As per title. This extends the test for activation to ensure OP_RETURN antireplay also triggers properly.
Details
Details
- Reviewers
freetrader sickpig awemany kyuupichan - Group Reviewers
Restricted Project - Commits
- rSTAGINGd74657114493: Test OP_RETURN anti replay feature
rABCd74657114493: Test OP_RETURN anti replay feature
../qa/pull-tester/rpc-tests.py abc-p2p-activation.py
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rABC Bitcoin ABC
- Branch
- opretantireplay
- Lint
Lint Passed - Unit
No Test Coverage - Build Status
Buildable 287 Build 287: arc lint + arc unit
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Built and passed in 6s. But see also comments.
| qa/rpc-tests/abc-p2p-activation.py | ||
|---|---|---|
| 268 ↗ | (On Diff #479) | As this checks for an OP_RETURN script - maybe also explicitly test here with an OP_RETURN script that does *not* contain the commitment? |
| 276 ↗ | (On Diff #479) | The sunset rule should be tested as well? Also, the OP_RETURN antireplay on <1MB blocks after activation should be tested. IMO, all of these should also be tested for an invalid OP_RETURN replay protection script. |
| qa/rpc-tests/abc-p2p-activation.py | ||
|---|---|---|
| 268 ↗ | (On Diff #479) | There is a unittest for that. This is proper testing activation. I think it's better to keep these separated. |
| 276 ↗ | (On Diff #479) | I don't think we want to pile up huundread of thousands of blocks and have the user wait for it. There is another unit test for it, so I think we are good. We really aim at testing things activate properly here. |
| qa/rpc-tests/abc-p2p-activation.py | ||
|---|---|---|
| 268 ↗ | (On Diff #479) | We test that this specific check is only done after the HF is enabled, essentially. With another commitment value, the check is never done, so it's not really relevant to the activation test. |