Update dependencies

[getong]

Update dependencies:

• rand to 0.9
• bitcoin_hashes to 0.16
• getrandom to 0.3

[apoelstra]

I guess we can move to rand 0.9 now that our MSRV is 1.63.0.

Can you update the lockfiles included in this crate? You can run ./contrib/update-lock-files.sh to do so.

[getong]

I guess we can move to rand 0.9 now that our MSRV is 1.63.0.

Can you update the lockfiles included in this crate? You can run ./contrib/update-lock-files.sh to do so.

done

[apoelstra]

Thanks! Can you also update the getrandom dep to 0.3? As written this results in two versions of getrandom (and two versions of some of its wasm-related deps).

Finally, can I ask that you break this into three commits:

• Update hashes
• Update getrandom
• Update rand

So that we can see the lockfile changes for each one?

[getong]

Thanks! Can you also update the getrandom dep to 0.3? As written this results in two versions of getrandom (and two versions of some of its wasm-related deps).

Finally, can I ask that you break this into three commits:

• Update hashes
• Update getrandom
• Update rand

So that we can see the lockfile changes for each one?

done

[tcharding]

I edited your PR description and title, hope you don't mind.

[tcharding]

I can investigate your CI fail later on today if you like. I'm surprised to see it with these small changes.

[tcharding]

Oh there are re-names that need doing in the docs e.g., thread_rng was renamed to rng.

[Kixunil]

I believe the last commit needs to be merged with the one updating rand.

[Kixunil]

I don't object to his but long term it'd be cool to propagate the feature.

[getong]

getong#1

In this github ci , only two failed, but it does not matter with this repo code.

[Kixunil]

@getong we have additional policy that each commit separately must pass tests. This is (currently) not checked by Github but @apoelstra has his own CI where he tests it.

[apoelstra]

The WASM error I think isn't related to this, but the other CI failure is because you're enabling the std feature of getrandom. I don't think we need this so it's ok to unconditionally disable it.

[getong]

The WASM error I think isn't related to this, but the other CI failure is because you're enabling the std feature of getrandom. I don't think we need this so it's ok to unconditionally disable it.

I try to add std feature to getrandom, but ci test still failed. So I delete std feature of getrandom.

[apoelstra]

Unfortunately you need to explicitly disable it with default-features = false.