Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

backport: bitcoin#22815, #22822, #23711, #23720, #23797, #23864, #23912, #23926, #23954, #23973 #6602

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Mar 18, 2025
Merged

backport: bitcoin#22815, #22822, #23711, #23720, #23797, #23864, #23912, #23926, #23954, #23973 #6602

merged 11 commits into from
Mar 18, 2025

Conversation

knst
Copy link
Collaborator

@knst knst commented Feb 27, 2025

What was done?

Just regular backports from Bitcoin Core v23

How Has This Been Tested?

Run unit / functional tests

doc/multisig-tutorial.md is dashified but not actually tested.

Breaking Changes

N/A

Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have assigned this pull request to a milestone (for repository code-owners and collaborators only)

MarcoFalke and others added 11 commits February 27, 2025 22:34
@knst
Merge bitcoin#23912: Insert and bump copyright headers
b66b56c 
1362d61 scripted-diff: Insert missed copyright headers (Hennadii Stepanov)
f47dda2 scripted-diff: Bump copyright headers (Hennadii Stepanov)
c29105e script: Fix copyright_header.py (Hennadii Stepanov)

Pull request description:

  This PR is an alternative to bitcoin#23903.

  It bumps the existing copyright headers as we did every year, and adds the missed copyright headers.

  A small fix has been applied to the `copyright_header.py` in order to prevent such weird bumping as `2021` --> `2021-2017`.

ACKs for top commit:
  MarcoFalke:
    ACK 1362d61

Tree-SHA512: 204d970fe8c51546b26b8f03fe4297db8a9bef5101df851540b7b9eddbd3a09677ee81fdd882c60937d732407f42c9883165bd978272200cff8f90190f075905
@knst
Merge bitcoin#23720: test: Refactor addr_relay.py addr generation, in…
72aa199 
…crease mocktime

261dddb test: Combine addr generation helper functions (Martin Zumsande)
aeeccd9 test: Fix intermittent issue in p2p_addr_relay.py (Martin Zumsande)

Pull request description:

  Fixes bitcoin#22449 by increasing the mocktime jump (just as in bitcoin@6168eb0), which prevents failures due to rare Poisson timer events, or at least makes them a lot more unlikely.

  The second commit combines the addr generation helper functions `setup_addr_msg` and `setup_rand_addr_msg`. It also changes the way `addr.time` is filled to random, because before, if too many addresses (>600) were created in a batch, they would stop being relayed because their timestamp would be too far in the future.

ACKs for top commit:
  josibake:
    reACK bitcoin@261dddb
  jnewbery:
    utACK 261dddb

Tree-SHA512: d0eca887de4bc85092730284cf612193d2c12b0a3d624a2bfa5fef4a5890d3b6375c564333c5927425958e4b6ec86b8854b18b2233c7b6f1691d9ddc397948a9
@knst
Merge bitcoin#23711: docs: RBF policy and mempool limit exemptions
a938914 
82858ba [doc] CPFP carve out and single-conflict RBF exemption (glozow)
1fd49eb [doc] clarify RBF difference from BIP125 (glozow)
919ae8b [doc] current rbf policy (glozow)

Pull request description:

  Since RBF was first implemented and BIP125 was written, our code has changed, people have highlighted implementation differences, and some people have proposed further changes to it. Many people seem to support the idea of documenting our _current_ RBF policy as it stands today.

  As the ancestor/descendant limit carve-out exemptions are very related to RBF, it seemed appropriate to group them with this PR.

  Related to bitcoin#22806 - it seems that these policies are the most confusing for people, or at least the most documentation-requested.

ACKs for top commit:
  dunxen:
    ACK 82858ba
  t-bast:
    ACK bitcoin@82858ba, thanks @glozow!
  darosior:
    re-ACK 82858ba
  ariard:
    ACK 82858ba

Tree-SHA512: 5d296537cce3488c18179c0aa76c739ca02fdc424e5aa17129b4cdd0d057358f86bcc1e92a9857bd2c60495f834fe9d9406d1a9f8ac5cfc8f0f4f4c27ec4f8e1
@knst
fix: removed mentioning of RBF from bips list to follow-up bitcoin#23711
6d3028b
@knst
Merge bitcoin#23797: ci: Use Cirrus "greedy" flag to use idle CPU tim…
01f3cd6 
…e when available

cfeb194 ci: Use Cirrus "greedy" flag to use idle CPU time when available (Luke Dashjr)

Pull request description:

  Disabled for MSan to avoid excessive RAM usage

Top commit has no ACKs.

