d64ac3f [tests] Allow tests to pass when stderr is non-empty (Jonas Schnelli)
Pull request description:
Resurrect #10241 with nits addressed
Not sure how much people want this. Would be useful for functional tests which cause bitcoind to print to stderr.
Tree-SHA512: 28caccf7818fb3ed5a38caef7f77161b1678aa9b8fd12c2d1e76032f409f0d33c40f7ac91e0c8d908df4a44fd01cf97d657a08bae50c6ff17d07f5b2e20c3a6e
This assures that we don't overwrite a random file called
`wallet.backup` that happens to be in the current directory. It also
assures that the temporary file will be cleaned up.
Noticed by Evan Klitzke, came up in discussion here:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10880#discussion_r128460722
4f92b5f Run Qt wallet tests on travis (Russell Yanofsky)
Pull request description:
Currently these test failures are not caught by travis leading to bugs like:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10506
Tree-SHA512: db1e4ff5b17bcd6fd000a3d21aa74f6b7e4c194e0663c1896a100612671910a7cdadd896b59642420ea016598895b54a8468914847ebefef105a3c47c311d4b2
9737572 [Qt] Use wallet 0 in rpc console if running with multiple wallets (Jonas Schnelli)
Pull request description:
Current master with multiwallet results in accessing wallet 0 in QT (send / receive / tx history / etc.), **but** the RPC console cannot access that wallet (only non-wallet commands work).
This is a quick solution to re-allow accessing the same wallet (Index 0) via RPC console in multiwallet.
The solutions design is not "state of the art" (should go over WalletModel). Ideally we work on an overall multiwallet support for the GUI (which then would remove this change).
I think we should consider this as a bugfix.
Tree-SHA512: 16cf844662248ffd3d82c7d0cbe5879f231fbc7d4f5a4aab4180a9087018519c98301e4ac311eaec2cc39dddf25d3edf9be99a6622ea682c138a820a9b21fd0c
a5ecaf1 Fix misspellings and remove safety verbiage (Steven D. Lander)
Pull request description:
Standardizing punctuation on CLI output and also including a few fixes for grammer. This PR is for text only changes and includes no code edits.
Tree-SHA512: afde551bf1212838822188b6723f2bf1b7222decfa1cd7aa6b04967489108a29f80833af6059252af028c53437755f258275af0614e0d4d0311e09421cd8e131
05e023f Move CloseSocket out of SetSocketNonBlocking and pass SOCKET by const reference in SetSocket* functions (Dag Robole)
Pull request description:
Rationale:
Readability, SetSocketNonBlocking does what it says on the tin.
Consistency, More consistent with the rest of the API in this unit.
Reusability, SetSocketNonBlocking can also be used by clients that may not want to close the socket on failure.
This also moves the responsibility of closing the socket back to the caller that opened it, which in general should know better how and when to close it.
Tree-SHA512: 85027137f1b626e2b636549ee38cc757a587adcf464c84be6e65ca16e3b75d7ed1a1b21dd70dbe34c7c5d599af39e53b89932dfe3c74f91a22341ff3af5ea80a
876e92b Testing: listsinceblock should display all transactions that were affected since the given block, including transactions that were removed due to a reorg. (Karl-Johan Alm)
f999c46 listsinceblock: optionally find and list any transactions that were undone due to reorg when requesting a non-main chain block in a new 'removed' array. (Karl-Johan Alm)
Pull request description:
The following scenario will not notify the caller of the fact `tx0` has been dropped:
1. User 1 receives BTC in tx0 from utxo1 in block aa1.
2. User 2 receives BTC in tx1 from utxo1 (same) in block bb1
3. User 1 sees 2 confirmations at block aa3.
4. Reorg into bb chain.
5. User 1 asks `listsinceblock aa3` and does not see that tx0 is now invalidated.
See `listsinceblock.py` commit for related test.
The proposed fix is to iterate from the given block down to the fork point, and to check each transaction in the blocks against the wallet, in addition to including all transactions from the fork point to the active chain tip (the current behavior). Any transactions that were present will now also be listed in the `listsinceblock` output in a new `replaced` array. This operation may be a bit heavy but the circumstances (and perceived frequency of occurrence) warrant it, I believe.
