a3f61676e8 test: Make more shell scripts verifiable by the `shellcheck` tool (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
Some shell scripts from `contrib/guix` and `contrib/shell` are not verifiable by the `shellcheck` tool for the following reasons:
- they have no extension (see 4eccf063b2 from bitcoin/bitcoin#21375)
- they have the `.bash` extension while `.sh` is expected
This PR adds these scripts to the input for the `shellcheck` tool, and it fixes discovered `shellcheck` warnings.
ACKs for top commit:
dongcarl:
Code Review ACK a3f61676e8, this is a good robustness improvement for our shell scripts.
jamesob:
crACK a3f61676e8
Tree-SHA512: 6703f5369d9c04c1a174491f381afa5ec2cc4d37321c1b93615abcdde4dfd3caae82868b699c25b72132d8c8c6f2e9cf24d38eb180ed4d0f0584d8c282e58935
Fix the warning:
```
./contrib/macdeploy/gen-sdk:84: FutureWarning: GzipFile was opened for writing, but this will change in future Python releases. Specify the mode argument for opening it for writing.
```
From what I can see the only platform this drops support for is CentOS
7. CentOS 7 reached the end of it's "full update" support at the end of
2020. It does receive maintenance updates until 2024, however I don't
think supporting glibc 2.17 until 2024 is realistic. Note that anyone
wanting to self-compile and target a glibc 2.17 runtime could build with
--disable-threadlocal.
glibc 2.18 was released in August 2013.
https://sourceware.org/legacy-ml/libc-alpha/2013-08/msg00160.html
365f35481d script: Add commits signed with sipas expired key to allow-revsig-commits (nthumann)
Pull request description:
Fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22737.
While investigating the issue above, I noticed that there are 141 commits that are signed with sipas expired key.
To allow `./contrib/verify-commits/verify-commits.py` to succeed, this PR adds them to `allow-revsig-commits`.
Feel free to confirm that they're indeed signed with an expired key using e.g. `git show --show-signature d8cd7b137fb075616f31d2b43b85fa2e27ea7477` :)
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK 365f35481d
Tree-SHA512: 860e372c5314714c6c205cd234ebec89756c9ade43a2ed65ed25575ae0a0d4d8dd7cf43692a5b267abe742f87e5cba0a3f1fb76a5fed7b1615ea2859902dfcdf
29173d6c6c ubsan: add minisketch exceptions (Cory Fields)
54b5e1aeab Add thin Minisketch wrapper to pick best implementation (Pieter Wuille)
ee9dc71c1b Add basic minisketch tests (Pieter Wuille)
0659f12b13 Add minisketch dependency (Gleb Naumenko)
0eb7928ab8 Add MSVC build configuration for libminisketch (Pieter Wuille)
8bc166d5b1 build: add minisketch build file and include it (Cory Fields)
b2904ceb85 build: add configure checks for minisketch (Cory Fields)
b6487dc4ef Squashed 'src/minisketch/' content from commit 89629eb2c7 (fanquake)
Pull request description:
This takes over #21859, which has [recently switched](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21859#issuecomment-921899200) to my integration branch. A few more build issues came up (and have been fixed) since, and after discussing with sipa it was decided I would open a PR to shepherd any final changes through.
> This adds a `src/minisketch` subtree, taken from the master branch of https://github.com/sipa/minisketch, to prepare for Erlay implementation (see #21515). It gets configured for just supporting 32-bit fields (the only ones we're interested in in the context of Erlay), and some code on top is added:
> * A very basic unit test (just to make sure compilation & running works; actual correctness checking is done through minisketch's own tests).
> * A wrapper in `minisketchwrapper.{cpp,h}` that runs a benchmark to determine which field implementation to use.
Only changes since my last update to the branch in the previous PR have been rebasing on master and fixing an issue with a header in an introduced file.
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK 29173d6c6c
Tree-SHA512: 1217d3228db1dd0de12c2919314e1c3626c18a416cf6291fec99d37e34fb6eec8e28d9e9fb935f8590273b8836cbadac313a15f05b4fd9f9d3024c8ce2c80d02
An IPv6 address from fc00::/8 could be either from the CJDNS network or
from a private-unroutable-reserved segment of IPv6. A seed node with
such an address must be from the CJDNS network, otherwise other peers
will not be able to connect to it.
