Add support for bitcoin core 29.0 #131

GideonBature · 2025-04-19T14:45:45Z

This PR adds support for the newly released bitcoin core version - v29.0

Updated RPCs

Implement getmininginfo which now returns nBits and the current target in the target field. It also returns a next object which specifies the height, nBits, difficulty, and target for the next block. (test added)
Implement getblock and getblockheader which now return the current target in the target field (test added)
Implement getblockchaininfo and getchainstates which now return nBits and the current target in the target field. (test added)
Implement getblocktemplate whose RPC curtime (BIP22) and mintime (BIP23) fields now account for the timewarp fix proposed in BIP94 on all networks. (test added)

New RPCs

Implement getdescriptoractivity rpc method which can be used to find all spend/receive activity relevant to a given set of descriptors within a set of specified blocks. (test added)

Closes #129

tcharding · 2025-04-21T22:09:27Z

CI fail can be fixed by creating the RPC help file, I haven't downloaded Core v29 yet but I'd expect that on this branch we could do:

contrib/run-bitcoind.sh start v29
bt29 help > verify/rpc-api-v29.txt

tcharding

Man this is looking pretty good! This crate is hard to work on so don't feel bad if you miss things. I'm having a hard time reviewing because the changeset is so big but I've left a few comments that will make it a fair bit smaller. Keep at it! Appreciate your effort.

types/src/v17/blockchain/mod.rs

types/src/v29/mod.rs

types/src/v29/blockchain/mod.rs

client/src/client_sync/v29/mod.rs

client/src/client_sync/v29/blockchain.rs

integration_test/tests/blockchain.rs

GideonBature · 2025-04-22T10:32:31Z

CI fail can be fixed by creating the RPC help file, I haven't downloaded Core v29 yet but I'd expect that on this branch we could do:
contrib/run-bitcoind.sh start v29
bt29 help > verify/rpc-api-v29.txt

I tried running the command after starting the bitcoind v29, but it keeps say the bt29 command not found, checked the repository to see if I can get anything that relates to that, but didn't find any...

tcharding · 2025-04-22T20:50:54Z

Oh I have a shell alias for each version, for v28 I have

bt28: aliased to bitcoin-cli -rpcconnect=localhost:28049 -rpcuser=*** -rpcpassword=***

And fill in the stars for your setup. Remember the leading 280 comes from the config file of .run-bitcoind.conf

GideonBature · 2025-04-23T00:30:17Z

Oh I have a shell alias for each version, for v28 I have
bt28: aliased to bitcoin-cli -rpcconnect=localhost:28049 -rpcuser=*** -rpcpassword=***
And fill in the stars for your setup. Remember the leading 280 comes from the config file of .run-bitcoind.conf

Thank you... It's done!

node/src/versions.rs

types/src/v29/mod.rs

tcharding · 2025-04-29T09:00:27Z

Can you get rid of all the formatting changes please.

GideonBature · 2025-04-29T16:47:46Z

Can you get rid of all the formatting changes please.

Done!

tcharding · 2025-04-29T21:28:19Z

It is surprising to see changes to types modules for any version other than v29. There are changes to v17. Please either remove them or justify why the changes are made.

GideonBature · 2025-04-30T16:33:23Z

It is surprising to see changes to types modules for any version other than v29. There are changes to v17. Please either remove them or justify why the changes are made.

Alright, so for v29, the getblocktemplate returns a Target field, in that case, I saw that v17 already has the getblocktemplate error, thus, I decided to add the target field Error variant to it so I could just reuse it for v29 instead of implementing the same thing for v29... I don't know if that counts... That was the reason why I added the additional field, but if it doesn't align with how the codebase is supposed to be, I can revert it back to it's original form and re-implement the error for v29 with target field....

tcharding · 2025-05-01T00:11:03Z

Yes please. Anything that is different in one version to another should have a separate type, errors included. I'm not totally convince that we should re-use errors at all but we already do in submitpackage IIRC and its kinda nice.

GideonBature · 2025-05-01T07:11:16Z

Yes please. Anything that is different in one version to another should have a separate type, errors included. I'm not totally convince that we should re-use errors at all but we already do in submitpackage IIRC and its kinda nice.

Alright, noted, I am going to do that right away...

GideonBature · 2025-05-06T09:39:02Z

What's the status of this bro? The client still has methods in that are not needed.

Yes, I want to create another PR to move the other ones out of client to where they belong in v17/mod.rs reason been that those where not part of this PR, the one that is part of this PR has been moved, already... So I will open another PR to move the other one as well.

tcharding · 2025-05-07T20:40:43Z

Am I understanding you correctly: this should be in draft state until #151 goes in?

GideonBature · 2025-05-08T19:52:52Z

#151

Yes....

tcharding · 2025-05-12T00:38:34Z

If you get time mate lets get this one in and then we can cut a new release.

