Pretty much all library packages were renamed in the 64-bit time_t
migration to add `t64` (even on 64-bit platforms).
Instead of complicating the doc with conditional package names, suggest
installing the `-dev` packages which still have the same name, and
besides that, are the right way to go about it as they contain the
"user facing" C++ headers needed to build against Qt5.
For Fedora, devel packages are already suggested.
This affects Ubuntu 24.04 and Debian Testing.
Github-Pull: #29764
Rebased-From: a3c6a13cb2
4bfaad4eca chainparams, assumeutxo: Fix signet txoutset hash (Fabian Jahr)
a503cd0f0b chainparams, assumeutxo: Fix testnet txoutset hash (Fabian Jahr)
f6213929c5 assumeutxo: Check deserialized coins for out of range values (Fabian Jahr)
66865446a7 docs: Add release notes for #28685 (Fabian Jahr)
cb0336817e scripted-diff: Rename hash_serialized_2 to hash_serialized_3 (Fabian Jahr)
351370a1d2 coinstats: Fix hash_serialized2 calculation (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
Closes#28675
The last commit demonstrates that theStack's analysis [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28675#issuecomment-1770389468) seems to be correct. There will be more changes needed for the rest of the test suite but the `feature_assumeutxo.py` with my additional tests pass.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 4bfaad4eca
theStack:
Code-review ACK 4bfaad4eca
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 4bfaad4eca
Tree-SHA512: 2f6abc92b282f7c5da46391803cf0804d13978d191d541f2509b532c538abccd0a081e46cda23d80d47206a05fa2b5d41b7ab246e6a263db7a7461d6292116ef
03f82087f6 doc: assumeutxo prune and index notes (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
Based on recent comments on #27596.
ACKs for top commit:
pablomartin4btc:
re ACK 03f82087f6
ryanofsky:
ACK 03f82087f6. Nice changes, these seem like very helpful notes
Tree-SHA512: fe651b49f4d667400a3655899f27a96dd1eaf67cf9215fb35db5f44fb8c0313e7d541518be6791fec93392df24b909793f3886adb808e53228ed2a291165639d
1b672eb766 doc: add release note for #27460 (new `importmempool` RPC) (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR adds a missing release note for #27460.
ACKs for top commit:
glozow:
ACK 1b672eb766
Tree-SHA512: 89deadbfd6779e6eb19801c9fe7459a9876b920d44e09df102774c1eb8b3c0716462613dc99d1711eda4bd959ea61595b33f4528424ac02cf1af6cb4e5f1f0e9
5b878be742 [doc] add release note for submitpackage (glozow)
7a9bb2a2a5 [rpc] allow submitpackage to be called outside of regtest (glozow)
5b9087a9a7 [rpc] require package to be a tree in submitpackage (glozow)
e32ba1599c [txpackages] IsChildWithParentsTree() (glozow)
b4f28cc345 [doc] parent pay for child in aggregate CheckFeeRate (glozow)
Pull request description:
Permit (restricted topology) submitpackage RPC outside of regtest. Suggested in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26933#issuecomment-1510851570
This RPC should be safe but still experimental - interface may change, not all features (e.g. package RBF) are implemented, etc. If a miner wants to expose this to people, they can effectively use "package relay" before the p2p changes are implemented. However, please note **this is not package relay**; transactions submitted this way will not relay to other nodes if the feerates are below their mempool min fee. Users should put this behind some kind of rate limit or permissions.
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
ACK 5b878be742
achow101:
ACK 5b878be742
dergoegge:
Code review ACK 5b878be742
ajtowns:
ACK 5b878be742
ariard:
Code Review ACK 5b878be742. Though didn’t manually test the PR.
Tree-SHA512: 610365c0b2ffcccd55dedd1151879c82de1027e3319712bcb11d54f2467afaae4d05dca5f4b25f03354c80845fef538d3938b958174dda8b14c10670537a6524
3d420d8f28 Add instructions for headerssync-params.py to release-process.md (Pieter Wuille)
53d7d35b58 Update parameters in headerssync.cpp (Pieter Wuille)
7899402cff Add headerssync-params.py script to the repository (Pieter Wuille)
Pull request description:
Builds upon #25946, as it incorporates changes based on the selected values there.
This adds the headerssync tuning parameters optimization script from https://gist.github.com/sipa/016ae445c132cdf65a2791534dfb7ae1 to the repository, updates the parameters based on its output, and adds release process instructions for doing this update in the future.
A few considerations:
* It would be a bit cleaner to have these parameters be part of `CChainParams`, but due to the nature of the approach, it really only applies to chains with unforgeable proof-of-work, which we really can only reasonably expect from mainnet, so I think it's fine to keep them local to `headerssync.cpp`. Keeping them as compile-time evaluatable constants also has a (likely negligible) performance impact (avoiding runtime modulo operations).
* If we want to make sure the chainparams and headerssync params don't go out of date, it could be possible to run the script in CI, and and possibly even have the parameters be generated automatically at build time. I think that's overkill for how unfrequently these need to change, and running the script has non-trivial cost (~minutes in the normal python interpreter).
* A viable alternative is just leaving this out-of-repo entirely, and just do ad-hoc updating from time to time. Having it in the repo and release notes does make sure it's not forgotten, though adds a cost to contributors/maintainers who follow the process.
ACKs for top commit:
ajtowns:
reACK 3d420d8f28
Tree-SHA512: 03188301c20423c72c1cbd008ccce89b93e2898edcbeecc561b2928a0d64e9a829ab0744dc3b017c23de8b02f3c107ae31e694302d3931f4dc3540e184de1963
fa6e6a3f03 doc: Remove confusing assert linter (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The `assert()` documentation and linter are redundant and confusing:
* The source code already refuses to compile with `assert()` disabled.
* They violate the assumptions about `Assert()`, which *requires* side effects.
* The existing linter doesn't enforce the guideline, only checking for `++` and `--` side effects.
Fix all issues by removing the docs and the linter. See also https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26684#discussion_r1287370102
Going forward everyone is free to use whatever code in this regard they think is the easiest to read. Also, everyone is still free to share style-nits, if they think it is a good use of their time and of the pull request author. Finally, the author is still free to dismiss or ignore this style-nit, or any other style-nit.
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK fa6e6a3f03, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK.
theStack:
ACK fa6e6a3f03
Tree-SHA512: 686738d71e1316cc95e5d3f71869b55a02bfb137c795cc0875057f4410e564bc8eff03c985a2087b007fb08fc84551c7da1e8b30c7a9c3f2b14e5e44a5970236