0f95247246 Integrate univalue into our buildsystem (Cory Fields)
9b49ed656f Squashed 'src/univalue/' changes from 98fadc0909..a44caf65fe (fanquake)
Pull request description:
This PR more tightly integrates building Univalue into our build system. This follows the same approach we use for [LevelDB](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/leveldb/), ([`Makefile.leveldb.include`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/Makefile.leveldb.include)), and [CRC32C](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/crc32c) ([`Makefile.crc32c.include`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/Makefile.crc32c.include)), and will be the same approach we use for [minisketch](https://github.com/sipa/minisketch); see #23114.
This approach yields a number of benefits, including:
* Faster configuration due to one less subconfigure being run during `./configure` i.e 22s with this PR vs 26s
* Faster autoconf i.e 13s with this PR vs 17s
* Improved caching
* No more issues with compiler flags i.e https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12467
* More direct control means we can build exactly the objects we want
There might be one argument against making this change, which is that builders should have the option to use "proper shared/system libraries". However, I think that falls down for a few reasons. The first being that we already don't support building with a number of system libraries (secp256k1, leveldb, crc32c); some for good reason. Univalue is really the odd one out at the moment.
Note that the only fork of Core I'm aware of, that actively patches in support for using system libs, also explicitly marks them as ["DANGEROUS"](a886811721/configure.ac (L1430)) and ["NOT SUPPORTED"](a886811721/configure.ac (L1312)). So it would seem they exist more to satisfy a distro requirement, as opposed to something that anyone should, or would actually use in practice.
PRs like #22412 highlight the "issue" with us operating with our own Univalue fork, where we actively fix bugs, and make improvements, when upstream (https://github.com/jgarzik/univalue) may not be taking those improvements, and by all accounts, is not currently actively maintained. Bitcoin Core should not be hamstrung into not being able to fix bugs in a library, and/or have to litter our source with "workarounds", i.e #22412, for bugs we've already fixed, based on the fact that an upstream project is not actively being maintained. Allowing builders to use system libs is really only exacerbating this problem, with little benefit to our project. Bitcoin Core is not quite like your average piece of distro packaged software.
There is the potential for us to give the same treatment to libsecp256k1, however it seems doing that is currently less straightforward.
ACKs for top commit:
dongcarl:
ACK 0f95247246 less my comment above, always nice to have an include-able `sources.mk` which makes integration easier.
theuni:
ACK 0f95247246. Thanks fanquake for keeping this going.
Tree-SHA512: a7f2e41ee7cba06ae72388638e86b264eca1b9a8b81c15d1d7b45df960c88c3b91578b4ade020f8cc61d75cf8d16914575f9a78fa4cef9c12be63504ed804b99
The tracepoint `validation:block_connected` was introduced in #22006.
The first argument was the hash of the connected block as a pointer
to a C-like String. The last argument passed the hash of the
connected block as a pointer to 32 bytes. The hash was only passed as
string to allow `bpftrace` scripts to print the hash. It was
(incorrectly) assumed that `bpftrace` cannot hex-format and print the
block hash given only the hash as bytes.
The block hash can be printed in `bpftrace` by calling
`printf("%02x")` for each byte of the hash in an `unroll () {...}`.
By starting from the last byte of the hash, it can be printed in
big-endian (the block-explorer format).
```C
$p = $hash + 31;
unroll(32) {
$b = *(uint8*)$p;
printf("%02x", $b);
$p -= 1;
}
```
See also: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22902#discussion_r705176691
This is a breaking change to the block_connected tracepoint API, however
this tracepoint has not yet been included in a release.
It is important that binaries request a standard interpreter location
where most distros would place the linker-loader. Otherwise, the user
would be met with a very confusing message:
bash: <path>/<to>/bitcoind: No such file or directory
When really it's the interpreter that's not found.
I used Guix's values for the powerpc64(le) dynamic linkers, and the
/lib-prefix seems to be a Guix-ism rather than standard. The standard
path for the linker-loaders start with /lib64.
I've taken the new loader values from SYSDEP_KNOWN_INTERPRETER_NAMES in
glibc's sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/ldconfig.h file.
For future reference, loader path values can also be found on glibc's
website: https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/ABIList?action=recall&rev=16
These test-*-check scripts should compile "test" binaries in a way that
is as close to what autotools would do, since the goal is to make sure
that if we run the *-check script, they can correctly detect flaws in
binaries which are compiled by our autotools-based system.
Therefore, we should emulate what happens when the binary is linked in
autotools, meaning that for C binaries, we need to supply the CFLAGS,
CPPFLAGS, and LDFLAGS flags in that order.
Note to future developers: perhaps it'd be nice to have these
test-*-check scripts be part of configure.ac to avoid having to manually
replicate autoconf-like behaviour every time we find a discrepancy. Of
course, that would also mean you'd have to write more m4...
This addresses issues like the one in #12467, where some of our compiler flags
end up being dropped during the subconfigure of Univalue. Specifically, we're
still using the compiler-default c++ version rather than forcing c++17.
We can drop the need subconfigure completely in favor of a tighter build
integration, where the sources are listed separately from the build recipes,
so that they may be included directly by upstream projects. This is
similar to the way leveldb build integration works in Core.
Core benefits of this approach include:
- Better caching (for ex. ccache and autoconf)
- No need for a slow subconfigure
- Faster autoconf
- No more missing compile flags
- Compile only the objects needed
There are no benefits to Univalue itself that I can think of. These changes
should be a no-op there, and to downstreams as well until they take advantage
of the new sources.mk.
This also removes the option to use an external univalue to avoid similar ABI
issues with mystery binaries.
Co-authored-by: fanquake <fanquake@gmail.com>
As the faucet will always ask for a captcha now, the current script is
no longer usable.
Change the script to print the captcha in dot-matrix to the terminal,
using unicode Braille characters.
a43b8e9555 build: set OSX_MIN_VERSION to 10.15 (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Taken out of #20744, as splitting up some of the build changes was mentioned [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22937#discussion_r707303172).
This is required to use `std::filesystem` on macOS, as support for it only landed in the libc++.dylib shipped with 10.15. So if we want to move to using `std::filesystem` for `23.0`, this bump is required.
See also: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode-release-notes/xcode-11-release-notes
> Clang now supports the C++17 \<filesystem\> library for iOS 13, macOS 10.15, watchOS 6, and tvOS 13.
macOS 10.15 was released in October 2019. macOS OS's seem to have a life of about 3 years, so it's possible that 10.14 will become officially unsupported by the end of 2021 and prior to the release of 23.0.
Guix builds:
```bash
bash-5.1# find guix-build-$(git rev-parse --short=12 HEAD)/output/ -type f -print0 | env LC_ALL=C sort -z | xargs -r0 sha256sum
abc8b749be65f1339dcdf44bd1ed6ade2533b8e3b5030ad1dde0ae0cede78136 guix-build-a43b8e955558/output/dist-archive/bitcoin-a43b8e955558.tar.gz
1edcc301eb4c02f3baa379beb8d4c78e661abc24a293813bc9d900cf7255b790 guix-build-a43b8e955558/output/x86_64-apple-darwin19/SHA256SUMS.part
e9dbb5594a664519da778dde9ed861c3f0f631525672e17a67eeda599f16ff44 guix-build-a43b8e955558/output/x86_64-apple-darwin19/bitcoin-a43b8e955558-osx-unsigned.dmg
11b23a17c630dddc7594c25625eea3de42db50f355733b9ce9ade2d8eba3a8f3 guix-build-a43b8e955558/output/x86_64-apple-darwin19/bitcoin-a43b8e955558-osx-unsigned.tar.gz
257ba64a327927f94d9aa0a68da3a2695cf880b3ed1a0113c5a966dcc426eb5e guix-build-a43b8e955558/output/x86_64-apple-darwin19/bitcoin-a43b8e955558-osx64.tar.gz
```
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK a43b8e9555
jarolrod:
ACK a43b8e9
Tree-SHA512: 9ac77be7cb56c068578860a3b2b8b7487c9e18b71b14aedd77a9c663f5d4bb19756d551770c02ddd12f1797beea5757b261588e7b67fb53509bb998ee8022369
ab9c34237a release: remove gitian (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Note that this doesn't yet touch any glibc back compat related code.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK ab9c34237a
Tree-SHA512: 8e2fe3ec1097f54bb11ab9136b43818d90eab5dbb0a663ad6a552966ada4bdb49cc12ff4e66f0ec0ec5400bda5c81f3a3ce70a9ebb6fe1e0db612da9f00a51a7
96cc6bb04f guix/prelude: Override VERSION with FORCE_VERSION (Carl Dong)
Pull request description:
```
Previously, if the builder exported $VERSION in their environment (as
past Gitian-building docs told them to), but their HEAD does not
actually point to v$VERSION, their build outputs will differ from those
of other builders.
This is because the contrib/guix/guix-* scripts only ever act on the
current git worktree, and does not try to check out $VERSION if $VERSION
is set in the environment.