GideonBature · 2025-05-13T00:06:13Z

If you get time mate lets get this one in and then we can cut a new release.

sure...

tcharding · 2025-05-13T22:46:31Z

No changes to v17 in a PR that adds support for v29 please.

EDIT: This should have been 'no changes to v17 types', I'd expect changes to the into_model function.

GideonBature · 2025-05-14T10:02:13Z

No changes to v17 in a PR that adds support for v29 please.

Noted. I have removed the changes I made to the v17 and others. I will open a separate PR to address those.

I removed all changes made to the v17 and other versions other than v29 with this recent push. I also reduce the docs on the getdescriptoractivity struct.

tcharding · 2025-05-15T01:50:01Z

We need to update verify/src/method/v29.rs because of your recent PRs.

Run diff src/method/v28.rs src/method/v29.rs to see how I worked this out.

tcharding · 2025-05-15T01:56:10Z

There is still changes in client that don't need to be there.

GideonBature · 2025-05-15T11:24:00Z

There is still changes in client that don't need to be there.

oh my... fixing that.

GideonBature · 2025-05-15T11:45:19Z

For this recent push, I removed all the unnecessary code in the client, made changes to the methods in the verify module of v29 to march the correct ones.

GideonBature · 2025-05-15T11:47:29Z

For this recent push, I removed all the unnecessary code in the client, made changes to the methods in the verify module of v29 to march the correct ones.

"29 checks for v29" :).

tcharding

Getting there, keep at it man.

integration_test/tests/mining.rs

client/src/client_sync/v29/blockchain.rs

tcharding · 2025-05-16T00:02:01Z

client/src/client_sync/v29/blockchain.rs

+                let blockhashes_val = json!(blockhashes);
+                let scan_objects_val = json!(scan_objects);
+                let include_mempool_val = json!(include_mempool);
+
+                let params = vec![blockhashes_val, scan_objects_val, include_mempool_val];
+
+                self.call("getdescriptoractivity", &params)


Suggested change

let blockhashes_val = json!(blockhashes);

let scan_objects_val = json!(scan_objects);

let include_mempool_val = json!(include_mempool);

let params = vec![blockhashes_val, scan_objects_val, include_mempool_val];

self.call("getdescriptoractivity", &params)

self.call("getdescriptoractivity", &[])

If I do this, the method won't work, because all the parameters are required even if they contain no value, they are to be present as empty arrays, including the bool value. Running the test, we will always have this:

getdescriptoractivity: JsonRpc(Rpc(RpcError { code: -3, message: "JSON value of type null is not of expected type array", data: None }))

That is the reason why I had to be passing an empty array.

That is odd, the docs say they are optional.

Exactly, while working on it at first, I tried without including the parameters, and I kept getting this error while running the test. So I decided to try by passing in an empty array instead, only then did it work.

integration_test/tests/mining.rs

tcharding · 2025-05-16T00:09:07Z

types/src/v29/blockchain/into.rs

+            median_time,
+            nonce: crate::to_u32(self.nonce, "nonce")?,
+            bits,
+            // target,


Need to add this still.

Why I comment it out is that if I should include it, I will need to make changes to the model type, which in turn I will have to touch the type of v17 to include this type returning None. So I intend to do that once we are done with this issue, else I will have to make changes across v17 into, as well as v28 into.

Or what do you advise I do?

Its expected that you'll need to update the model type. But add the new field as an option then you only have to change the v17 into_model function. I really hope you hadn't done that before when I said "no changes to v17 in this PR" - else I'll have egg on my face.

Alright, I am going to do that right away. Although I did this in the into method of v17, but seems I touched some part of 17 as well.

tcharding · 2025-05-16T00:09:42Z

types/src/v29/blockchain/mod.rs

+    /// The bits.
+    pub bits: String,
+    /// The difficulty target.
+    pub target: String,


You marked this resolved but its not resolved.

tcharding · 2025-05-16T00:11:07Z

types/src/model/blockchain.rs

+    /// The bits
+    // pub bits: Option<CompactTarget>, // Only from v29 onwards
+    /// The difficulty target.
+    // pub target: Option<Target>, // Only from v29 onwards


Duplicate above.

I commented it out because it's going to cause errors in v17 and v28 implementation of the into method. Which I will need to resolve. Since we are not supposed to touch the other methods in this issue, I intend to work on these in a different PR.

tcharding · 2025-05-16T00:11:26Z

types/src/model/blockchain.rs

+    /// The difficulty target
+    // pub target: Option<Target>, // Only from v29 onwards


Need to uncoment this.

If I uncomment it, I have to make changes to the type for v17 and I think v28, which is not supposed to be a part of this PR, since this only focuses on v29. I intend to do that after working on this.