Example output:
```Python
{
'transactions': [],
'replaced': [
{
'walletconflicts': [],
'vout': 1,
'account': '',
'timereceived': 1485234857,
'time': 1485234857,
'amount': '1.00000000',
'bip125-replaceable': 'unknown',
'trusted': False,
'category': 'receive',
'txid': 'ce673859a30dee1d2ebdb3c05f2eea7b1da54baf68f93bb8bfe37c5f09ed22ff',
'address': 'miqEt4kWp9zSizwGGuUWLAmxEcTW9bFUnQ',
'label': '',
'confirmations': -7
}
],
'lastblock': '7a388f27d09e3699102a4ebf81597d974fc4c72093eeaa02adffbbf7527f6715'
}
```
I believe this addresses the comment by @luke-jr in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9516#issuecomment-274190081 but I could be wrong..
Tree-SHA512: 607b5dcaeccb9dc0d963d3de138c40490f3e923050b29821e6bd513d26beb587bddc748fbb194503fe618cfe34a6ed65d95e8d9c5764a882b6c5f976520cff35
44eb9d4 [QA] Avoid running multiwallet.py twice (Jonas Schnelli)
Pull request description:
It's already on L92.
Second script execution was introduced in #106043707fcd94e (probably rebase issue)
Reported by @MarcoFalke
Tree-SHA512: cd2873df08e31cbf5b7a43b5e6713b643b758496d4357dcc99d1c3ad2da07e55f6d69996654d17d3f5484219cb5fd4e32da3bfd94701d1137bc955241d285e57
Identified with `cppcheck --enable=unusedFunction .`.
- GetSendBufferSize()'s last use removed in
991955ee81
- SetPort()'s last use removed in
7e195e8459
- GetfLargeWorkInvalidChainFound() was introduced in
e3ba0ef956 and never used
This commit adds a listwallets RPC, which lists the names of the
currently loaded wallets. This command intentionally shows no
information about the wallet other then the name. Information on
individual wallets can be obtained using the getwalletinfo RPC.
6b8d872 Protect SSE4 code behind a compile-time flag (Pieter Wuille)
fa9be90 Add selftest for SHA256 transform (Pieter Wuille)
c1ccb15 Add SSE4 based SHA256 (Pieter Wuille)
2991c91 Add SHA256 dispatcher (Pieter Wuille)
4d50f38 Support multi-block SHA256 transforms (Pieter Wuille)
Pull request description:
This adds an SSE4 assembly version of the SHA256 transform by Intel, and uses it at run time if SSE4 instructions are available, and use a fallback C++ implementation otherwise. Nearly every x86_64 CPU supports SSE4. The feature is only enabled when compiled with `--enable-experimental-asm`.
In order to avoid build dependencies and other complications, the original Intel YASM code was translated to GCC extended asm syntax.
This gives around a 50% speedup on the SHA256 benchmark for me.
It is based on an earlier patch by @laanwj, though only includes a single assembly version (for now), and removes the YASM dependency.
Tree-SHA512: d31c50695ceb45264291537b93c0d7497670be38edf021ca5402eaa7d4e1e0e1ae492326e28d4e93979d066168129e62d1825e0384b1b906d36f85d93dfcb43c
d9d1bd3 nCheckDepth chain height fix (romanornr)
Pull request description:
````
if (nCheckDepth <= 0)
nCheckDepth = 1000000000; // suffices until the year 19000
if (nCheckDepth > chainActive.Height())
nCheckDepth = chainActive.Height();
````
These lines confuse me.
Correct me if I am wrong, but we can't check any more blocks than we have right?
If someone requests <= 0 it get set it into some huge number and then immediately limit it to the chain height in the following statement.
````
if (nCheckDepth > chainActive.Height())
nCheckDepth = chainActive.Height();
````
when using ````--checkblocks=Z```` When Z is ````0```` or any other negative number, it will check all blocks.
