.0.0.

This PR also cleans up the expected failures list to remove out-of-date cheyenne fates testmods. It also adds a new test that is expected to fail per #2423.

Finally, it adds build namelist code to make fates hydro and sp mode incompatible for the time being.

Specific notes

Contributors other than yourself, if any: @rgknox

CTSM Issues Fixed (include github issue #):
Fixes #2478

Are answers expected to change (and if so in what way)? Yes, but only for fates. One new expected failure for aux_clm that has been added.

Any User Interface Changes (namelist or namelist defaults changes)? new fates parameter file, check for a failure condition

Testing performed, if any: standard FATES testing

[glemieux]

To do list on top of the usual list:

• add fates hydro + sp failure mode unit test
• test fates hydro + sp failure mode

[glemieux]

Running build-namelist_test.pl to fail test the new fates namelist graceful failures passed test successfully.

[glemieux]

Regression testing is complete and show all expected tests pass B4B on derecho with one exception. SMS.f10_f10_mg37.I2000Clm50BgcCrop.derecho_nvhpc.clm-cro failed during the MODEL_BUILD step. All fates diffs are expected due to science updates.

Results: /glade/u/home/glemieux/scratch/ctsm-tests/tests_pr2436-aux_clm-final

Regression testing on izumi shows all expected tests are B4B. The only DIFFs are the fates tests which are as expected.

Results: /home/glemieux/scratch/ctsm-tests/tests_pr2436-aux_clm

[ekluzek]

@glemieux on the failing test. The clm60 version is marked as failing as well. And it looks like there's a copied version of it. So it probably just needs to have both the clm50 and clm60 version in expected fails. So this looks fine to me. Thanks for pointing it out.

[ekluzek]

Good to bring this in. The CTSM side changes are small, so not a lot to say. There's some small things I noticed in terms of comments for the testlist and Expected fails. Since, @glemieux is out and it's simple I'll do that.

Thanks for doing the testing @glemieux.