fix: Custom network chain id not converted to hexadecimal format

[tommasini]

Description

This PR was merged some days before the hexadecimal chain id format, and those changes were missed when the hexadecimal chain id PR was merged.

This PR addresses the conversion to hexadecimal format and also a non handled promise when nickname is undefined when a custom network is added.

Related issues

Fixes: NA

Manual testing steps

1. Go to add custom network
2. Enter fields needed (like Gnosis network info)
3. The user should see a bottom sheet to confirm the intention of adding that network
4. The user should see a bottom sheet to switch to that network
5. User should be switched to that network if confirmed it

Screenshots/Recordings

https://recordit.co/ECgXE9ZHke

Before

After

Pre-merge author checklist

• I’ve followed MetaMask Coding Standards.
• I've clearly explained what problem this PR is solving and how it is solved.
• I've linked related issues
• I've included manual testing steps
• I've included screenshots/recordings if applicable
• I’ve included tests if applicable
• I’ve documented my code using JSDoc format if applicable
• I’ve applied the right labels on the PR (see labeling guidelines). Not required for external contributors.
• I’ve properly set the pull request status:
  • In case it's not yet "ready for review", I've set it to "draft".
  • In case it's "ready for review", I've changed it from "draft" to "non-draft".

Pre-merge reviewer checklist

• I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed).
• I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots.

[github-actions]

CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes.

[github-actions]

E2E test started on Bitrise: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/bd822468-61fa-4565-9e97-79a977309579
You can also kick off another Bitrise E2E smoke test by removing and re-applying the (Run Smoke E2E) label

[github-actions]

E2E test started on Bitrise: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/1625b535-2fc1-4a85-bc8c-fca981ac8953
You can also kick off another Bitrise E2E smoke test by removing and re-applying the (Run Smoke E2E) label

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (23dc52b) 41.06% compared to head (f724736) 41.05%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8606      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   41.06%   41.05%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1247     1247              
  Lines       30351    30362      +11     
  Branches     2963     2964       +1     
==========================================
  Hits        12464    12464              
- Misses      17142    17153      +11     
  Partials      745      745              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
100.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[NicolasMassart]

Looks good to me.

convo in progress