Skip to content

0.8.2 [Smaug]#611

Merged
ca333 merged 17 commits intomasterfrom
dev
Mar 1, 2024
Merged

0.8.2 [Smaug]#611
ca333 merged 17 commits intomasterfrom
dev

Conversation

@ca333
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@ca333 ca333 commented Jan 29, 2024

No description provided.

dimxy and others added 14 commits March 28, 2023 01:31
Without -fPIC for libcryptoconditions_core.a build will end with
error below on Xenial:

```
/usr/bin/ld: cryptoconditions/libcryptoconditions_core.a(libcryptoconditions_core_a-cryptoconditions.o): relocation R_X86_64_32 against `.text' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC
cryptoconditions/libcryptoconditions_core.a: error adding symbols: Bad value
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
```
Co-authored-by: Jack Grigg <jack@z.cash>
Co-authored-by: Kris Nuttycombe <kris@nutty.land>
Co-authored-by: Daira Hopwood <daira@jacaranda.org>
burned coins refer to the value sent for OP_RETURN scripts:
```
"vout": [
...
    {
      "value": 2.00000000,
      "valueZat": 200000000,
      "n": 1,
      "scriptPubKey": {
        "asm": "OP_RETURN 6465636b6572",
        "hex": "6a066465636b6572",
        "type": "nulldata"
      }
    }
  ],
  "vjoinsplit": [
  ]
```
burned coins are also excluded from transparent pool.
this update activates burned coins value pool, see: BURNED_VALUE_VERSION
The change was made solely for debugging purposes and was
accidentally included in the PR. We are now reverting that change.
get rid of using THC chain name in ParseArgumentsTests
Pass CWalletDB to OrderedTxItems() as optional param
add chain supply, transparent and burned coins value pools
update assetchains.{json,old} to actual version
@ca333 ca333 requested review from DeckerSU, kivqa and smk762 January 29, 2024 12:43
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@DeckerSU DeckerSU left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, but it seems like we forgot to update the actual version in the source code. I have already prepared a PR for this - you can find it here: #612. Once it is merged into the dev branch, we can approve PR #611 to be merged into the master branch.

@DeckerSU DeckerSU self-requested a review January 30, 2024 14:58
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@DeckerSU DeckerSU left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

@ca333 ca333 merged commit a89b6e8 into master Mar 1, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants