Updating dependencies #377
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Maybe replacing |
elichai
force-pushed
the
2019-08-update-deps
branch
from
142ae31 to
6b43d77
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #377 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 87.48% 87.48% +<.01%
==========================================
Files 29 29
Lines 15775 15791 +16
==========================================
+ Hits 13801 13815 +14
- Misses 1974 1976 +2
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
Why drop the explicit bitcoin_hashes? As long as they're bumped together it shouldn't matter (and what about ensuring it gets the fuzztarget feature?).
Anyway, looks awesome!
… On Aug 23, 2019, at 16:48, Elichai Turkel ***@***.***> wrote:
Updating rust-bitcoin to latest 0.20.
And rust-secp256k1 to 0.15.
Removed bitcoin_hashes and reused the one that is now re-exported from rust-bitcoin (rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin#289)
I rebased my wasm tests on top of this and updated the test and I can verify that after this the code here 100% supports wasm :)
https://github.com/elichai/rust-lightning/tree/wasm/wasm-test
cc rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin#298
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
#377
Commit Summary
Updated bitcoin&secp256k1 dependencies
Replaced bitcoin_hashes with bitcoin::hashes
Modified consensus verify and usize to u64 casting to support the new rust-bitcoin api
File Changes
M Cargo.toml (9)
M fuzz/fuzz_targets/chanmon_deser_target.rs (3)
M fuzz/fuzz_targets/chanmon_fail_consistency.rs (9)
M fuzz/fuzz_targets/full_stack_target.rs (11)
M fuzz/fuzz_targets/router_target.rs (3)
M src/chain/chaininterface.rs (2)
M src/chain/keysinterface.rs (8)
M src/chain/transaction.rs (2)
M src/lib.rs (1)
M src/ln/chan_utils.rs (14)
M src/ln/chanmon_update_fail_tests.rs (4)
M src/ln/channel.rs (20)
M src/ln/channelmanager.rs (10)
M src/ln/channelmonitor.rs (34)
M src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs (17)
M src/ln/functional_tests.rs (19)
M src/ln/msgs.rs (6)
M src/ln/onion_utils.rs (8)
M src/ln/peer_channel_encryptor.rs (4)
M src/ln/peer_handler.rs (6)
M src/ln/router.rs (8)
M src/util/chacha20poly1305rfc.rs (2)
M src/util/macro_logger.rs (2)
M src/util/ser.rs (4)
M src/util/test_utils.rs (2)
Patch Links:
https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-lightning/pull/377.patch
https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-lightning/pull/377.diff
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
|
hmm the point of using As a middle ground, we can in the code use |
|
Using the bitcoin-exported copy only provides robustness if we want to depend on a different hashes than upstream so that downstream users don't have to upgrade to the latest hashes to upgrade, but we're not doing that here.
… On Aug 23, 2019, at 18:21, Elichai Turkel ***@***.***> wrote:
hmm the point of using bitcoin::hashes is for future robustness, but if you prefer I can revert this part.
anyhow, rust-bitcoin propagates this feature to bitcoin_hashes https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin/blob/master/Cargo.toml#L18
As a middle ground, we can in the code use bitcoin::hashes but also in the Cargo.toml import it to make sure we propagate the feature (although then in the future it can get out of sync without anyone noticing)
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
elichai
force-pushed
the
2019-08-update-deps
branch
from
6b43d77 to
2030206
Compare
|
Ok, I changed it back to use |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Updating
rust-bitcointo latest 0.20, andrust-secp256k1to 0.15.Removed
bitcoin_hashesand reused the one that is now re-exported fromrust-bitcoin(rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin#289)I rebased my wasm tests on top of this and updated the test and I can verify that after this the code here 100% supports wasm :)
https://github.com/elichai/rust-lightning/tree/wasm/wasm-test
One thing that a bit bothered me and should be double checked is that we only use usize for the weight, not for the fees themselves. (otherwise it won't be enough for 32 bit systems)
cc rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin#298