The only reason BOOST_CPPFLAGS was needed here, is because of the policy/rbf.h include, which ultimately includes boost multi_index via txmempool.h. However this include is unused.
build: remove BOOST_CPPFLAGS usage from bitcoin-tx #26086
pull fanquake wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from fanquake:bitcoin_tx_prune_boost_cpp changing 2 files +1 −2-
fanquake commented at 8:32 AM on September 14, 2022: member
-
f839697d9b
build: remove BOOST_CPPFLAGS usage from bitcoin-tx
The only reason BOOST_CPPFLAGS is needed here, is because of the policy/rbf.h include, which ultimately includes boost multi_index via txmempool.h. However this include is actually unused.
- DrahtBot added the label Build system on Sep 14, 2022
-
theuni commented at 4:32 PM on September 14, 2022: member
Nice. ACK f839697d9b89002d020997154e182ddb4dccf45b.
As an aside, do any of our c-i runs actually test this? At least for depends, the boost headers are installed to the same prefix as everything else, meaning that
$(BOOST_CPPFLAGS)is almost always redundant.Since boost is our only remaining external consensus dependency, as a follow-up, I'm wondering if we need a less hackish version of: https://github.com/theuni/bitcoin/commit/e131d8f1e33baa9a9499d2e1a4a99b171566c5a5
-
hebasto commented at 8:30 AM on September 15, 2022: member
As an aside, do any of our c-i runs actually test this? At least for depends, the boost headers are installed to the same prefix as everything else, meaning that
$(BOOST_CPPFLAGS)is almost always redundant.Agree. Right now a build will success even after
sed 's/ $(BOOST_CPPFLAGS)//g'through the entire code base. To make manipulations with$(BOOST_CPPFLAGS)verifiable, I strongly believe that @theuni's suggestion should go first. -
fanquake commented at 8:39 AM on September 15, 2022: member
As an aside, do any of our c-i runs actually test this? At least for depends, the boost headers are installed to the same prefix as everything else, meaning that $(BOOST_CPPFLAGS) is almost always redundant.
At the moment, atleast a native macOS (M1) build will blow up, because (brew installed) Boost is in a "non-standard" path.
Agree. Right now a build will success even after sed 's/ $(BOOST_CPPFLAGS)//g' through the entire code base.
This isn't correct. Non-depends builds can/will fail.
-
hebasto commented at 8:52 AM on September 15, 2022: member
As an aside, do any of our c-i runs actually test this? At least for depends, the boost headers are installed to the same prefix as everything else, meaning that $(BOOST_CPPFLAGS) is almost always redundant.
At the moment, atleast a native macOS (M1) build will blow up, because (brew installed) Boost is in a "non-standard" path.
Agree. Right now a build will success even after sed 's/ $(BOOST_CPPFLAGS)//g' through the entire code base.
This isn't correct. Non-depends builds can/will fail.
Agree, but it appears that the only system on which a build will fail is macOS M1 due to the reasons mentioned above.
-
fanquake commented at 9:16 AM on September 15, 2022: member
Since boost is our only remaining external consensus dependency, as a follow-up, I'm wondering if we need a less hackish version of: https://github.com/theuni/bitcoin/commit/e131d8f1e33baa9a9499d2e1a4a99b171566c5a5
Agree, but it appears that the only system on which a build will fail is macOS M1 due to the reasons mentioned above.
I'm happy for us to move in the direction suggested by Cory as a follow up. I think the current set of cpp changes (including the other PRs) are straightforward, and can be reviewed without changing depends (I'm also checking flag usage locally).
-
in src/bitcoin-tx.cpp:18 in f839697d9b
14 | @@ -15,7 +15,6 @@ 15 | #include <key_io.h> 16 | #include <fs.h> 17 | #include <policy/policy.h> 18 | -#include <policy/rbf.h>
hebasto commented at 10:35 AM on September 15, 2022:iwyu reports:
bitcoin-tx.cpp should remove these lines: - #include <policy/rbf.h> // lines 18-18 - #include <util/translation.h> // lines 29-29
fanquake commented at 11:07 AM on September 16, 2022:Going to leave this as is.
hebasto approvedfanquake merged this on Sep 16, 2022fanquake closed this on Sep 16, 2022fanquake deleted the branch on Sep 16, 2022fanquake commented at 2:18 PM on September 16, 2022: memberSince boost is our only remaining external consensus dependency, as a follow-up, I'm wondering if we need a less hackish version of: https://github.com/theuni/bitcoin/commit/e131d8f1e33baa9a9499d2e1a4a99b171566c5a5 @theuni did you want to follow up to this with a PR?
sidhujag referenced this in commit 1e0bda0257 on Sep 20, 2022fanquake referenced this in commit f8b68c1f63 on Feb 8, 2023bitcoin locked this on Sep 16, 2023Labels
This is a metadata mirror of the GitHub repository bitcoin/bitcoin. This site is not affiliated with GitHub. Content is generated from a GitHub metadata backup.
generated: 2026-04-18 18:13 UTC
More mirrored repositories can be found on mirror.b10c.me