Ensure proving backend(s) <> Nargo installed is compatible

[Savio-Sou]

Problems

Ambiguous incompatibility error message

When users attempt to use Nargo with an incompatible version of proving backend (incompatibility due to an outdated local install for example), they would currently be prompted with:

% nargo info
Error: The backend encountered an error

Location:
    tooling/nargo_cli/src/cli/mod.rs:90:5

which is unclear to the user where the problem lies.

Regression on requiring extra steps for updating Nargo

Users that have an incompatible version of proving backend installed (which could currently happen even if it's the default proving backend installed by an old version of Nargo) would have to go through these extra manual steps to uninstall and reinstall a compatible version of the proving backend.

Happy Case

Nargo should check the version of the proving backend installed for compatibility:

1. If it is compatible, proceed as usual;

2. If it is incompatible, Nargo should attempt fetching and reinstalling a compatible version of the proving backend through the installation link provided when the proving backend was first installed;

   1. If no compatible version could be found / downloaded, Nargo should prompt the user with a more descriptive error, e.g.:

      Error: The proving backend installed on this machine is incompatible with the version of Nargo in use. Please install a version of Nargo compatible with the proving backend installed, or vice versa.
      

Question: When should that check happen?

Alternatives Considered

noirup wipes all proving backends locally installed when users install a new version of Nargo through it, so Nargo would at least automatically fetch a compatible version of the default proving backend.

Less ideal in terms of e.g. unnecessary redownloads and reinstallations, but if it's a faster solution we should tackle it this way first.

Additional Context

### Happy case is blocked by
- [ ] https://github.com/AztecProtocol/aztec-packages/issues/2312

Would you like to submit a PR for this Issue?

No

Support Needs

Not sure how but would love to break this down into smaller sub-issues. Suggestions welcome!

cc @kevaundray @TomAFrench