-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 432
[0.1] Backport #4341 and cut 0.1.9 #4343
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: 0.1
Are you sure you want to change the base?
[0.1] Backport #4341 and cut 0.1.9 #4343
Conversation
Electrum's `blockchain.scripthash.get_history` will return the *confirmed* history for any scripthash, but will then also append any matching entries from the mempool, with respective `height` fields set to 0 or -1 (depending on whether all inputs are confirmed or not). Unfortunately we previously only included a filter for confirmed `get_history` entries in the watched output case, and forgot to add such a check also when checking for watched transactions. This would have us treat the entry as confirmed, then failing on the `get_merkle` step which of course couldn't prove block inclusion. Here we simply fix this omission and skip entries that are still unconfirmed (e.g., unconfirmed funding transactions from 0conf channels). Signed-off-by: Elias Rohrer <dev@tnull.de> Backport of cc1eb16
|
I've assigned @wpaulino as a reviewer! |
e36a7b2 to
d78e8e9
Compare
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## 0.1 #4343 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 87.49% 84.57% -2.93%
==========================================
Files 149 135 -14
Lines 101924 76539 -25385
Branches 101924 76539 -25385
==========================================
- Hits 89182 64732 -24450
+ Misses 10476 9766 -710
+ Partials 2266 2041 -225 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
983210c to
787b725
Compare
787b725 to
f1488d9
Compare
|
👋 The first review has been submitted! Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer. |
While I was kinda hoping to also fix #4307 here, the upstream PR (#4342) is much too divergent to backport so instead I think we just don't bother fixing for 0.1.