Setting $VERSION only makes the scripts pretend like the current
worktree is $VERSION.
This problem was seen in jonatack's attestation for all.SHA256SUMS,
where only his bitcoin-22.0rc3-osx-signed.dmg differed from everyone
else's.
Here is my deduced sequence of events:
1. Aug 27th: He guix-builds 22.0rc3 and uploads his attestations up to
guix.sigs
2. Aug 30th, sometime after POSIX time 1630310848: he pulls the latest
changes from master in the same worktree where he guix-built 22.0rc3
and ends up at 7be143a960
3. Aug 30th, sometime before POSIX time 1630315907: With his worktree
still on 7be143a960, he guix-codesigns. Normally, this would result
in outputs going in guix-build-7be143a960e2, but he had
VERSION=22.0rc3 in his environment, so the guix-* scripts pretended
like he was building 22.0rc3, and used 22.0rc3's guix-build directory
to locate un-codesigned outputs and dump codesigned ones.
However, our SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH defaults to the POSIX time of HEAD
(7be143a960), which made all timestamps in the resulting codesigned
DMG 1630310848, 7be143a960e2's POSIX timestamp. This differs from the
POSIX timestamp of 22.0rc3, which is 1630348517. Note that the
windows codesigning procedure does not consider SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH.
We resolve this by only allowing VERSION overrides via the FORCE_VERSION
environment variable.
```
Please ignore the branch name, it's not relevant to the change.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK 96cc6bb04f - Also makes sense given there are Guix build guides recommending to set `VERSION` as part of the process. i.e https://gist.github.com/hebasto/7293726cbfcd0b58e1cfd5418316cee3.
Tree-SHA512: 9dca3fc637ce11049286a3ebee3cd61cce2125fc51d31cf472fbed7f659e1846fc44062753e0e71bfaec9e7fbab6f040bb88d9d4bc4f8acb28c6890563584acf
Previously, if the builder exported $VERSION in their environment (as
past Gitian-building docs told them to), but their HEAD does not
actually point to v$VERSION, their build outputs will differ from those
of other builders.
This is because the contrib/guix/guix-* scripts only ever act on the
current git worktree, and does not try to check out $VERSION if $VERSION
is set in the environment.
Setting $VERSION only makes the scripts pretend like the current
worktree is $VERSION.
This problem was seen in jonatack's attestation for all.SHA256SUMS,
where only his bitcoin-22.0rc3-osx-signed.dmg differed from everyone
else's.
Here is my deduced sequence of events:
1. Aug 27th: He guix-builds 22.0rc3 and uploads his attestations up to
guix.sigs
2. Aug 30th, sometime after POSIX time 1630310848: he pulls the latest
changes from master in the same worktree where he guix-built 22.0rc3
and ends up at 7be143a960
3. Aug 30th, sometime before POSIX time 1630315907: With his worktree
still on 7be143a960, he guix-codesigns. Normally, this would result
in outputs going in guix-build-7be143a960e2, but he had
VERSION=22.0rc3 in his environment, so the guix-* scripts pretended
like he was building 22.0rc3, and used 22.0rc3's guix-build directory
to locate un-codesigned outputs and dump codesigned ones.
However, our SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH defaults to the POSIX time of HEAD
(7be143a960), which made all timestamps in the resulting codesigned
DMG 1630310848, 7be143a960e2's POSIX timestamp. This differs from the
POSIX timestamp of 22.0rc3, which is 1630348517. Note that the
windows codesigning procedure does not consider SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH.
We resolve this by only allowing VERSION overrides via the FORCE_VERSION
environment variable.
42dbd9025a contrib: return non-zero status if getcoins.py errors (Sebastian Falbesoner)
8c203cf0e1 contrib: catch bitcoin-cli RPC call errors in getcoins.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
0eca5ebace contrib: refactor: introduce bitcoin-cli RPC call helper in getcoins.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR is based on #22565 ("[script] signet's getcoins.py improvements"), which should be reviewed first.
The signet faucet script `contrib/signet/getcoins.py` currently issues bitcoin-cli RPC calls without catching errors -- the only case tackled is if there is no `bitcoin-cli` file found. Instead of crashing with a stack-trace on a failed RPC call, the changes in this PR aim to produce a more user-friendly output (see also https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22565#discussion_r683754875). Additionally, in case of any error, a non-zero status is now returned (instead of 0, indicating success), which could be useful for other scripts taking use of signet faucet script.