I think it should be changed to this maybe.
````
if (nCheckDepth <= 0 || nCheckDepth > chainActive.Height())
nCheckDepth = chainActive.Height();
````
Which gets rid of that huge number which is confusing for any other altcoins that have a different block time.
Tree-SHA512: 8ee0ae5f33b399fa74dc16926709694ccfe1fc8a043cba2f5d00884220ac1b9b13f2df4588041f4133be634e5c7b14f4eebe24294028dafe91581a97dbe627f3
4dc1915 check for null values in rpc args and handle appropriately (Gregory Sanders)
999ef20 importmulti options are optional (Gregory Sanders)
a70d025 fixup some rpc param counting for rpc help (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
Audited where named args will fail to use correct default values or may fail when additional optional arguments are added.
Previously for these parameters, it was fine to omit them as positional arguments, but it would trigger UniValue runtime errors to set them to null, or to omit them while passing named parameters with greater positions (which would internally set earlier missing arguments to null). Now null values are treated the same as missing values so these errors do not occur.
Included a few other small fixes while working on it.
I didn't bother fixing account-based rpc calls.
Tree-SHA512: 8baf781a35bd48de7878d4726850a580dab80323d3416c1c146b4fa9062f8a233c03f37e8ae3f3159e9d04a8f39c326627ca64c14e1cb7ce72538f934ab2ae1e
6b4f231 Move transaction combining from signrawtransaction to new RPC (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
Create a combinerawtransaction RPC which accepts a json array of hex raw transactions to combine them into one transaction. Signrawtransaction is changed to no longer combine transactions and only accept one transaction at a time.
The tests have been updated to test this. Tests for the signrawtransaction merge have also been removed.
This is part of #10570
Tree-SHA512: 035aebbd6537c1c017d5c8e06d309228b4c23fe52d5b31ffde19741c81a11a6346ddbbdc582b77b02a47f4c22b1952b69d3c2ee1109c29b3f0f1b612d8de53ed
7ec3343 add gdb attach process to test README (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
Saved me many hours. h/t to @jnewbery for the new guide efforts
Tree-SHA512: 4d8ba1717eb842201079488f1cfe369d5d5114df5278643a3f996c986a51e3e039ea994a6f2f06bf6607b697388ad6561198da4693e3cb1ca4a8424e6d423d85
1c9b818 getinfo deprecation warning (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
This is an alternative to #10841
This PR implements @gmaxwell's suggestion of a `nag` field for getinfo which warns about the deprecation. Instead of calling it `nag`, I have named it `deprecation-warning`. The output of `getinfo` will look like this:
```
{
"version": 149900,
"protocolversion": 70015,
"walletversion": 139900,
"balance": 0.00000000,
"blocks": 476281,
"timeoffset": 0,
"connections": 2,
"proxy": "",
"difficulty": 804525194568.1318,
"testnet": false,
"keypoololdest": 1496858803,
"keypoolsize": 197,
"unlocked_until": 0,
"paytxfee": 0.00000000,
"relayfee": 0.00001000,
"errors": "This is a pre-release test build - use at your own risk - do not use for mining or merchant applications",
"deprecation-warning": "WARNING: getinfo is deprecated and will be fully removed in 0.16. Projects should transition to using getblockchaininfo, getnetworkinfo, and getwalletinfo before upgrading to 0.16"
}
```
I think this should be tagged for 0.15
Tree-SHA512: ea1bac96a67f797519e8748ddd661cf0a1127cbc38f145b98f10cf9b54dcf0519b353062ce9888e1f51875497299c75ff5147566944451bc3fc117620e773489
f4d00e6 Add a discard_rate (Alex Morcos)
b138585 Remove factor of 3 from definition of dust. (Alex Morcos)
Pull request description:
The definition of dust is redefined to remove the factor of 3.