Tree-SHA512: 4351d477b8749b3578a1f808ba7e963a44e0a4a1b695605b473ab3cf424d75ade6e13e7401a39675843e7c9b48a3e46936909d6bcc4af1f7abe1b690fe5b7a55
@knst
Merge bitcoin#23864: doc: Drop outdated note
53a1a6a 
94a7f09 doc: Drop outdated note (Hennadii Stepanov)

Pull request description:

  It is outdated since bitcoin#23060.

ACKs for top commit:
  MarcoFalke:
    cr ACK 94a7f09
  theStack:
    Code-review ACK 94a7f09

Tree-SHA512: 5a98cf39c3939845d1abb64cb62dbb9bdb1135aa07a5cd0d85de7b6a6d9a3397b0e5da06cdb89991aac31151cb3c0d38eacf4898c53014cb7f7600e992230f87
@knst
Merge bitcoin#23926: rpc: Quote user supplied descriptor in error msg
adbe553 
fa4c599 rpc: Quote user supplied descriptor in error msg (MarcoFalke)

Pull request description:

  Follow-up to commit fa24a3d

  Forgotten in bitcoin#23755

ACKs for top commit:
  hebasto:
    ACK fa4c599, tested locally.
  prayank23:
    tACK bitcoin@fa4c599

Tree-SHA512: bff07bfe95644c94eeb1d27579bf9ffe33df5e709bf6e08cd24f9235f9348dc271ccc868724bcda63b94179bde55625b102cf0b783fad805d0055219743e8e5e
@knst
Merge bitcoin#23954: doc: remove CC_FOR_BUILD from OpenBSD build doc
1489f80 
62c173a doc: remove CC_FOR_BUILD from OpenBSD build doc (fanquake)

Pull request description:

  This is no-longer necessary after upstream libsecp256k1 changes that have been pulled into our repo.

ACKs for top commit:
  theStack:
    ACK 62c173a

Tree-SHA512: 7c328185afec366ff49096512b2fcc3c2f2a2381875f65f5444ffacf118f9a51e4e2237daaae6b32f742a7c4c54c1fbba7cee4e1807d7c4816123f6b0e7c33c8
@knst
Merge bitcoin#23973: test: Bundle all integer sanitizer suppressions …
4f23881 
…of dependencies

fa77dc9 test: Bundle all integer sanitizer suppressions of dependencies (MarcoFalke)

Pull request description:

  And remove three that are no longer needed.
  Can be reviewed with `--color-moved=dimmed-zebra`.

  Having separate sections for out-of-tree dependencies and in-tree suppressions makes it easier to categorize while reading.

ACKs for top commit:
  fanquake:
    ACK fa77dc9

Tree-SHA512: c18ba99c54595c1a3dd066c5317bf5ed391ed7dace7435f686b4d0047d8d622f71deb646dcd3db1776c7564a721b01e27b19474b307d52ee8870a4b4d382b24e
@knst
Merge bitcoin#22815: ci: Enable the gui in the tsan build
284600a 
ec7b7d4 ci: Enable the gui in the TSan build (Hennadii Stepanov)

Pull request description:

  This PR is a reincarnation of bitcoin#19162.

ACKs for top commit:
  MarcoFalke:
    review ACK ec7b7d4

Tree-SHA512: b68a25edce546a538f0ec6e929940ad9c4ea94c9af1cabae5475bc04dd536615a9709444c2f2994b7aaa400d2375bf628b5edefb911ed2a2bedd30138d681c1d
@knst
Merge bitcoin#22822: doc: Add multisig tutorial
acfc1d8 
1ef2c03 Add multisig tutorial (lsilva01)

Pull request description:

  This PR adds a mutisig tutorial, as requested in bitcoin#21278

  Although there is already a brief explanation and a functional test about the multisig implemented in bitcoin#22067, this tutorial proposes to use the signet (instead of regtest), bringing the reader closer to a real environment and explaining some functions in more detail.

  I'm not sure if this format should be in this repository or on some wiki page. But as there is an open issue regarding this matter, that is my suggestion.

ACKs for top commit:
  Sjors:
    re-utACK 1ef2c03
  prayank23:
    ACK bitcoin@1ef2c03

Tree-SHA512: 2c3f17a8c50e554f802029dceb28ab90a77021f135b8cbd77dca3879ba1f1a0eac6bda0afb90d1ff6b8116fb0628471687d3fb77bb255ef5d8b9590b775cbce9
@knst knst added this to the 23 milestone Feb 27, 2025
UdjinM6
UdjinM6 approved these changes Mar 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK acfc1d8

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta merged commit 65d995c into dashpay:develop Mar 18, 2025
31 of 33 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 UdjinM6 approved these changes

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta Awaiting requested review from PastaPastaPasta

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
23
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@knst @UdjinM6 @PastaPastaPasta