Release/1187.0.0 - #9823
Merged
Merged
Conversation
|
❌ Failed to push changelog fixes. Check the workflow run for details. |
cryptodev-2s
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2026
pull Bot
pushed a commit
to Reality2byte/core
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 11, 2026
## Explanation <!-- Thanks for your contribution! Take a moment to answer these questions so that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand your changes: * What is the current state of things and why does it need to change? * What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work? * Are there any changes whose purpose might not obvious to those unfamiliar with the domain? * If your primary goal was to update one package but you found you had to update another one along the way, why did you do so? * If you had to upgrade a dependency, why did you do so? --> ## Bridge Controller [79.1.0] ### Added - Point Arc's native USDC to the registered `slip44:5042` asset ID instead of the `erc20:0x0000...` placeholder ([MetaMask#9796](MetaMask#9796)) ### Changed - Bump `@metamask/transaction-controller` from `^69.5.0` to `^69.5.2` ([MetaMask#9798](MetaMask#9798), [MetaMask#9823](MetaMask#9823)) - Bump `@metamask/accounts-controller` from `^39.0.6` to `^39.1.0` ([MetaMask#9791](MetaMask#9791), [MetaMask#9807](MetaMask#9807)) - Bump `@metamask/multichain-network-controller` from `^3.2.2` to `^3.2.3` ([MetaMask#9791](MetaMask#9791)) - Bump `@metamask/assets-controllers` from `^111.0.0` to `^111.1.0` ([MetaMask#9793](MetaMask#9793)) - Bump `@metamask/assets-controller` from `^13.1.1` to `^13.1.2` ([MetaMask#9813](MetaMask#9813)) ## References <!-- Are there any issues that this pull request is tied to? Are there other links that reviewers should consult to understand these changes better? Are there client or consumer pull requests to adopt any breaking changes? For example: * Fixes #12345 * Related to #67890 --> ## Checklist - [ ] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs for packages I've changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md) - [ ] I've introduced [breaking changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md) in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them <!-- CURSOR_SUMMARY --> --- > [!NOTE] > **Low Risk** > No runtime code changes in the diff—only versions, changelogs, and lockfile entries for a tagged release. > > **Overview** > Release cut that bumps the core monorepo to **1188.0.0** and publishes **`@metamask/bridge-controller` 79.1.0**, with **`@metamask/bridge-status-controller`** updated to depend on bridge-controller **^79.1.0** and **`yarn.lock`** aligned. > > The **79.1.0** changelog (not new code in this diff) documents shipping Arc native USDC on **`slip44:5042`** instead of a zero-address ERC-20 placeholder, plus routine dependency bumps on transaction-controller, accounts-controller, multichain-network-controller, and assets packages. > > <sup>Reviewed by [Cursor Bugbot](https://cursor.com/bugbot) for commit 31a2562. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure [here](https://www.cursor.com/dashboard/bugbot).</sup> <!-- /CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
pull Bot
pushed a commit
to dmrazzy/core
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 13, 2026
## Explanation ## Assets Controller [13.1.3] ### Changed - Bump `@metamask/transaction-controller` from `^69.5.1` to `^69.5.2` ([MetaMask#9823](MetaMask#9823)) ### Fixed - Fix Arc native USDC never appearing until the account receives its first deposit, by default-tracking the native asset id (`eip155:5042/slip44:5042`) instead of the `0x3600...` ERC20 identity so `assetsInfo` metadata is seeded up front ([MetaMask#9869](MetaMask#9869)) - Properly filter empty (`''`) selected account group event ([MetaMask#9825](MetaMask#9825)) <!-- Thanks for your contribution! Take a moment to answer these questions so that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand your changes: * What is the current state of things and why does it need to change? * What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work? * Are there any changes whose purpose might not obvious to those unfamiliar with the domain? * If your primary goal was to update one package but you found you had to update another one along the way, why did you do so? * If you had to upgrade a dependency, why did you do so? --> ## References <!-- Are there any issues that this pull request is tied to? Are there other links that reviewers should consult to understand these changes better? Are there client or consumer pull requests to adopt any breaking changes? For example: * Fixes #12345 * Related to #67890 --> ## Checklist - [ ] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs for packages I've changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md) - [ ] I've introduced [breaking changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md) in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them <!-- CURSOR_SUMMARY --> --- > [!NOTE] > <sup>[Cursor Bugbot](https://cursor.com/bugbot) is generating a summary for commit 444cbe4. Configure [here](https://www.cursor.com/dashboard/bugbot).</sup> <!-- /CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Explanation
Release
1187.0.0with a patch version bump for:@metamask/transaction-controller69.5.1→69.5.2@metamask/transaction-controller@69.5.2Changed
@metamask/accounts-controllerfrom^39.0.7to^39.1.0(#9807)Fixed
isSimulationEnableddepends on controllers not yet registered (#9821)Dependency updates
17 packages had their
@metamask/transaction-controllerdependency range updated to^69.5.2with corresponding changelog entries under[Unreleased]:@metamask/assets-controller,@metamask/assets-controllers,@metamask/bridge-controller,@metamask/bridge-status-controller,@metamask/client-utils,@metamask/eip-5792-middleware,@metamask/gator-permissions-controller,@metamask/money-account-utils,@metamask/network-enablement-controller,@metamask/phishing-controller,@metamask/profile-metrics-controller,@metamask/shield-controller,@metamask/smart-transactions-controller,@metamask/subscription-controller,@metamask/transaction-pay-controller,@metamask/user-operation-controller,@metamask/walletReferences
@metamask/accounts-controllerChecklist
Note
Low Risk
Dependency and release-metadata only; behavioral change is limited to the patch-level transaction-controller fix already shipped in 69.5.2.
Overview
Monorepo release
1187.0.0bumps the root version from1186.0.0and publishes@metamask/transaction-controller69.5.2(from69.5.1).Downstream packages only change
package.jsondependency ranges to^69.5.2,yarn.lock, and[Unreleased]changelog lines (17 consumers such aswallet, bridge, assets, EIP-5792 middleware, etc.). There is no application source change in this diff.Consumers of
69.5.2get the fixes documented on that release: skip the resimulation check when failing incomplete transactions at startup (avoids a crash whenisSimulationEnabledtouches controllers not registered yet), plus theaccounts-controllerbump noted in that package’s changelog.Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 90794b1. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.