13911 | Add ignoring of RuntimeWarning of aer in GenericBackendV2 test

[LeanderCS]

Summary

Because the aer isn't available on all envs, the test logs get flooded with sometimes meaningless DeprecationWarnings.

This PR adds that the affected class's error gets ignored in the tests.

Fixes #13911

[qiskit-bot]

Thank you for opening a new pull request.

Before your PR can be merged it will first need to pass continuous integration tests and be reviewed. Sometimes the review process can be slow, so please be patient.

While you're waiting, please feel free to review other open PRs. While only a subset of people are authorized to approve pull requests for merging, everyone is encouraged to review open pull requests. Doing reviews helps reduce the burden on the core team and helps make the project's code better for everyone.

One or more of the following people are relevant to this code:

• @Qiskit/terra-core

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 13530727959

Details

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• 4 unchanged lines in 1 file lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.007%) to 87.983%

---

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
crates/qasm2/src/lex.rs	4	92.98%

Totals
Change from base Build 13512719904:	0.007%
Covered Lines:	77510
Relevant Lines:	88097

---

💛 - Coveralls

[ElePT]

Hi LeanderCS, thanks for your contribution. If you read the issue carefully, you will notice that the proposed course of action is not stopping the issue of warnings inside the GenericBackendV2 class, but modifying the base test configuration to filter the warnings only during our unit test process. If you'd like to contribute to that, please revert the current change and apply the filter in the unit test base class.

[LeanderCS]

@ElePT Do I understand it correctly, that you want the ignoring to be added inside of test/utils/base.py?

Why would the ignoring in the affected test be not suitable?

[ElePT]

My bad, I read the changes too quickly and assumed the filter was in the class not the test, so my previous comment didn't fully make sense. Let me clarify: the approach was not incorrect, but because the generic backend is widely used in other unit tests (and those were the ones causing the flooding of the logs), it's more efficient to have the filter in the base test class. LGTM, and thanks again.