fixes gh-1905 actualise building_from_source.rst

[Onvember]

fixes #1905
fixes #1757
fixes #1780
Fixes #1702
Fixes #1640

These changes are based on @Totktonada's comments to #1879, https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/blob/master/README.MacOSX,
https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/blob/master/README.FreeBSD,
https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/blob/master/static-build/README.md

See the result on our test server: https://tarantool-develop.herokuapp.com/en/doc/gh-1905/dev_guide/building_from_source/

[Totktonada]

(The link to the test server gives me infinite redirect after authorization.)

To be honest, this page scaries me. (My feeling: should I read all this text just to build tarantool?!)

Can we split it to sections?

• A short 'common path to build & test'. Not much text, mostly commands. (I would also think how to better visualize OS specific steps to ease skipping of unrelated parts. Subsections?)
• Recipes: 'How to clean up the repo?', 'How to build tarantoolctl?', 'How to install tarantool?', 'How to set a build type?', 'How to build a package?' and so on.
• Troubleshooting (I'll not look to the section if everything goes fine).

I see, a lot of work is performed to actualize the instructions.

However there are notes and recipes that does not look actual (or it is unclear whether the problem still actual, it is not clear where it may appear). When we need to install PyYAML from sources (especially 3.10, which is very old)? On which OSes we need to install openssl111 (if it is for FreeBSD, then FreeBSD 12 and 13 already have 1.1.1 version in the openssl package).

Maybe it is good time to get rid of old troubleshooting recipes. New ones should be accompanied with a clear description of the problem and should bring all necessary context.

[Onvember]

The new version is based on @Totktonada suggestions and recommendations. I managed to check all these instructions, except FreeBSD. I found two bugs while building (tarantool/tarantool#5959 and tarantool/tarantool#5955).

[Totktonada]

Aside of several small comments the PR is okay for me. I think it is nice simplification of the document structure.

I think there is no need to review it again with me if there are no questions or doubts regarding my comments.