feat(cmd): Add tx show subcommand for pretty-printing transactions

[kostko]

No description provided.

[matevz]

This is probably related to #8 ?

I'm puzzled how to test this. So I tried:

$ oasis accounts transfer 1 test:bob --offline --gas-limit 1 --nonce 1 --wallet test:alice --network testnet --no-paratime
You are about to sign the following transaction:
Method: staking.Transfer
Body:
  To:     oasis1qrydpazemvuwtnp3efm7vmfvg3tde044qg6cxwzx
  Amount: 1.0 TEST
Nonce:  1
Fee:
  Amount: 0.0 TEST
  Gas limit: 1
  (gas price: 0.0 TEST per gas unit)

Account:  test:alice
Network:  testnet
Paratime: none (consensus layer)
? Sign this transaction? Yes
(In case you are using a hardware-based signer you may need to confirm on device.)
{
  "untrusted_raw_value": "pGNmZWWiY2dhcwFmYW1vdW50QGRib2R5omJ0b1UAyND0Wds45cwxynfmbSxEVty+tQJmYW1vdW50RDuaygBlbm9uY2UBZm1ldGhvZHBzdGFraW5nLlRyYW5zZmVy",
  "signature": {
    "public_key": "NcPzNW3YU2T+ugNUtUWtoQnRvbOL9dYSaBfbjHLP1pE=",
    "signature": "k51gq/PyDHCjm2vEMMpePnnTOaFUddRadfrP8UmgzMz1G0JDr+1lRH9lsg04+2krpmMYs7TOgX55+RVJ5a+LDw=="
  }
}

and copied the content into testtx.json.

Then, tx show gives me INVALID SIGNATURE error:

$ oasis tx show testtx.json 
Hash: bd312d0faf8b7399b8b92b07cb6b40b418995875551341fa8540503322c5b70a
Signer: NcPzNW3YU2T+ugNUtUWtoQnRvbOL9dYSaBfbjHLP1pE=
        (signature: k51gq/PyDHCjm2vEMMpePnnTOaFUddRadfrP8UmgzMz1G0JDr+1lRH9lsg04+2krpmMYs7TOgX55+RVJ5a+LDw==)
        [INVALID SIGNATURE]
Content:
  Method: staking.Transfer
  Body:
    To:     oasis1qrydpazemvuwtnp3efm7vmfvg3tde044qg6cxwzx
    Amount: 1.0 TEST
  Nonce:  1
  Fee:
    Amount: 0.0 TEST
    Gas limit: 1
    (gas price: 0.0 TEST per gas unit)

Showing runtime tx also seems wrong:

$ oasis accounts transfer 1 test:bob --offline --gas-limit 1 --nonce 1 --wallet test:alice --network testnet --paratime sapphire
You are about to sign the following transaction:
{
  "v": 1,
  "call": {
    "method": "accounts.Transfer",
    "body": "omJ0b1UAyND0Wds45cwxynfmbSxEVty+tQJmYW1vdW50gkgN4Lazp2QAAEA="
  },
  "ai": {
    "si": [
      {
        "address_spec": {
          "signature": {
            "ed25519": "NcPzNW3YU2T+ugNUtUWtoQnRvbOL9dYSaBfbjHLP1pE="
          }
        },
        "nonce": 1
      }
    ],
    "fee": {
      "amount": {
        "Amount": "0",
        "Denomination": ""
      },
      "gas": 1
    }
  }
}

Account:  test:alice
Network:  testnet
Paratime: sapphire
? Sign this transaction? Yes
(In case you are using a hardware-based signer you may need to confirm on device.)
{
  "Body": "o2F2AWJhaaJic2mBomVub25jZQFsYWRkcmVzc19zcGVjoWlzaWduYXR1cmWhZ2VkMjU1MTlYIDXD8zVt2FNk/roDVLVFraEJ0b2zi/XWEmgX24xyz9aRY2ZlZaJjZ2FzAWZhbW91bnSCQEBkY2FsbKJkYm9keaJidG9VAMjQ9FnbOOXMMcp35m0sRFbcvrUCZmFtb3VudIJIDeC2s6dkAABAZm1ldGhvZHFhY2NvdW50cy5UcmFuc2Zlcg==",
  "AuthProofs": [
    {
      "signature": "mxOARaaRkHrHiUObGO2KbUXZhmbIS2h3hsRM+3Y/DzvMtbVdwcZm2EZ7oP7dR5XHKkrQnjMwZnkT0mdZUsLIBw=="
    }
  ]
}

$ oasis tx show testtx2.json 
Hash: ff6578af32b265a25fad72546667b078df7a4ca68a519c2ee6d2b3fe4df7d4d9
Signer: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA=
        (signature: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA==)
        [INVALID SIGNATURE]
Content:
  Method: 
  Body:
    <unknown method body: >
  Nonce:  0
  Fee:   none

[kostko]

No, #8 is improving the "show tx" for ParaTime transactions. This just enables showing transactions in general, the actual pretty output can be improved in the future.

But yeah I see there are some problems with format autodetection, will take a look ;-)

[kostko]

@matevz The transaction decoding should work correctly now and there should no longer be signature verification errors as long as you use the right --network during tx show. Note that this does not improve how signed or unsigned runtime transactions are actually pretty-printed (e.g. currently it is just an ugly JSON dump, so not much added value there) as that is something that should be solved in #8 (and this new tx show would then automatically use that improved output as well).

[matevz]

Should this go into oasis-sdk? E.g. to simplify the runtime test vectors and for debugging future client-sdk/go apps?

[kostko]

I would rather not bloat the SDK until this is required somewhere else as well.

[matevz]

Thanks, good job!