The former seemed to replace the wrong line with the copied checksum.
We now add read it from the first line and add it on top of our sums.
This expression also seems a fair bit easier to understand now.
Signed-off-by: Peter Neuroth <pet.v.ne@gmail.com>
Removing the Fedora fake as it seems to be not necessary. We later copy
the checksum from the release captains checksums anyway.
Also adding the sum check as it gives more details about which file did
not match if so.
Signed-off-by: Peter Neuroth <pet.v.ne@gmail.com>
This ensures that we have the release captains checksum file where we
expect it to be and gives a little hint where to get it if needed.
Signed-off-by: Peter Neuroth <pet.v.ne@gmail.com>
This seems to be a cut & paste bug (mine, AFAICT!) from the command code:
```
rune = rune_derive_start(cmd, master_rune,
tal_fmt(tmpctx, "%"PRIu64,
rune_counter ? *rune_counter : 0));
```
In that case, rune_counter was a pointer, which could be NULL.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
It always is for runes we create, but in theory you can take our secret key
and make our own runes with your own tools.
(We correctly refuse runes without uniqueids if they're *not* ours
anyway: uniqueid is only used for our own runes).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This was a misunderstanding: nodeid is useful for commando, where it's the
peer's nodeid, and Noise-XK guarantees that we know who that is. It's
not useful for clnrest, so don't require it (it was our node id, which
is redundant).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
nodeid is only useful when we know the peer we're talking to (e.g. commando).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
No-schema-diff-check: We're simply making optional, not deprecating!
Usage line isn't correct, as fields are not optional, and return
needs fleshing out for error codes.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We were using `number` instead of `u32` which caused it to be
serialized to string with a decimal, which then would be rejected by
lightningd.
Changelog-Fixed: proto: Fixed a wrong number type being used in routes
OpenAPI readme always includes `content-type: application/json` header, even when body parameters are empty.
But the server expects data if the content-type has been sent.
This results in a "Server Error" response for non-param requests from readme doc.
This only affects readme requests as it is designed to send the header by default.
Changelog-None
1. When we add a shadow amount, we were using the wrong channel for
the fee calculation.
2. Similarly, when calculating the delay amount.
The result is that we can get WIRE_INCORRECT_CLTV_EXPIRY repeatedly
from nodes.
Reported-by: https://github.com/SjorsFixes: #6620
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Changlog-Experimental: Fixed: `renepay` handles ctlv correctly when it varies along a path.
"id" is a magic name, so it was being populated by sqlite3
automatically, starting at 0. Fortunately, we only fetched by id in
one place: to indicate the `stored` flag when asked about an explicit
rune in `showrunes`.
Reported-by: @ShahanaFarooqui
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Changelog-Fixed: JSON-RPC: `showrunes` on a specific rune would always say `stored`: false.
```
Flow 391: amount=23528000msat prob=0.000 fees=1023msat delay=140 path=-2471854x37x4/1(min=max=23528783msat)->-2414928x98x0/0->
Flow 391: Failure of 23529023msat for 2471854x37x4/1 capacity [23528783msat,23528783msat] -> [23528783msat,23528783msat]
```
We added fees and went over capacity! This screams of a deeper logic
bug, but renepay is experimental and it's release day so hack around
it for now...
Reported-by: https://github.com/daywalker90
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Eduardo is on holiday right now, but he pinged me asking for this. It
makes some sense, and using half the *failed value* covers the case where
it's less than half what we expected.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
It now looks like (for test_hardmpp):
```
# we have computed a set of 1 flows with probability 0.328, fees 0msat and delay 23
# Flow 1: amount=1800000000msat prob=0.328 fees=0msat delay=12 path=-103x2x0/1(min=max=4294967295msat)->-103x5x0/0->-103x3x0/1->
# Flow 1: Failed at node #1 (WIRE_TEMPORARY_CHANNEL_FAILURE): failed: WIRE_TEMPORARY_CHANNEL_FAILURE (reply from remote)
# Flow 1: Failure of 1800000000msat for 103x5x0/0 capacity [0msat,3000000000msat] -> [0msat,1799999999msat]
# we have computed a set of 2 flows with probability 0.115, fees 0msat and delay 23
# Flow 2: amount=500000000msat prob=0.475 fees=0msat delay=12 path=-103x6x0/0(min=max=4294967295msat)->-103x1x0/1->-103x4x0/1->
# Flow 3: amount=1300000000msat prob=0.242 fees=0msat delay=12 path=-103x2x0/1(min=max=4294967295msat)->-103x5x0/0(max=1799999999msat)->-103x3x0/1->
# Flow 3: Failed at node #1 (WIRE_TEMPORARY_CHANNEL_FAILURE): failed: WIRE_TEMPORARY_CHANNEL_FAILURE (reply from remote)
# Flow 3: Failure of 1300000000msat for 103x5x0/0 capacity [0msat,1799999999msat] -> [0msat,1299999999msat]
# we have computed a set of 2 flows with probability 0.084, fees 0msat and delay 23
# Flow 4: amount=260000000msat prob=0.467 fees=0msat delay=12 path=-103x6x0/0(500000000msat in 1 htlcs,min=max=4294967295msat)->-103x1x0/1(500000000msat in 1 htlcs)->-103x4x0/1(500000000msat in 1 htlcs)->
# Flow 5: amount=1040000000msat prob=0.179 fees=0msat delay=12 path=-103x2x0/1(min=max=4294967295msat)->-103x5x0/0(max=1299999999msat)->-103x3x0/1->
# Flow 5: Failed at node #1 (WIRE_TEMPORARY_CHANNEL_FAILURE): failed: WIRE_TEMPORARY_CHANNEL_FAILURE (reply from remote)
# Flow 5: Failure of 1040000000msat for 103x5x0/0 capacity [0msat,1299999999msat] -> [0msat,1039999999msat]
# we have computed a set of 2 flows with probability 0.052, fees 0msat and delay 23
# Flow 6: amount=120000000msat prob=0.494 fees=0msat delay=12 path=-103x6x0/0(760000000msat in 2 htlcs,min=max=4294967295msat)->-103x1x0/1(760000000msat in 2 htlcs)->-103x4x0/1(760000000msat in 2 htlcs)->
# Flow 7: amount=920000000msat prob=0.105 fees=0msat delay=12 path=-103x2x0/1(min=max=4294967295msat)->-103x5x0/0(max=1039999999msat)->-103x3x0/1->
# Flow 7: Success
```
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
I am doing to add more more debugging, but sent here is 0.
Document that clearly, and put a real value in sent.
Also: since we already sub 1 msat from x, amount_msat_less_eq should
be amount_msat_less (it may be equal to our min, in theory).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
