From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Feb 03 00:09:26 2021 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Feb 2021 05:09:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36547 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1l7APr-0006ea-A0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 00:09:26 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:57616) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1l78JW-0003Kl-03 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 21:54:45 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49084) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l78JV-0003zx-MQ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 21:54:41 -0500 Received: from mail-40130.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.130]:27630) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l78JS-0005bM-UK for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 21:54:41 -0500 Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2021 02:54:30 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail; t=1612320873; bh=S9EsmNHR3dT4MqnPthkv1B6F+GNAQwCodtHDc8EBqLc=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:From; b=LV1favuUm/G+TQLhx2ttYhEjdbRH9V/gA5cCe1YO73z8/TjelO+Sp528KBzs4PZB5 OwFS0coOOmFbV3gKYLW9xb5YvpEQSB/mjy6t50qf0H9BPO43KuKmcZ6zrzPqrCs2z/ Uwc9IeseOEaqykDvDmNp4QybcLIKWt4+je0qRj3w= To: "guix-patches@gnu.org" From: ZmnSCPxj Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Update bitcoin-core to 0.21.0 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on mailout.protonmail.ch Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.40.130; envelope-from=ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com; helo=mail-40130.protonmail.ch X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 03 Feb 2021 00:09:22 -0500 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) In addition to updating, I made as well, separate `bitcoin-core-0.20` and `= bitcoin-core-0.21` packages. Due to RPC changes, it is possible that other programs compatible with olde= r `bitcoin-core` version is not compatible with newer version. Thus, an `operating-system` declaration, may need to pin a specific major v= ersion. Hoping for your kind review and acceptance of this patch. Tested with `guix build bitcoin-core`. Is there more testing I need to do before this is accepted? Regards, ZmnSCPxj >From 319a66d931f2191ab91037e0ba9da1c2b969229d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ZmnSCPxj Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 00:51:07 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Update bitcoin-core to 0.21.0 * gnu/packages/finance.scm (make-bitcoin-core): New procedure, moved from .= .. (bitcoin-core): ... here. Update to 0.21.0. (bitcoin-core-0.20): New variable. (bitcoin-core-0.21): New variable. --- gnu/packages/finance.scm | 16 ++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/gnu/packages/finance.scm b/gnu/packages/finance.scm index 1798ad82bc..dc9b911c68 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/finance.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/finance.scm @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2020 Vinicius Monego ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2020 Carlo Holl ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2020 Giacomo Leidi +;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2021 ZmnSCPxj ;;; ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix. ;;; @@ -108,18 +109,17 @@ #:use-module (gnu packages xml) #:use-module (gnu packages gnuzilla)) -(define-public bitcoin-core +(define (make-bitcoin-core target-version hash) (package (name "bitcoin-core") - (version "0.20.1") + (version target-version) (source (origin (method url-fetch) (uri (string-append "https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-" version "/bitcoin-" version ".tar.gz")) (sha256 - (base32 - "0y5rad68b398arh0abr2wgiwybdw0i5a4dxz9s3fk9fgdbyn5gab")))) + (base32 hash)))) (build-system gnu-build-system) (native-inputs `(("autoconf" ,autoconf) @@ -186,6 +186,14 @@ of the bitcoin protocol. This package provides the Bi= tcoin Core command line client and a client