The most straight-forward way to test this is invoking the script without a `bitcoind` running on signet:
PR22565 branch:
```
$ ./contrib/signet/getcoins.py
error: Could not connect to the server 127.0.0.1:8332
Make sure the bitcoind server is running and that you are connecting to the correct RPC port.
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./contrib/signet/getcoins.py", line 26, in <module>
curr_signet_hash = subprocess.check_output([args.cmd] + args.bitcoin_cli_args + ['getblockhash', '1']).strip().decode()
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.8/subprocess.py", line 415, in check_output
return run(*popenargs, stdout=PIPE, timeout=timeout, check=True,
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.8/subprocess.py", line 516, in run
raise CalledProcessError(retcode, process.args,
subprocess.CalledProcessError: Command '['bitcoin-cli', 'getblockhash', '1']' returned non-zero exit status 1.
```
this PR branch:
```
$ ./contrib/signet/getcoins.py
error: Could not connect to the server 127.0.0.1:38332
Make sure the bitcoind server is running and that you are connecting to the correct RPC port.
-----
Error while calling "bitcoin-cli -signet getblockhash 1" (see output above).
```
ACKs for top commit:
kallewoof:
Code ACK 42dbd9025a
Zero-1729:
tACK 42dbd90🧪
Tree-SHA512: 912240a4ed03c87035e370602f4095c7ffe26806421bbbd6cf86588126f2310a01a6a61606e9e2918fb2c1a0debdd0ce768c69ba2e4b8e7750fa3474a56d01a0
b0c8246cac Add cleaner errors for unsuccessful faucet transactions (NikhilBartwal)
1c612b274b [script] Update signet getcoins.py for custom network (NikhilBartwal)
Pull request description:
Currently, using the getcoins.py with a custom signet executes successfully and shows the transfer of 0.001 testBTC as complete, however for obvious reasons, it should not. In fact, upon verification it does not actually execute the transaction, but rather gives the output that it did, as shown below which can be misleading:
```
[nikhilb@nikhil-PC bitcoin]$ echo $datadir
/home/nikhilb/signet-custom
[nikhilb@nikhil-PC bitcoin]$ contrib/signet/getcoins.py -- -datadir=$datadir
Payment of 0.00100000 BTC sent with txid dd22c7d996e95f3e5baf20f73140d517ff48f1b26d0e4fefd61e3c37991b8f86
[nikhilb@nikhil-PC bitcoin]$ bitcoin-cli -datadir=$datadir getrawtransaction dd22c7d996e95f3e5baf20f73140d517ff48f1b26d0e4fefd61e3c37991b8f86
error code: -5
error message:
No such mempool or blockchain transaction. Use gettransaction for wallet transactions.
[nikhilb@nikhil-PC bitcoin]$ bitcoin-cli -datadir=$datadir gettransaction dd22c7d996e95f3e5baf20f73140d517ff48f1b26d0e4fefd61e3c37991b8f86
error code: -5
error message:
Invalid or non-wallet transaction id
```
This PR adds a sanity check for custom signet by comparing the current network's first block hash (the block after the genesis block) with global signet's respective block hash (since all signet networks share the same genesis block) and if a custom network is detected, the user is prompted to either work on the global signet or setup their own faucet.
The PR was checked to be working successfully, giving the output as below:
```
[nikhilb@nikhil-PC bitcoin]$ git checkout update_signet_getcoins
Switched to branch 'update_signet_getcoins'
Your branch is ahead of 'upstream/master' by 1 commit.
(use "git push" to publish your local commits)
[nikhilb@nikhil-PC bitcoin]$ contrib/signet/getcoins.py -- -datadir=$datadir
The global faucet cannot be used with a custom Signet network. Please use the global signet or setup your custom faucet for the same.
You can have a look here for setting up your own faucet: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Signet
```
ACKs for top commit:
prayank23:
utACK b0c8246cac
kallewoof:
ACK b0c8246cac
arnabsen1729:
utACK b0c8246
prakash1512:
utACK b0c8246
0xB10C:
Tested ACK b0c8246cac
theStack:
Tested ACK b0c8246cac
Zero-1729:
crACK b0c8246🧉
Tree-SHA512: 144b47a83008521a5cda13f4c1b12809a125a744f865a8e0f792132d52fdb88926d4f4f4d7230452c2e129b5879892cdbeda981b8af10b789e9fc0cda2905a5d
132cae44f2 doc: Mention the flat directory structure for uploads (Andrew Chow)
fb17c99e35 guix: Don't include directory name in SHA256SUMS (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
The SHA256SUMS file can be used in a sha256sum -c command to verify downloaded binaries. However users are likely to download just a single file and not place this file in the correct directory relative to the SHA256SUMS file for the simple verification command to work. By not including the directory name in the SHA256SUMS file, it will be easier for users to verify downloaded binaries.
