This is #27593 cleaned up / rebased, now that the legacy wallet has been dropped.
Closes #27593.
test: fix RPC coverage check #33064
pull fanquake wants to merge 2 commits into bitcoin:master from fanquake:29387_rebased changing 3 files +6 −1-
fanquake commented at 2:02 PM on July 25, 2025: member
- DrahtBot added the label Tests on Jul 25, 2025
-
DrahtBot commented at 2:02 PM on July 25, 2025: contributor
<!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.
<!--006a51241073e994b41acfe9ec718e94-->
Code Coverage & Benchmarks
For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/33064.
<!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->
Reviews
See the guideline for information on the review process.
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.
<!--174a7506f384e20aa4161008e828411d-->
Conflicts
Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:
- #31668 (Added rescan option for import descriptors by saikiran57)
If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.
<!--5faf32d7da4f0f540f40219e4f7537a3-->
- DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Jul 25, 2025
-
test: add abortrescan RPC test 2630b64f81
-
test: fix RPC coverage check 8aed477c33
- fanquake force-pushed on Jul 26, 2025
- fanquake marked this as ready for review on Jul 26, 2025
- DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Jul 26, 2025
-
cedwies commented at 3:52 PM on July 27, 2025: contributor
Tested on MacOS 15.5 (Debug build).
- unit tests pass (0/143 failures)
- ./test/functional/wallet_transactiontime_rescan.py passes (11 s)
Question: would it make sense to also test "abortrescan" during an active rescan to hit the True path and ensure the scan halts as expected?
ACK 8aed477
-
maflcko commented at 8:41 AM on July 28, 2025: member
lgtm ACK 8aed477c3322212a636ab69d4923f89e2d9a63a2
-
fanquake commented at 9:40 AM on July 28, 2025: member
Question: would it make sense to also test "abortrescan" during an active rescan to hit the True path and ensure the scan halts as expected?
Feel free to open a new PR, adding additional test changes.
- fanquake merged this on Jul 28, 2025
- fanquake closed this on Jul 28, 2025
- fanquake deleted the branch on Jul 28, 2025
- alexanderwiederin referenced this in commit 28fe919bf7 on Aug 6, 2025
- sedited referenced this in commit b98d982d79 on Aug 7, 2025
- alexanderwiederin referenced this in commit 4152176d02 on Aug 8, 2025
- alexanderwiederin referenced this in commit 9ef94c31db on Aug 8, 2025
- stringintech referenced this in commit 71275a1b5e on Aug 17, 2025
- yuvicc referenced this in commit 22f55cf11d on Aug 26, 2025
- bug-castercv502 referenced this in commit 4aa5572aea on Sep 28, 2025
- stickies-v referenced this in commit a19c56cd7c on Nov 4, 2025
- knst referenced this in commit 6628ef3b48 on Apr 10, 2026
- knst referenced this in commit ff4302f89b on Apr 10, 2026
- PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 2b831c1a2d on Apr 28, 2026
- thepastaclaw referenced this in commit 8b13c3cd40 on May 19, 2026
- thepastaclaw referenced this in commit 5e0af0b980 on May 19, 2026
- Kino1994 referenced this in commit 86bf191fa6 on Jun 28, 2026
- BigcoinBGC referenced this in commit 0c32488baf on Jun 30, 2026
- bitcoin locked this on Jul 30, 2026
Labels