Or instead would it be better if I exclude it completely, and bring it back in the PR I will be working to resolve this?

tcharding · 2025-05-16T00:14:25Z

types/src/model/blockchain.rs

+
+/// Models a script pubkey with strongly typed fields.
+#[derive(Clone, Debug, PartialEq, Eq, Deserialize, Serialize)]
+pub struct ScriptPubkey {


I don't think we want this. We have a bunch of useage of this type already. Are you able to do the same in this PR. I.e., convert the data out of this to the correct rust-bitcoin types.

Yes, I was able to convert the hex and address fields to the correct rust-bitcoin types.

types/src/v29/blockchain/mod.rs

tcharding · 2025-05-17T09:51:06Z

I've a bad feeling now that I told you then wrong thing before, if so apologies for that.

tcharding · 2025-05-17T22:36:09Z

You've put a fair bit of effort into this and I feel bad for giving the dud review. Do you want me to help you push it over the line i.e., want me to make the final changes and push them up? Totally up to you, I'm good to wait and just review also.

GideonBature · 2025-05-18T05:29:27Z

You've put a fair bit of effort into this and I feel bad for giving the dud review. Do you want me to help you push it over the line i.e., want me to make the final changes and push them up? Totally up to you, I'm good to wait and just review also.

No problem, I am comfortable you reviewing it. I am really okay with that. :).

GideonBature · 2025-05-18T09:23:18Z

I've a bad feeling now that I told you then wrong thing before, if so apologies for that.

No problem. Please don't feel bad, maintaining this library is not easy, as sometimes making changes to a file also affect others, so I feel sometimes missing somethings in that case is normal.

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch 4 times, most recently from 5438355 to 1dbf4df Compare April 19, 2025 18:15

tcharding reviewed Apr 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch 2 times, most recently from dc856f3 to 3c6c22f Compare April 22, 2025 20:08

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch from 3c6c22f to 8135a58 Compare April 23, 2025 00:29

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch 2 times, most recently from 798a62e to 2308f10 Compare April 23, 2025 05:19

tcharding reviewed Apr 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

node/src/versions.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch 2 times, most recently from 20080f5 to 87a78dd Compare April 28, 2025 15:15

tcharding reviewed Apr 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

types/src/v29/mod.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch 2 times, most recently from fb921bd to 5709498 Compare April 29, 2025 16:46

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch 3 times, most recently from fa9350a to 1db66bf Compare April 29, 2025 17:13

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch from 1db66bf to ab6e0aa Compare May 1, 2025 16:04

tcharding marked this pull request as draft May 8, 2025 23:32

tcharding mentioned this pull request May 12, 2025

Release tracking PR: node, client, and types - v0.8.0 #162

Draft

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch 3 times, most recently from 8341786 to 717ab4d Compare May 13, 2025 04:39

GideonBature marked this pull request as ready for review May 13, 2025 04:44

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch 2 times, most recently from 9a1982e to a2840af Compare May 14, 2025 09:52

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch 2 times, most recently from 3180c5c to 124e08a Compare May 15, 2025 11:39

tcharding mentioned this pull request May 15, 2025

Remove support for 26.0 and 26.1 #180

Open

tcharding reviewed May 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

Add support for bitcoin core 29.0

3e54aff

GideonBature force-pushed the support-29.0 branch from 124e08a to 3e54aff Compare May 18, 2025 10:21

		/// The difficulty target
		// pub target: Option<Target>, // Only from v29 onwards

Add support for bitcoin core 29.0 #131

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Add support for bitcoin core 29.0 #131

Conversation

GideonBature commented Apr 19, 2025 • edited Loading

Updated RPCs

New RPCs

tcharding commented Apr 21, 2025

tcharding left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

GideonBature commented Apr 22, 2025

tcharding commented Apr 22, 2025

GideonBature commented Apr 23, 2025

tcharding commented Apr 29, 2025

GideonBature commented Apr 29, 2025

tcharding commented Apr 29, 2025

GideonBature commented Apr 30, 2025

tcharding commented May 1, 2025

GideonBature commented May 1, 2025

GideonBature commented May 6, 2025

tcharding commented May 7, 2025 • edited Loading

GideonBature commented May 8, 2025

tcharding commented May 12, 2025

GideonBature commented May 13, 2025

tcharding commented May 13, 2025 • edited Loading

GideonBature commented May 14, 2025 • edited Loading

tcharding commented May 15, 2025 • edited Loading

tcharding commented May 15, 2025

GideonBature commented May 15, 2025

GideonBature commented May 15, 2025

GideonBature commented May 15, 2025

tcharding left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tcharding commented May 17, 2025

tcharding commented May 17, 2025

GideonBature commented May 18, 2025

GideonBature commented May 18, 2025

GideonBature commented Apr 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tcharding commented May 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tcharding commented May 13, 2025 •

edited

Loading

GideonBature commented May 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tcharding commented May 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading