Skip to content

Conversation

@fanquake
Copy link
Member

@fanquake fanquake commented Sep 24, 2025

The next commit requires an additional mainnet block which changes the difficulty.

Also fix a few minor mistakes in the test (suite):
- rename the create_coinbase retarger_period argument to halving_period. Before bitcoin#31583 this was hardcoded for regtest where these values are the same.
- drop unused fees argument from mine helper

Finally the CPU miner instructions for generating the alternative mainnet chain are expanded.

Github-Pull: bitcoin#33446
Rebased-From: 4c3c1f4
A target field was added to the getblock and getblockheader RPC calls in bitcoin#31583, but it mistakingly always used the tip value.

Because regtest does not have difficulty adjustment, a test is added for mainnet instead.

Github-Pull: bitcoin#33446
Rebased-From: bf7996c
@fanquake fanquake added this to the 30.0 milestone Sep 24, 2025
@DrahtBot
Copy link
Contributor

DrahtBot commented Sep 24, 2025

The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Code Coverage & Benchmarks

For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/33473.

Reviews

See the guideline for information on the review process.

Type Reviewers
ACK marcofleon, dergoegge, hebasto, Zero-1729
Concept ACK instagibbs, Sjors

If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

ajtowns and others added 4 commits September 30, 2025 18:37
Using bypass_limits=true is essentially fuzzing part of a
reorg only, and results in TRUC invariants unable to be
checked. Remove most instances of bypassing limits, leaving
one harness able to do so.

Github-Pull: bitcoin#33504
Rebased-From: bbe8e90
Not enforcing TRUC topology on reorg was the intended
behavior, but the appropriate bypass argument was not
checked.

This mistake means we could potentially invalidate a long
chain of perfectly incentive-compatible transactions that
were made historically, including subsequent non-TRUC
transactions, all of which may have been very high feerate.

Lastly, it wastes CPU cycles doing topology checks since
this behavior cannot actually enforce the topology in
general for the reorg setting.

Github-Pull: bitcoin#33504
Rebased-From: 26e71c2
Modern Ubuntu isn't shipping with this library installed by default.
Staticly link it to remove the need for end-users to install it.

Closes bitcoin#33432.

Github-Pull: bitcoin#33434
Rebased-From: eca5085
@fanquake fanquake marked this pull request as ready for review October 3, 2025 14:29
@fanquake
Copy link
Member Author

fanquake commented Oct 3, 2025

Edited https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/v30.0-Release-Notes-Draft to remove the mention of the libxcb-cursor runtime requirement.

QT translations are optional, but the script would error when
'translations_dir' falls back to its default value NULL.

This PR fixes it by moving the set-up of QT translations under
the check for 'translations_dir' presence.

Github-Pull: bitcoin#33482
Rebased-From: 7b5261f
@instagibbs
Copy link
Member

ACK on #33504 and #33504 changes

Copy link
Contributor

@marcofleon marcofleon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm ACK 4e869a6

The diff looks fine and I did a (light) code review of every PR commit.

@DrahtBot DrahtBot requested a review from instagibbs October 3, 2025 18:40
Copy link
Member

@dergoegge dergoegge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ACK 4e869a6

@Sjors
Copy link
Member

Sjors commented Oct 4, 2025

ACK on the #33446 changes.

Can you add #33229?

Copy link
Member

@hebasto hebasto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ACK 4e869a6, I agree on the backported PRs. I've reproduced locally all backports, the manpages update, and the example bitcoin.conf updated, and obtained zero diff with this PR.

@DrahtBot DrahtBot requested a review from Sjors October 5, 2025 11:24
Copy link
Contributor

@Zero-1729 Zero-1729 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM ACK 4e869a6

Tested locally, all checks out.

@fanquake
Copy link
Member Author

fanquake commented Oct 6, 2025

Can you add #33229?

I'm not going to add that here, rc3 is already late. There might be more multiprocess backporting done, so it could be included there, but that's also blocked on at least bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess#222.

@fanquake fanquake merged commit d5e0077 into bitcoin:30.x Oct 6, 2025
20 checks passed
@fanquake fanquake deleted the 30_0_rc3 branch October 6, 2025 10:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.