Dust is redefined to be the value of an output such that it would
cost that value in fees to (create and) spend the output at the dust
relay rate. The previous definition was that it would cost 1/3 of the
value. The default dust relay rate is correspondingly increased to
3000 sat/kB so the actual default dust output value of 546 satoshis
for a non-segwit output remains unchanged. This commit is a refactor
only unless a dustrelayfee is passed on the commandline in which case
that number now needs to be increased by a factor of 3 to get the same
behavior. -dustrelayfee is a hidden command line option.
Note: It's not exactly a refactor due to edge case changes in rounding
as evidenced by the required change to the unit test.
A discard_rate is added which defaults to 10,000 sat/kB
Any change output which would be dust at the discard_rate you are
willing to discard completely and add to fee (as well as continuing to
pay the fee that would have been needed for creating the change)
This would be a nice addition for 0.15 and I think will remain useful for 0.16 with the new coin selection algorithms in discussion, but its not crucial.
It does add translation strings, but we could (should?) avoid that by hiding the option
Tree-SHA512: 5b6f655354d0ab6b8b6cac1e8d1fe3136d10beb15c6d948fb15bfb105155a9d03684c6240624039b3eed6428b7e60e54216cc8b2f90c4600701e39f646284a9b
e0d459264 Avoid redundant redeclaration of GetWarnings(const string&) (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Avoid redundant redeclaration of `GetWarnings(const string&)`.
`std::string GetWarnings(const std::string& strFor)` is declared in `warnings.h` and defined in `warnings.cpp`.
Tree-SHA512: d1503e00a2073cf080d66eafa303dc9c660a7ac15d4d2abcf2e4aa69cf9622d89a8e3f09324139bb7b8debaa6d1ee4a1c1681d347cebd99b1d3672a4da6d1ace
Create a combinerawtransaction RPC which accepts a json array of hex raw
transactions to combine them into one transaction. Signrawtransaction is changed
to no longer combine transactions and only accept one transaction at a time.
cf82a9e Do not allow users to get keys from keypool without reserving them (Matt Corallo)
Pull request description:
fundrawtransaction allows users to add a change output and then
not have it removed from keypool. While it would be nice to have
users follow the normal CreateTransaction/CommitTransaction process
we use internally, there isnt much benefit in exposing this option,
especially with HD wallets, while there is ample room for users to
misunderstand or misuse this option.
This partially reverts #9377. Would be nice to get this for 15 since its kinda crazy we have this option to begin with IMO, will need release notes as an RPC option is now ignored.
Tree-SHA512: 72b5ee9c4a229b84d799dfb00c56fe80d8bba914ce81a433c3f5ab325bf9bf2b839ee658c261734f0ee183ab19435039481014d09c41dbe155e6323e63beb01d
fundrawtransaction allows users to add a change output and then
not have it removed from keypool. While it would be nice to have
users follow the normal CreateTransaction/CommitTransaction process
we use internally, there isnt much benefit in exposing this option,
especially with HD wallets, while there is ample room for users to
misunderstand or misuse this option.
This could be particularly nasty in some use-cases (especially
pre-HD-split) - eg a user might fundrawtransaction, then call
getnewaddress, hand out the address for someone to pay them, then
sendrawtransaction. This may result in the user thinking they have
received payment, even though it was really just their own change!
This could obviously result in needless key-reuse.
6b9faf7 [QA] add basic multiwallet test (Jonas Schnelli)
979d0b8 [tests] [wallet] Add wallet endpoint support to authproxy (John Newbery)
76603b1 Select wallet based on the given endpoint (Jonas Schnelli)
32c9710 Fix test_bitcoin circular dependency issue (Jonas Schnelli)
31e0720 Add wallet endpoint support to bitcoin-cli (-usewallet) (Jonas Schnelli)
dd2185c Register wallet endpoint (Jonas Schnelli)
Pull request description:
Alternative for #10829 and #10650.
It adds the most simplest form of wallet based endpoint support (`/wallet/<filename>`).
No v1 and no node/wallet endpoint split.
Tree-SHA512: 23de1fd2f9b48d94682928b582fb6909e16ca507c2ee19e1f989d5a4f3aa706194c4b1fe8854d1d79ba531b7092434239776cae1ae715ff536e829424f59f9be
Ryan Havar