487dcbe80c
7d0f80bUse anonymous namespace instead of static functions (Pieter Wuille)b61fb71Mention removal of bare multisig IsMine in release notes (Pieter Wuille)9c2a8b8Do not treat bare multisig as IsMine (Pieter Wuille)08f3228Optimization: only test for witness scripts at top level (Pieter Wuille)3619735Track difference between scriptPubKey and P2SH execution in IsMine (Pieter Wuille)ac6ec62Switch to a private version of SigVersion inside IsMine (Pieter Wuille)19fc973Do not expose SigVersion argument to IsMine (Pieter Wuille)fb1dfbbRemove unused IsMine overload (Pieter Wuille)952d821Make CScript -> CScriptID conversion explicit (Pieter Wuille) Pull request description: Currently our wallet code will treat bare multisig outputs (meaning scriptPubKeys with multiple public keys + `OP_CHECKMULTISIG` operator in it) as ours without the user asking for it, as long as all private keys in it are in our wallet. This is a pointless feature. As it only works when all private keys are in one place, it's useless compared to single key outputs (P2PK, P2PKH, P2WPKH, P2SH-P2WPKH), and worse in terms of space, cost, UTXO size, and ability to test (due to lack of address format for them). Furthermore, they are problematic in that producing a list of all `scriptPubKeys` we accept is not tractable (it involves all combinations of all public keys that are ours). In further wallet changes I'd like to move to a model where all scriptPubKeys that are treated as ours are explicit, rather than defined by whatever keys we have. The current behavior of the wallet is very hard to model in such a design, so I'd like to get rid of it. I think there are two options: * Remove it entirely (do not ever accept bare multisig outputs as ours, unless watched) * Only accept bare multisig outputs in situations where the P2SH version of that output would also be acceptable This PR implements the first option. The second option was explored in #12874. Tree-SHA512: 917ed45b3cac864cee53e27f9a3e900390c576277fbd6751b1250becea04d692b3b426fa09065a3399931013bd579c4f3dbeeb29d51d19ed0c64da75d430ad9a
Compiling/running unit tests
Unit tests will be automatically compiled if dependencies were met in ./configure
and tests weren't explicitly disabled.
After configuring, they can be run with make check.
To run the bitcoind tests manually, launch src/test/test_bitcoin. To recompile
after a test file was modified, run make and then run the test again. If you
modify a non-test file, use make -C src/test to recompile only what's needed
to run the bitcoind tests.
To add more bitcoind tests, add BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE functions to the existing
.cpp files in the test/ directory or add new .cpp files that
implement new BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE sections.
To run the bitcoin-qt tests manually, launch src/qt/test/test_bitcoin-qt
To add more bitcoin-qt tests, add them to the src/qt/test/ directory and
the src/qt/test/test_main.cpp file.
Running individual tests
test_bitcoin has some built-in command-line arguments; for example, to run just the getarg_tests verbosely:
test_bitcoin --log_level=all --run_test=getarg_tests
... or to run just the doubledash test:
test_bitcoin --run_test=getarg_tests/doubledash
Run test_bitcoin --help for the full list.
Note on adding test cases
The sources in this directory are unit test cases. Boost includes a unit testing framework, and since bitcoin already uses boost, it makes sense to simply use this framework rather than require developers to configure some other framework (we want as few impediments to creating unit tests as possible).
The build system is setup to compile an executable called test_bitcoin
that runs all of the unit tests. The main source file is called
test_bitcoin.cpp. To add a new unit test file to our test suite you need
to add the file to src/Makefile.test.include. The pattern is to create
one test file for each class or source file for which you want to create
unit tests. The file naming convention is <source_filename>_tests.cpp
and such files should wrap their tests in a test suite
called <source_filename>_tests. For an example of this pattern,
examine uint256_tests.cpp.
For further reading, I found the following website to be helpful in explaining how the boost unit test framework works: http://www.alittlemadness.com/2009/03/31/c-unit-testing-with-boosttest/.