Skip to content
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

release: create v0.17.5 release branch #8664

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Apr 22, 2024

Conversation

Roasbeef
Copy link
Member

This release includes a single PR: #8573. This fixes an issue with bitcoind which starts to explicitly reject values it deems to be high fee from sendrawtransaction. See #8571 for more details.

@Roasbeef Roasbeef added bitcoind Bitcoin Core backend bug fix releases labels Apr 18, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Apr 18, 2024

Important

Auto Review Skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

bitcoind v25.0 updated the `sendrawtransaction` RPC to have an optional
argument `maxburnamount` with a default value of 0. This means our
existing test that uses burning output cannot be published, hence, we
remove the usage of it in our tests and replace it with a normal tx.
@Roasbeef
Copy link
Member Author

Roasbeef commented Apr 18, 2024

Hit this failure in CI:

--- FAIL: TestLightningWalletBitcoindZMQ (10.38s)
    test_interface.go:3277: unable to establish connection to bitcoind: method did not return within the timeout
--- FAIL: TestLightningWalletBitcoindRPCPolling (31.08s)
    --- FAIL: TestLightningWalletBitcoindRPCPolling/btcwallet/bitcoind-rpc-polling:transaction_subscriptions (4.34s)
        test_interface.go:1479: 
                Error Trace:    /home/runner/work/lnd/lnd/lnwallet/test/test_interface.go:1479
                                            /home/runner/work/lnd/lnd/lnwallet/test/test_interface.go:3465
                Error:          Received unexpected error:
                                unmatched backend error: -25: Unspendable output exceeds maximum configured by user (maxburnamount)
                Test:           TestLightningWalletBitcoindRPCPolling/btcwallet/bitcoind-rpc-polling:transaction_subscriptions

Was fixed here in master: 783e914

Similar thing where bitcoind with the recent release doesn't like large amounts of Bitcoin in OP_RETURN outputs. We used it previously to burn Bitcoin in a test. Now we'll just send to a random pubkey.

Tacked on just that commit from the greater PR (#8345), which has other new logic re testmempoolaccept usage.

@guggero
Copy link
Collaborator

guggero commented Apr 19, 2024

Unit tests fail because of the borked Unix socket support in bitcoind v27.0 (see bitcoin/bitcoin#27679, broken by bitcoin/bitcoin#22087). Was fixed in #8273, but maybe that whole PR is a bit too involved to apply to this branch.
We could just replace all instances of ipc:// with tcp://, for example:

zmqBlockHost := "ipc:///" + tempBitcoindDir + "/blocks.socket"

This will be flakey without the fix to the unique port generation code in #8273 but at least most of the unit tests would pass.

EDIT: Proposed fix for unit tests: guggero@b9454ee (in branch https://github.com/guggero/lnd/tree/v0-17-5-zmq-fix)

@Roasbeef
Copy link
Member Author

@guggero thanks for that!

Cherry picked it into the branch.

Copy link
Collaborator

@guggero guggero left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 🎉

@Roasbeef Roasbeef merged commit d23dab1 into lightningnetwork:v0-17-5-branch Apr 22, 2024
20 of 25 checks passed
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.

3 participants