based on Qt.") (license license:expat))) +;; Pinning specific versions may be necessary due to changes in +;; RPC interface, or signalling reasons. +(define-public bitcoin-core-0.20 + (make-bitcoin-core "0.20.1" "0y5rad68b398arh0abr2wgiwybdw0i5a4dxz9s3fk9f= gdbyn5gab")) +(define-public bitcoin-core-0.21 + (make-bitcoin-core "0.21.0" "0dszcn4r43w0ffsmgwmyzkzr5lqws3bbhlkssmjgnjg= fc8n2148s")) +(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-0.21) + (define-public hledger (package (name "hledger") -- 2.30.0 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Feb 24 04:12:03 2021 Received: (at 46266) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Feb 2021 09:12:03 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33285 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lEqDC-0001Uk-Pd for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:12:02 -0500 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([212.71.252.8]:38082) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lEqDB-0001UL-4B for 46266@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 04:12:01 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:68c1:0:8ac0:b4c7:f5c8:7caa]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F334427BC4A; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:11:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from capella (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 2f3fcf63; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:11:59 +0000 (UTC) References: User-agent: mu4e 1.4.14; emacs 27.1 From: Christopher Baines To: ZmnSCPxj Subject: Re: [bug#46266] [PATCH] gnu: Update bitcoin-core to 0.21.0 In-reply-to: Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:11:57 +0000 Message-ID: <877dmxltia.fsf@cbaines.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46266 Cc: 46266@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Hi ZmnSCPxj, Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. guix-patches--- via writes: > In addition to updating, I made as well, separate `bitcoin-core-0.20` > and `bitcoin-core-0.21` packages. Due to RPC changes, it is possible > that other programs compatible with older `bitcoin-core` version is > not compatible with newer version. Thus, an `operating-system` > declaration, may need to pin a specific major version. I think it's OK to keep older versions if that's important, but it would be good to specifically note why specific older versions are useful to keep. I'm saying that because it's useful to know when an older version can be removed. So, for 0.20 are there incompatibilities that you're aware of? The second thing is, I wouldn't immediately jump to the (make-... pattern, and I would instead use package inheritance. See the ruby packages for example [1]. 1: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/gnu/packages/ruby.scm#n95 Package inheritance makes it simpler to make changes to individual versions, and avoids the complexity of introducing a procedure. Does that all make sense? Thanks, Chris --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmA2GF1fFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9XehDxAAlHqYGsQWJ+wmRf3s2yXOoyTqdeXg+DU7 ATCptfaae7hJXwuq5/RvWsG5coG11mZIU/Ir4qY4/41ogv6v/ZLF4N2yg0L6X/hU 2ZY4t2D85buvs8bGi5FWzT3HqelW61qdFrNugLPCxlNEFw0M71Xu88btjkHRvShO CJDrrXq6q5Samth1kSXe15A4bqW+x2zzdmVtjfQIfFn6t3AyaxB36tKJe72LM4bY Wvq72Ax0tPy97bnzI3OqtazBz8fOlxMQiFb2sDm5ttjoyqQv7UHIpo76txh0jQ5y Iavderb0rkbAe4esLyvIgvD7395FbkJ5WYySElJORK1E7j9A/jAY3W3oWON37+zY OK4SwD0vHvdBsyYXW8zHM6+bf3M30jm4Csnd/n9ggYjC3Mhc6gJ/jkR6CMETSS5U 6d4DwPYnAmsdR7lG/6hj/k1jUWIms6RYkRSFlINI/+RWg2ySnOfV7p7GNwrQ9jep uRZE12wV7O1d34K2lo5nkaMspkaDiIRI1/4LobxsRj/Dszytl9zZC3GEQc8EfNpo z1H5bFnT/BmdWYx/Hs2fy1bQHxJxDw8z+tPK1MUF2WMaCWmPoxgUJrsQYaX+/jkL dYJw7WqGeZaqZbS1iEpEY/JR7i3JKGU78kMpO4DMM4VTPYtG+M2GwqAOxaxYiy9D 0HmoaeH8iGI= =mhCG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Mar 15 22:54:03 2021 Received: (at 46266) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Mar 2021 02:54:06 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37687 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lLzq8-0001vu-JX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 22:54:02 -0400 Received: from mail-40135.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.135]:15571) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lLzpc-0001p1-R6 for 46266@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 22:53:39 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 02:53:08 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail; t=1615863189; bh=jF3uV5AASkBOg+maTCpmBLTnFs9mwjBBMPUOrPKsBao=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=MefTzB/xx8M7DWIfVJ5p80YUAFyDUVDRhJ6uAQKMRTCBd5m/NrJbC/XxmzkzpLO0P dSvX/UXD1Jal6CY+sdjox1S7OH05mhjrFPl5i8cG6KRpMkEQ6LnKrrLpnbgZp57tql Aa3DqIxdzfnf6+OFFWbT67c9MS11Hvvj19ONaXjo= To: Christopher Baines From: ZmnSCPxj Subject: Re: [bug#46266] [PATCH] gnu: Update bitcoin-core to 0.21.0 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <877dmxltia.fsf@cbaines.net> References: <877dmxltia.fsf@cbaines.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on mailout.protonmail.ch X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46266 Cc: "46266@debbugs.gnu.org" <46266@debbugs.gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Good morning Christopher, > Hi ZmnSCPxj, > > Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. > > guix-patches--- via guix-patches@gnu.org writes: > > > In addition to updating, I made as well, separate `bitcoin-core-0.20` > > and `bitcoin-core-0.21` packages. Due to RPC changes, it is possible > > that other programs compatible with older `bitcoin-core` version is > > not compatible with newer version. Thus, an `operating-system` > > declaration, may need to pin a specific major version. > > I think it's OK to keep older versions if that's important, but it would > be good to specifically note why specific older versions are useful to > keep. I'm saying that because it's useful to know when an older version > can be removed. So, for 0.20 are there incompatibilities that you're > aware of? Previously between 0.18.x to 0.19.0.1, the RPC command `sendrawtransaction`= changed its second parameter from a boolean `allowhighfees` to a numeric `= maxfeerate`. Thus, an automated update from 0.18.x to 0.19.0.1 would have lead to proble= ms in dependent software that used the older `allowhighfees` parameter. So I think it is a good policy in general to provide major versions for Bit= coin Core at least, to avoid such issues in the future. Another is that Bitcoin Core itself has a policy of not pushing updates; th= e idea is that the user should consciously elect to update to a newer versi= on, because there may be consensus changes that the user does not agree wit= h. Using an unanchored `bitcoin-core` would break this policy and make Guix pr= ovide always the latest available. Of course, it is possible to use inferiors and so on. Finally, 0.21.1 is intended to include consensus policy changes on the acti= vation of the new Taproot feature. Whatever is deployed in 0.21.1 may or may not be agreed to by the specific = user, thus `bitcoin-core` should ideally not be updated automatically to 0.= 21.1. Bitcoin Core makes an effort to maintain older major versions in order to a= llow users to avoid particular changes in later major versions they do not = agree with. > The second thing is, I wouldn't immediately jump to the > (make-... pattern, and I would instead use package inheritance. See the > ruby packages for example [1]. > > 1: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/gnu/packages/ruby.scm#= n95 > > Package inheritance makes it simpler to make changes to individual > versions, and avoids the complexity of introducing a procedure. > > Does that all make sense? Okay, thank you. Regards, ZmnSCPxj From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 16 19:42:38 2021 Received: (at 46266) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Mar 2021 23:42:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41458 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lMJKf-0007Qm-Kt for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 19:42:38 -0400 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([212.71.252.8]:33868) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lMJKc-0007Qc-N5 