c48e788246
5f9c0b6360wallet: Remove -upgradewallet from dummywallet (MarcoFalke)a314271f08test: Remove unused wallet.dat (MarcoFalke)bf7635963ctests: Test specific upgradewallet scenarios and that upgrades work (Andrew Chow)4b418a9dectest: Add test_framework/bdb.py module for inspecting bdb files (Andrew Chow)092fc43485tests: Add a sha256sum_file function to util (Andrew Chow)0bd995aa19wallet: upgrade the CHDChain version number when upgrading to split hd (Andrew Chow)8e32e1c41cwallet: remove nWalletMaxVersion (Andrew Chow)bd7398cc62wallet: have ScriptPubKeyMan::Upgrade check against the new version (Andrew Chow)5f720544f3wallet: Add GetClosestWalletFeature function (Andrew Chow)842ae3842dwallet: Add utility method for CanSupportFeature (Andrew Chow) Pull request description: This PR cleans up the wallet upgrade mechanism a bit, fixes some probably bugs, and adds more test cases. The `nWalletMaxVersion` member variable has been removed as it made `CanSupportFeature` unintuitive and was causing a couple of bugs. The reason this was introduced originally was to allow a wallet upgrade to only occur when the new feature is first used. While this makes sense for the old `-upgradewallet` option, for an RPC, this does not quite make sense. It's more intuitive for an upgrade to occur if possible if the `upgradewallet` RPC is used as that's an explicit request to upgrade a particular wallet to a newer version. `nWalletMaxVersion` was only relevant for upgrades to `FEATURE_WALLETCRYPT` and `FEATURE_COMPRPUBKEY` both of which are incredibly old features. So for such wallets, the behavior of `upgradewallet` will be that the feature is enabled immediately without the wallet needing to be encrypted at that time (note that `FEATURE_WALLETCRYPT` indicates support for encryption, not that the wallet is encrypted) or for a new key to be generated. `CanSupportFeature` would previously indicate whether we could upgrade to `nWalletMaxVersion` not just whether the current wallet version supported a feature. While this property was being used to determine whether we should upgrade to HD and HD chain split, it was also causing a few bugs. Determining whether we should upgrade to HD or HD chain split is resolved by passing into `ScriptPubKeyMan::Upgrade` the version we are upgrading to and checking against that. By removing `nWalletMaxVersion` we also fix a bug where you could upgrade to HD chain split without the pre-split keypool. `nWalletMaxVersion` was also the version that was being reported by `getwalletinfo` which meant that the version reported was not always consistent across restarts as it depended on whether `upgradewallet` was used. Additionally to make the wallet versions consistent with actually supported versions, instead of just setting the wallet version to whatever is given to `upgradewallet`, we normalize the version number to the closest supported version number. For example, if given 150000, we would store and report 139900. Another bug where CHDChain was not being upgraded to the version supporting HD chain split is also fixed by this PR. Lastly several more tests have been added. Some refactoring to the test was made to make these tests easier. These tests check specific upgrading scenarios, such as from non-HD (version 60000) to HD to pre-split keypool. Although not specifically related to `upgradewallet`, `UpgradeKeyMetadata` is now being tested too. Part of the new tests is checking that the wallet files are identical before and after failed upgrades. To facilitate this, a utility function `sha256sum_file` has been added. Another part of the tests is to examine the wallet file itself to ensure that the records in the wallet.dat file have been correctly modified. So a new `bdb.py` module has been added to deserialize the BDB db of the wallet.dat file. This format isn't explicitly documented anywhere, but the code and comments in BDB's source code in file `dbinc/db_page.h` describe it. This module just dumps all of the fields into a dict. ACKs for top commit: MarcoFalke: approach ACK5f9c0b6360laanwj: Code review ACK5f9c0b6360jonatack: ACK5f9c0b6360, approach seems fine, code review, only skimmed the test changes but they look well done, rebased on current master, debug built and verified the `wallet_upgradewallet.py` test runs green both before and after running `test/get_previous_releases.py -b v0.19.1 v0.18.1 v0.17.2 v0.16.3 v0.15.2` Tree-SHA512: 7c4ebf420850d596a586cb6dd7f2ef39c6477847d12d105fcd362abb07f2a8aa4f7afc5bfd36cbc8b8c72fcdd1de8d2d3f16ad8e8ba736b6f4f31f133fe5feba
Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree
What is Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is an experimental digital currency that enables instant payments to anyone, anywhere in the world. Bitcoin uses peer-to-peer technology to operate with no central authority: managing transactions and issuing money are carried out collectively by the network. Bitcoin Core is the name of open source software which enables the use of this currency.
For more information, as well as an immediately usable, binary version of the Bitcoin Core software, see https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/, or read the original whitepaper.
License
Bitcoin Core is released under the terms of the MIT license. See COPYING for more information or see https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT.
Development Process
The master branch is regularly built (see doc/build-*.md for instructions) and tested, but it is not guaranteed to be
completely stable. Tags are created
regularly from release branches to indicate new official, stable release versions of Bitcoin Core.
The https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui repository is used exclusively for the development of the GUI. Its master branch is identical in all monotree repositories. Release branches and tags do not exist, so please do not fork that repository unless it is for development reasons.
The contribution workflow is described in CONTRIBUTING.md and useful hints for developers can be found in doc/developer-notes.md.
Testing
Testing and code review is the bottleneck for development; we get more pull requests than we can review and test on short notice. Please be patient and help out by testing other people's pull requests, and remember this is a security-critical project where any mistake might cost people lots of money.
Automated Testing
Developers are strongly encouraged to write unit tests for new code, and to
submit new unit tests for old code. Unit tests can be compiled and run
(assuming they weren't disabled in configure) with: make check. Further details on running
and extending unit tests can be found in /src/test/README.md.
There are also regression and integration tests, written
in Python, that are run automatically on the build server.
These tests can be run (if the test dependencies are installed) with: test/functional/test_runner.py
The Travis CI system makes sure that every pull request is built for Windows, Linux, and macOS, and that unit/sanity tests are run automatically.
Manual Quality Assurance (QA) Testing
Changes should be tested by somebody other than the developer who wrote the code. This is especially important for large or high-risk changes. It is useful to add a test plan to the pull request description if testing the changes is not straightforward.
Translations
Changes to translations as well as new translations can be submitted to Bitcoin Core's Transifex page.
Translations are periodically pulled from Transifex and merged into the git repository. See the translation process for details on how this works.
Important: We do not accept translation changes as GitHub pull requests because the next pull from Transifex would automatically overwrite them again.
Translators should also subscribe to the mailing list.