GNU bug report logs - #63583
gnu: bitcoin-core: Update to 24.1.

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 63583 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 63583 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Michael Ford <fanquake <at> gmail.com>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: gnu: bitcoin-core: Update to 24.1.
Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 13:30:36 +0100

From 5cd545487e1f5c161f2aeb58b4e16b44269a7712 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: fanquake <fanquake <at> gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 13:29:18 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: bitcoin-core: Update to 24.1.

---
 gnu/packages/finance.scm | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/finance.scm b/gnu/packages/finance.scm
index 57d3f37c7c..7f15be1202 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/finance.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/finance.scm
@@ -134,10 +134,10 @@ (define-module (gnu packages finance)
   #:use-module (gnu packages xml)
   #:use-module (gnu packages gnuzilla))

-(define-public bitcoin-core-23.1
+(define-public bitcoin-core-24.1
   (package
     (name "bitcoin-core")
-    (version "23.1")
+    (version "24.1")
     (source (origin
               (method url-fetch)
               (uri
@@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ (define-public bitcoin-core-23.1
                               version "/bitcoin-" version ".tar.gz"))
               (sha256
                (base32
-                "03k56vgk0a0wr84gpj256hvijk6iyshl85hcrx800hiznyzl5hkl"))))
+                "0kmgpzknbykgwb8vd7hj3j1xxn35785gf4vii5705k6rnarks2la"))))
     (build-system gnu-build-system)
     (native-inputs
      (list autoconf
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ (define-public bitcoin-core-23.1
 ;; The support lifetimes for bitcoin-core versions can be found in
 ;; <https://bitcoincore.org/en/lifecycle/#schedule>.

-(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-23.1)
+(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-24.1)

 (define-public ghc-hledger
   (package
-- 
2.40.1

Message #10 received at 63583-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>
To: Michael Ford <fanquake <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 63583-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#63583] gnu: bitcoin-core: Update to 24.1.
Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 15:24:43 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Patch applied as 0aab24855238cc7c7a31066ab39cd94e534b857f.
Thanks.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #13 received at 63583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Michael Ford <fanquake <at> gmail.com>, 63583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#63583] gnu: bitcoin-core: Update to 24.1.
Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 18:29:13 +0200

Hi,

On ven., 19 mai 2023 at 13:30, Michael Ford <fanquake <at> gmail.com> wrote:

> -(define-public bitcoin-core-23.1
> +(define-public bitcoin-core-24.1

[...]

> -    (version "23.1")
> +    (version "24.1")

[...]

> -                "03k56vgk0a0wr84gpj256hvijk6iyshl85hcrx800hiznyzl5hkl"))))
> +                "0kmgpzknbykgwb8vd7hj3j1xxn35785gf4vii5705k6rnarks2la"))))

[...]

> -(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-23.1)
> +(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-24.1)

Out of curiosity, why are these two symbols required?  Maybe, it could
be nice to drop ’bitcoin-core-xy.z’ and keep only ’bitcoin-core’, no?

WDYT?

Cheers,
simon

Message #16 received at 63583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>
To: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 63583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Michael Ford <fanquake <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bug#63583] gnu: bitcoin-core: Update to 24.1.
Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 16:52:12 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> skribis:

> Hi,
>
> On ven., 19 mai 2023 at 13:30, Michael Ford <fanquake <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> -(define-public bitcoin-core-23.1
>> +(define-public bitcoin-core-24.1
>
> [...]
>
>> -    (version "23.1")
>> +    (version "24.1")
>
> [...]
>
>> -                "03k56vgk0a0wr84gpj256hvijk6iyshl85hcrx800hiznyzl5hkl"))))
>> +                "0kmgpzknbykgwb8vd7hj3j1xxn35785gf4vii5705k6rnarks2la"))))
>
> [...]
>
>> -(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-23.1)
>> +(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-24.1)
>
> Out of curiosity, why are these two symbols required?  Maybe, it could
> be nice to drop ’bitcoin-core-xy.z’ and keep only ’bitcoin-core’, no?
>
> WDYT?
>
> Cheers,
> simon

Hi.
IIRC, at some point in the past we had two versions of bitcoin-core, and
the 'bitcoin-core' variable was pointing at one of the packages. Then
one of the versions became outdated and was removed.
Since we now have only one version, removing the leftovers from the
multiple package version support stuff seems like a good idea...

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #19 received at 63583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>
To: 63583 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Michael Ford <fanquake <at> gmail.com>,
 Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bug#63583] gnu: bitcoin-core: Update to 24.1.
Date: Sat, 20 May 2023 07:24:44 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net> skribis:

> Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On ven., 19 mai 2023 at 13:30, Michael Ford <fanquake <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> -(define-public bitcoin-core-23.1
>>> +(define-public bitcoin-core-24.1
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> -    (version "23.1")
>>> +    (version "24.1")
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> -                "03k56vgk0a0wr84gpj256hvijk6iyshl85hcrx800hiznyzl5hkl"))))
>>> +                "0kmgpzknbykgwb8vd7hj3j1xxn35785gf4vii5705k6rnarks2la"))))
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> -(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-23.1)
>>> +(define-public bitcoin-core bitcoin-core-24.1)
>>
>> Out of curiosity, why are these two symbols required?  Maybe, it could
>> be nice to drop ’bitcoin-core-xy.z’ and keep only ’bitcoin-core’, no?
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> simon
>
> Hi.
> IIRC, at some point in the past we had two versions of bitcoin-core, and
> the 'bitcoin-core' variable was pointing at one of the packages. Then
> one of the versions became outdated and was removed.
> Since we now have only one version, removing the leftovers from the
> multiple package version support stuff seems like a good idea...

Hi.
Cleanup done in 24b6f94cf9b4ab97ef2eb70d05b2104a06776e62.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.