for 46266@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 19:42:36 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:68c1:0:8ac0:b4c7:f5c8:7caa]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D6BC27BC54; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 23:42:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from capella (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 94d63631; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 23:42:33 +0000 (UTC) References: <877dmxltia.fsf@cbaines.net> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.15; emacs 27.1 From: Christopher Baines To: ZmnSCPxj Subject: Re: [bug#46266] [PATCH] gnu: Update bitcoin-core to 0.21.0 In-reply-to: Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 23:42:30 +0000 Message-ID: <878s6mekd5.fsf@cbaines.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46266 Cc: "46266@debbugs.gnu.org" <46266@debbugs.gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain ZmnSCPxj writes: > Good morning Christopher, > >> Hi ZmnSCPxj, >> >> Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. >> >> guix-patches--- via guix-patches@gnu.org writes: >> >> > In addition to updating, I made as well, separate `bitcoin-core-0.20` >> > and `bitcoin-core-0.21` packages. Due to RPC changes, it is possible >> > that other programs compatible with older `bitcoin-core` version is >> > not compatible with newer version. Thus, an `operating-system` >> > declaration, may need to pin a specific major version. >> >> I think it's OK to keep older versions if that's important, but it would >> be good to specifically note why specific older versions are useful to >> keep. I'm saying that because it's useful to know when an older version >> can be removed. So, for 0.20 are there incompatibilities that you're >> aware of? > > Previously between 0.18.x to 0.19.0.1, the RPC command > `sendrawtransaction` changed its second parameter from a boolean > `allowhighfees` to a numeric `maxfeerate`. Thus, an automated update > from 0.18.x to 0.19.0.1 would have lead to problems in dependent > software that used the older `allowhighfees` parameter. So I think it > is a good policy in general to provide major versions for Bitcoin Core > at least, to avoid such issues in the future. > > Another is that Bitcoin Core itself has a policy of not pushing > updates; the idea is that the user should consciously elect to update > to a newer version, because there may be consensus changes that the > user does not agree with. Using an unanchored `bitcoin-core` would > break this policy and make Guix provide always the latest available. > Of course, it is possible to use inferiors and so on. > > Finally, 0.21.1 is intended to include consensus policy changes on the > activation of the new Taproot feature. Whatever is deployed in 0.21.1 > may or may not be agreed to by the specific user, thus `bitcoin-core` > should ideally not be updated automatically to 0.21.1. > > Bitcoin Core makes an effort to maintain older major versions in order > to allow users to avoid particular changes in later major versions > they do not agree with. Ok, I've found https://bitcoincore.org/en/lifecycle/#schedule now which makes me feel a little better at keeping older versions around, as there are dates from the upstream project which help signal when removing versions from Guix might be good. >> The second thing is, I wouldn't immediately jump to the >> (make-... pattern, and I would instead use package inheritance. See the >> ruby packages for example [1]. >> >> 1: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/gnu/packages/ruby.scm#n95 >> >> Package inheritance makes it simpler to make changes to individual >> versions, and avoids the complexity of introducing a procedure. >> >> Does that all make sense? > > Okay, thank you. On this point, are you OK with sending an updated patch? Thanks, Chris --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmBRQmZfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9Xd/hQ/9G8s1ZYJsnZOm9uMAy7U0bnivB0PCgKIt 5PFE22ecVAD3I2dqwYOO81EZ3AXn6SxwNlX+cSj8PSzIeL4ECtFJz6WuLUcOEmKV qTdNhaP2SAypq12lDMdnig/YgSH252awz0/AWVSgQMw0jOOaeerc4K22IGebg625 fzqEJWDX1dT20Yyfuk8N798sFbGKZtQaT7Wt/i9/DhYz8Tw91QGJMlSC1bnna+dg H07+uKtqRczn4YDhON/7xUcr8+RDId6pUsyAgL3AgPgEhgqXkQG+NlXKce3ig5As /l640ERm8FTKdJDHMhMF9iYBVsUi/IqngHBZwH12W+MPgshblzUDV4dLTBEn4QC2 rIvLwJjEXpTYvYrHVr3NFgFkS3wGm24OVRfMzAYJ55S8ldQEt6ku9sGhqfRxRP0d 6pnlZKBMKADM5p7i1vDmKNBYUWL04DmSlrZ4Umf1EXm2AZ3SrsZ+vgrQNeqrumiq L49t5YjZwicieVCMXpr0ZkkGAh08LQrq84ayjBhLibXBpCHtV42Y6T8OC4tXrt7G k3HQ8m9fntaHnFS2bwyxF3eGmp8X6nFx29SJd8t0dsIZ7bwegzN0A29icYR7zTYy 8Z3cNmNadOSqqi2rCMOOY3wGZmSHE4/p6qKgztsezokMDXuIkeX+Yd1UyHQ553n7 YKpRzbKJc9Y= =G9aQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 16 23:18:25 2021 Received: (at 46266) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Mar 2021 03:18:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41600 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lMMhV-000431-75 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 23:18:25 -0400 Received: from mail-40138.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.138]:41160) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lMMhS-00042m-IV for 46266@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Mar 2021 23:18:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 03:18:11 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail; t=1615951095; bh=P62mDXpO0CSPgZPPudEaM3/jpP/2ZrffRrtlBYTEbAk=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=CaDwipcNgvvDmBMtPi1WPyXvalvaq+CMQjKK2taAESTJCraaknwW2Z8jtxchdFz/G gdyQ9tGBKidoCCbKbC00mnNs4M2sm9K071yn0fdQR8Mvsl+a3pG3XJ13zkSe9rofJf Zqqba2cjqcHP/Khi5zyp/qswf7n4THxP0xsyOd6I= To: Christopher Baines From: ZmnSCPxj Subject: Re: [bug#46266] [PATCH] gnu: Update bitcoin-core to 0.21.0 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <878s6mekd5.fsf@cbaines.net> References: <877dmxltia.fsf@cbaines.net> <878s6mekd5.fsf@cbaines.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on mailout.protonmail.ch X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46266 Cc: "46266@debbugs.gnu.org" <46266@debbugs.gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Good morning Christopher, > ZmnSCPxj ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com writes: > > > Good morning Christopher, > > > > > Hi ZmnSCPxj, > > > Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. > > > guix-patches--- via guix-patches@gnu.org writes: > > > > > > > In addition to updating, I made as well, separate `bitcoin-core-0.2= 0` > > > > and `bitcoin-core-0.21` packages. Due to RPC changes, it is possibl= e > > > > that other programs compatible with older `bitcoin-core` version is > > > > not compatible with newer version. Thus, an `operating-system` > > > > declaration, may need to pin a specific major version. > > > > > > I think it's OK to keep older versions if that's important, but it wo= uld > > > be good to specifically note why specific older versions are useful t= o > > > keep. I'm saying that because it's useful to know when an older versi= on > > > can be removed. So, for 0.20 are there incompatibilities that you're > > > aware of? > > > > Previously between 0.18.x to 0.19.0.1, the RPC command > > `sendrawtransaction` changed its second parameter from a boolean > > `allowhighfees` to a numeric `maxfeerate`. Thus, an automated update > > from 0.18.x to 0.19.0.1 would have lead to problems in dependent > > software that used the older `allowhighfees` parameter. So I think it > > is a good policy in general to provide major versions for Bitcoin Core > > at least, to avoid such issues in the future. > > Another is that Bitcoin Core itself has a policy of not pushing > > updates; the idea is that the user should consciously elect to update > > to a newer version, because there may be consensus changes that the > > user does not agree with. Using an unanchored `bitcoin-core` would > > break this policy and make Guix provide always the latest available. > > Of course, it is possible to use inferiors and so on. > > Finally, 0.21.1 is intended to include consensus policy changes on the > > activation of the new Taproot feature. Whatever is deployed in 0.21.1 > > may or may not be agreed to by the specific user, thus `bitcoin-core` > > should ideally not be updated automatically