lint: (re-)add contrib/guix for Python linting #35869

pull fanquake wants to merge 2 commits into bitcoin:master from fanquake:re_lint_guix_scripts changing 4 files +6 −5

fanquake commented at 10:59 AM on August 3, 2026: member

These were no-longer being linted after #32458.

suppress [union-attr] warning. i.e:

contrib/guix/symbol-check.py:309: error: Item "None" of "lief.PE.Binary | lief.ELF.Binary | lief.MachO.Binary | lief.COFF.Binary | None" has no attribute "format"  [union-attr]
contrib/guix/security-check.py:284: error: Item "lief.COFF.Binary" of "lief.PE.Binary | lief.ELF.Binary | lief.MachO.Binary | lief.COFF.Binary | None" has no attribute "abstract"  [union-attr]

Add the comment suggested in #35855..

lint: re-add guix scripts to mypy linting

These were no-longer being linted after #32458.

suppress `[union-attr]` warning. i.e:
```bash
contrib/guix/symbol-check.py:309: error: Item "None" of "lief.PE.Binary | lief.ELF.Binary | lief.MachO.Binary | lief.COFF.Binary | None" has no attribute "format"  [union-attr]
contrib/guix/security-check.py:284: error: Item "lief.COFF.Binary" of "lief.PE.Binary | lief.ELF.Binary | lief.MachO.Binary | lief.COFF.Binary | None" has no attribute "abstract"  [union-attr]
```

594a02c3ae

lint: document CI lief version requirement 8221d714c7
DrahtBot added the label Tests on Aug 3, 2026
DrahtBot commented at 10:59 AM on August 3, 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/35869.



Reviews

See the guideline and AI policy for information on the review process.

Type Reviewers

ACK hebasto, maflcko

If your review is incorrectly listed, please copy-paste <code></code> into the comment that the bot should ignore.
hebasto approved
hebasto commented at 11:15 AM on August 3, 2026: member

ACK 8221d714c7888cbcf44971ab279effde505707a9, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK.
maflcko commented at 11:15 AM on August 3, 2026: member

Haven't reviewed the first commit. Are we still using mypy, and should this be modified, or is there an effort to move to ty anyway?

lgtm ACK 8221d714c7888cbcf44971ab279effde505707a9 in any case.
fanquake commented at 11:17 AM on August 3, 2026: member

Are we still using mypy

mypy is still being run over python files. @willcl-ark probably has insights on any potential migration.
willcl-ark commented at 11:25 AM on August 3, 2026: member

I would like to move to ty, but I do still read that it's perhaps not 100% stable enough yet (not being v1.0) to use in production, so have held off for now. (I have been using it myself for a year and it seems great tbh though).

Perhaps I'll set up a fork repo to rebase master here using ty and see if/how often it breaks
fanquake merged this on Aug 3, 2026
fanquake closed this on Aug 3, 2026
fanquake deleted the branch on Aug 3, 2026

Type	Reviewers
ACK	hebasto, maflcko

Contributors

Labels

Linked (view graph)

#32458 guix: move `*-check.py` scripts under contrib/guix/#35855 guix: update time-machine

lint: (re-)add contrib/guix for Python linting #35869

Code Coverage & Benchmarks

Reviews