MOVEONLY-ish: Move most block header validation function defintions to consensus/blockverify.cpp #6048

1. 
   jtimon commented at 10:36 pm on April 22, 2015: contributor

   Right after #5975 is merged I would open this PR so I think it makes sense to open it already in case both things can be merged at once, and also to simplify #6051 dependecies.

   Note that this is no longer depedendent on #5696 nor #5669

2. jtimon renamed this:
   MOVEONLY: Move most consensus function declarations to consensus/consensus.h
   MOVEONLY: Move most block header validation function defintions to consensus/blockverify.cpp
   on Apr 22, 2015
3. jtimon renamed this:
   MOVEONLY: Move most block header validation function defintions to consensus/blockverify.cpp
   DEPENDENT: MOVEONLY: Move most block header validation function defintions to consensus/blockverify.cpp
   on Apr 22, 2015
4. 
   jtimon commented at 0:53 am on April 23, 2015: contributor

   Closing until #5696 is resolved
5. jtimon closed this on Apr 23, 2015

   ---

6. jtimon reopened this on Apr 23, 2015

   ---

7. jtimon force-pushed on Apr 23, 2015
8. jtimon closed this on Apr 23, 2015

   ---

9. Consensus: Separate CheckIndexAgainstCheckpoint() from ContextualCheckBlockHeader 4658a49243
10. jtimon reopened this on Apr 24, 2015

    ---

11. jtimon force-pushed on Apr 24, 2015
12. jtimon renamed this:
    DEPENDENT: MOVEONLY: Move most block header validation function defintions to consensus/blockverify.cpp
    MOVEONLY: Move most block header validation function defintions to consensus/blockverify.cpp
    on Apr 24, 2015
13. jtimon renamed this:
    MOVEONLY: Move most block header validation function defintions to consensus/blockverify.cpp
    MOVEONLY-ish: Move most block header validation function defintions to consensus/blockverify.cpp
    on Apr 24, 2015
14. 
    jtimon commented at 10:30 pm on April 24, 2015: contributor

    Reopened as independent from #5696
15. 
    theuni commented at 11:19 pm on April 24, 2015: member

    NACK. Why?

    #5696 has several ACKs and is likely to be merged very quickly. Those changes have gone through half a dozen iterations, but never been merged because they’re constantly moving in and out of PRs. Now you’ve tacked it on to something else that will need more review, essentially putting the brakes on it again. Worse yet, it fails to build.

    Please, just wait for one chunk at a time. This is getting out of hand.

16. MOVEONLY: Move to consensus/blockverify.cpp:

    (declarations to consensus/consensus.h)
    
    from main.cpp:
    -CheckBlockHeader
    -ContextualCheckBlockHeader
    -IsSuperMajority
    
    from pow.cpp:
    -CalculateNextWorkRequired
    -CheckProofOfWork
    -GetNextWorkRequired

    0d486be24a
17. jtimon force-pushed on Apr 25, 2015
18. 
    jtimon commented at 8:50 am on April 25, 2015: contributor

    I’m sorry, I just wanted to show that this (and everything necessary to expose VerifyHeader) is independent from #5696, from whether MANDATORY_SCRIPT_VERIFY_FLAGS is consensus, policy, or none of them. And if the includes in #5696 (not so many now that the policy stuff is left out) trigger a rebase (like they have done many times before), this could still not need rebase and have an older commit ID the replacement of https://github.com/jtimon/bitcoin/commit/691161d419fe3d82d7a49b511ef80e2b24332aac. I also wanted to show additional motivation for #5975 (or maybe merge both together, it’s not that big of a change), for example, to support the argument for merging #5975 before #6055.

    About the building error, I don’t know why forgetting .h files in the makefile doesn’t fail in my computer, but fixed.

    Anyway, even if it’s independent from #5696, merging one would trigger a trivial rebase on the other, so closing until #5696 and #5975.

19. 
    sipa commented at 9:02 am on April 25, 2015: member

    Try “make distcheck”, which builds a source package abd rebuilds from that. If you don’t do that (and this has bitten me as well), you risk that the build uses files from the repository which are not listed as source files in the build system.
20. 
    jtimon commented at 9:26 am on April 25, 2015: contributor

    Thank you @sipa . Oh, I forgot to actually close the PR
21. jtimon closed this on Apr 25, 2015

    ---

22. MarcoFalke locked this on Sep 8, 2021

Contributors
jtimon theuni sipa