to 0.21.1. > > Bitcoin Core makes an effort to maintain older major versions in order > > to allow users to avoid particular changes in later major versions > > they do not agree with. > > Ok, I've foundhttps://bitcoincore.org/en/lifecycle/#schedule now which > makes me feel a little better at keeping older versions around, as there > are dates from the upstream project which help signal when removing > versions from Guix might be good. Okay, I will add a comment linking to this as well in the patch. > > > > The second thing is, I wouldn't immediately jump to the > > > (make-... pattern, and I would instead use package inheritance. See t= he > > > ruby packages for example [1]. > > > 1: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/gnu/packages/ruby.= scm#n95 > > > Package inheritance makes it simpler to make changes to individual > > > versions, and avoids the complexity of introducing a procedure. > > > Does that all make sense? > > > > Okay, thank you. > > On this point, are you OK with sending an updated patch? Yes, please give me a few days or weeks. Regards, ZmnSCPxj From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Mar 17 07:49:05 2021 Received: (at 46266) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Mar 2021 11:49:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42209 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lMUfg-0002JM-O4 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 07:49:05 -0400 Received: from mail-40132.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.132]:15759) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lMUfe-0002Ir-FS for 46266@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 07:49:04 -0400 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 11:48:52 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail; t=1615981735; bh=zin3AiSa56HENAjupwDsQH1HPiyCk0XTTyij3w58E38=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:From; b=chgh3Uu8ueadYgDjhgf4gb/ZYL7ITgUxMwVHq22slAU4R7439jhkuqDYVWMyQqOVh KDxdhSv8xp2EG43m+G2REOU52TJYadAjZtvRx9vLqRsxcapD1BM90DsOSUJhIN+UPK WW0fwMyxyLs43YJBQ+wF7BvWikzmXXgbJbjI20ok= To: Christopher Baines From: ZmnSCPxj Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gnu: Update bitcoin-core to 0.21.0 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on mailout.protonmail.ch X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46266 Cc: "46266@debbugs.gnu.org" <46266@debbugs.gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-) >From 4397bd3d76fb72a97dcd37c78c23b7e174fd7bc5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: raid5atemyhomework Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 19:46:22 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Update bitcoin-core to 0.21.0 * gnu/packages/finance.scm (bitcoin-core): Update to 0.21.0. (bitcoin-core-0.20): New variable. (bitcoin-core-0.21): New variable. --- gnu/packages/finance.scm | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/gnu/packages/finance.scm b/gnu/packages/finance.scm index e6df40c168..b1c1da9095 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/finance.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/finance.scm @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2020 Vinicius Monego ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2020 Carlo Holl ;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2020 Giacomo Leidi +;;; Copyright =C2=A9 2021 ZmnSCPxj jxPCSnmZ ;;; ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix. ;;; @@ -52,6 +53,7 @@ #:use-module (guix build-system glib-or-gtk) #:use-module (guix build-system go) #:use-module (guix build-system qt) + #:use-module (guix deprecation) #:use-module (guix utils) #:use-module (gnu packages) #:use-module (gnu packages aidc) @@ -108,10 +110,18 @@ #:use-module (gnu packages xml) #:use-module (gnu packages gnuzilla)) -(define-public bitcoin-core +;; Specific versions of bitcoin-core are provided, because RPC changes may +;; occur between major releases, which can cause problems with dependent +;; software. +;; In addition, consensus-critical changes may also be scheduled for +;; particular major releases, and the user may prefer to hold back until +;; consensus on a newer version forms. +;; The support lifetimes for major versions can be found in +;; . +(define-public bitcoin-core-0.21 (package (name "bitcoin-core") - (version "0.20.1") + (version "0.21.0") (source (origin (method url-fetch) (uri @@ -119,7 +129,7 @@ version "/bitcoin-" version ".tar.gz")) (sha256 (base32 - "0y5rad68b398arh0abr2wgiwybdw0i5a4dxz9s3fk9fgdbyn5gab")))) + "0dszcn4r43w0ffsmgwmyzkzr5lqws3bbhlkssmjgnjgfc8n2148s")))) (build-system gnu-build-system) (native-inputs `(("autoconf" ,autoconf) @@ -186,6 +196,21 @@ of the bitcoin protocol. This package provides the Bi= tcoin Core command line client and a client based on Qt.") (license license:expat))) +(define-public bitcoin-core-0.20 + (package + (inherit bitcoin-core-0.21) + (version "0.20.1") + (source (origin + (method url-fetch) + (uri + (string-append "https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-" + version "/bitcoin-" version ".tar.gz")) + (sha256 + (base32 + "0y5rad68b398arh0abr2wgiwybdw0i5a4dxz9s3fk9fgdbyn5gab"))))= )) + +(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-0.21) + (define-public hledger (package (name "hledger") -- 2.31.0 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Mar 23 17:59:19 2021 Received: (at 46266-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Mar 2021 21:59:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33261 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lOp3X-0002w7-5S for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:59:19 -0400 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([212.71.252.8]:58272) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lOp3U-0002vy-L3 for 46266-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:59:17 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:68c1:0:8ac0:b4c7:f5c8:7caa]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 871CC27BC59; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:59:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from capella (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 356524f7; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:59:14 +0000 (UTC) References: User-agent: mu4e 1.4.15; emacs 27.1 From: Christopher Baines To: ZmnSCPxj Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gnu: Update bitcoin-core to 0.21.0 In-reply-to: Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:59:11 +0000 Message-ID: <875z1hbkgg.fsf@cbaines.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 46266-done Cc: 46266-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain ZmnSCPxj writes: > * gnu/packages/finance.scm (bitcoin-core): Update to 0.21.0. > (bitcoin-core-0.20): New variable. > (bitcoin-core-0.21): New variable. > --- > gnu/packages/finance.scm | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) Thanks, I've gone ahead and upshed this as d3c8aa3f8214434c8ba819984ed4513796a09e38. Sorry for the delay. I tweaked one of the comments just to be a bit shorter, also tweaked the commit message. Thanks again, Chris --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKlBAEBCgCPFiEEPonu50WOcg2XVOCyXiijOwuE9XcFAmBaZK9fFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNF ODlFRUU3NDU4RTcyMEQ5NzU0RTBCMjVFMjhBMzNCMEI4NEY1NzcRHG1haWxAY2Jh aW5lcy5uZXQACgkQXiijOwuE9Xd2xw/9EV1Mw0c3oHvFfxPH1u5aQIAPCzZutVse VQLPD8phs8+KUYUcCFT3NDBZKosPUoqWa6EvOjpff3R3HdV1rxVPE6Qty0GadqK/ QNB9nxTbEvh8JBO3bf/0OEoMU0TY1PhCblJLeqOVOlO/1riykDcaFLGpsQsZqOcf T7mGdjdWnBT83datFOyLImnPXC5o4XrxmB2FumY2rRqQyAt2GP4xqojM7GQL5l72 AXtptmgWYAr6CMHz8Luj/3TKihfrUh0Z2MqvJ0EGlVNecpj6zt1XwwBZ1dfdnojp I35yzvCSGcGBX4QOJAxM8aYs7C9MY+MAe5+xSOjmsntfCpN1ZFHG/GXssM8zpufS g0w0DUwQnlKo5t+Vq9l+nWVHIzoMjVOfWGaSKddIuNXNq/Z9ZaiOyA66O4WFzRmj ue7KENhMyfv7Z924smPYwpn2QhjErnWUuhuLULLRNYz9QmeOOdcy/O2swIjQIHzR I+o/gnFIis0pPN8CCoq3RL27sp6Pkezvay56WiIkkAWszpx92oklH/9v+8hNBirt 5dM9LLH1J+NeL+vwzDNi4uoghEg0gMn48f6XSt/irFTiEsSy+UIrjeQmc1xIdt1b 0Ab+okg5BjmpZNnCMEkUvOGiLjulJyxjPZZbyXEdZNX+Ngt6TCi1I3uwMLezb8FN SYAzkPBRVW0= =IvFS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From unknown Fri Aug 22 01:03:42 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:24:06 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator