wallet: fix importprunedfunds to allow importing spending txs #34350

1. 
   crackedhandle commented at 8:25 am on January 20, 2026: none

   Fixes #21647

   This PR fixes an issue where the importprunedfunds RPC only allowed importing transactions that credit the wallet, but rejected transactions that spend from the wallet.

   This could lead to incorrect wallet balance in pruned or partially-synced setups where a spending transaction is missing: the wallet would remember receiving funds but forget that they were already spent.

   The fix extends the check to also allow transactions that are IsFromMe().

   A functional test is added to cover importing a spending transaction and ensure it is correctly accepted and restored to the wallet.

2. DrahtBot added the label Wallet on Jan 20, 2026
3. 
   DrahtBot commented at 8:25 am on January 20, 2026: contributor

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/34350.

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process. A summary of reviews will appear here.

4. in src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp:665 in a7d259147d

   661@@ -662,3 +662,4 @@ RPCHelpMan restorewallet()
   662     };
   663 }
   664 } // namespace wallet
   665+
   

   ---

   ---

   

   achow101 commented at 8:03 pm on January 20, 2026:

   Unnecessary whitespace change

   ---

   

   crackedhandle commented at 8:41 am on January 21, 2026:

   Fixed. Removed the unrelated change and the unnecessary comment. The PR now only contains the test.
5. in test/functional/wallet_importprunedfunds.py:111 in a7d259147d

   107@@ -108,14 +108,34 @@ def run_test(self):
   108         assert_equal(address_info['ismine'], True)
   109 
   110         # Remove transactions
   111-        assert_raises_rpc_error(-4, f'Transaction {txnid1} does not belong to this wallet', w1.removeprunedfunds, txnid1)
   112-        assert not [tx for tx in w1.listtransactions() if tx['txid'] == txnid1]
   113+              # --- NEW TEST: importing a SPENDING transaction ---
   

   ---

   ---

   

   achow101 commented at 8:03 pm on January 20, 2026:

   These comments are unnecessary. There is no need to have code comments that describe how the behavior is changing.

   ---

   

   crackedhandle commented at 8:13 am on January 21, 2026:

   Thanks for the review! I’ve removed the unnecessary whitespace change and dropped the explanatory comment to keep the diff minimal.

   ---

   

   crackedhandle commented at 8:25 am on January 21, 2026:

   Fixed. I removed the unnecessary comment and the unrelated change. The diff now only contains the test.
6. test: cover importprunedfunds for spending transactions d2e494aaec
7. crackedhandle force-pushed on Jan 21, 2026
8. 
   maflcko commented at 10:11 am on January 21, 2026: member

   Can you please not add ai-generated images to the pull description? They are distracting and usually wrong. Also, they won’t be seen in git log anyway.
9. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Jan 21, 2026
10. 
    maflcko commented at 11:52 am on January 21, 2026: member

    these pics make things easy to understand

    no they don’t. They are wrong (hallucinated), so they are confusing.

    instead of producing incorrect pictures, you could have compiled and run the tests locally. All of them fail.

11. ci: retrigger 01a226720c
12. 
    maflcko commented at 8:16 pm on January 21, 2026: member

    I’ll close this for now. Testing locally does not mean to push an empty commit on an already failing branch to re-trigger the ci.

    Generally, please focus on creating high-quality, original content that demonstrates a clear understanding of the project’s requirements and goals.

13. maflcko closed this on Jan 21, 2026

    ---

14. 
    crackedhandle commented at 3:10 am on January 22, 2026: none

    Can i pull a newly high content re-request?

Contributors
crackedhandle DrahtBot achow101 maflcko

Labels
Wallet CI failed