ACKs for top commit:
Zero-1729:
re-ACK 132cae44f2
fanquake:
ACK 132cae44f2
Tree-SHA512: c9ff416b8dfb2f3ceaf4d63afb84aac9fcaefbbf9092f9e095061b472884ec92c7a809e6530c7132a82cfe3ab115a7328e47994a412072e1d4feb26fc502c8c5
The SHA256SUMS file can be used in a sha256sum -c command to verify
downloaded binaries. However users are likely to download just a single
file and not place this file in the correct directory relative to the
SHA256SUMS file for the simple verification command to work. By not
including the directory name in the SHA256SUMS file, it will be easier
for users to verify downloaded binaries.
Co-authored-by: Carl Dong <contact@carldong.me>
021daedfa1 refactor: replace remaining binascii method calls (Zero-1729)
Pull request description:
This PR removes the remaining `binascii` method calls outside `test/functional` and `test_framework`, as pointed out here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22619#pullrequestreview-722153458.
Follow-up to #22593 and #22619Closes#22605
ACKs for top commit:
josibake:
re-ACK 021daedfa1
theStack:
re-ACK 021daedfa1
Tree-SHA512: 2ae9fee8917112c91a5406f219ca70f24cd8902b903db5a61fc2de85ad640d669a772f5c05970be0fcee6ef1cdd32fae2ca5d1ec6dc9798b43352c8160ddde6f
5449d44e37 scripts: prevent GCC optimising test symbols in test-symbol-check (fanquake)
Pull request description:
I noticed in #22381 that when the test-symbol-check target was being built with Clang and run in the CI it would fail due to using a too-new version of `pow` (used [here](d67330d112/contrib/devtools/test-symbol-check.py (L85))). Our CIs use Focal (glibc 2.31) and the version of `pow` was the optimized version introduced in [glibc 2.29](https://lwn.net/Articles/778286/):
```bash
* Optimized generic exp, exp2, log, log2, pow, sinf, cosf, sincosf and tanf.
```
This made sense, except for that if it was failing when built using Clang, why hadn't it also been failing when being built with GCC?
Turns out GCC is optimizing away that call to `pow` at all optimization levels, including `-O0`, see: https://godbolt.org/z/53MhzMxT7, and this has been the case forever, or at least since GCC 5.x. Clang on the other hand, will only optimize away the `pow` call at `-O1` and `-O2`, not `-O0`: https://godbolt.org/z/Wbnqj3q6c. Thus when this test was built with Clang (we don't pass `-O` so we default to `-O0`) it was failing in the CI environment, because it would actually have a call to the "new" `pow`.
Avoid this issue by using a symbol that won't be optimized away, or that we are unlikely to ever have versioning issues with.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 5449d44e37
Tree-SHA512: 3a26c5c3a5f2905fd0dd90892470e241ba625c0af3be2629d06d5da3a97534c1d6a55b796bbdd41e2e6a26a8fab7d981b98c45d4238565b0eb7edf3c5da02007
7d95777417 builder-keys: Add dongcarl (Carl Dong)
Pull request description:
https://keys.openpgp.org/search?q=04017A2A6D9A0CCDC81D8EC296AB007F1A7ED999
This is my master key, will be bumping the expiration of subkeys or rotating when necessary.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK 7d95777417 - matches what I've got.
Tree-SHA512: 3a76b8eda81821b3221402501cf8191bce73118624b932aa80a7fc1a32a91e3825aeb2b03ed261bbf284b088e927c384f92e08eadddf7f94ed4de579d9f6d2b7
90b3e482e9 release: Release with separate SHA256SUMS and sig files (Carl Dong)
Pull request description:
This allows us to:
- remove the rfc4880 EOL hacks, and
- release with a SHA256SUMS.asc file that's a combination of all signer signatures
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 90b3e482e9
laanwj:
Concept and code review ACK 90b3e482e9
Tree-SHA512: 5d5086063d303aa0cbd590e5fdf2ae8f555e25f4e43bf67545e33384449b990e94834c711622530ad0eb3dcc83f52746884a5081dadb0acff8dd799cfadafac7
