Skip to content

Update CI builder image to use bitcoind 0.16.0 and reduce number of required blocks - #1134

Merged
rustyrussell merged 5 commits into
ElementsProject:masterfrom
cdecker:travis
Mar 1, 2018
Merged

Update CI builder image to use bitcoind 0.16.0 and reduce number of required blocks#1134
rustyrussell merged 5 commits into
ElementsProject:masterfrom
cdecker:travis

Conversation

@cdecker

@cdecker cdecker commented Feb 28, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Now seems to slightly overlap with #1127. Updates bitcoind to version 0.16.0 and reduces number of blocks pre-generated to 121, instead of 432. 121 are required at least so we have some mature funds.

@jsarenik

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

README file also mentions 432 blocks.

@rustyrussell

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks, fixed up README.md and reduced from 121 to 101 (tested! 100 is not enough, 101 is).

cdecker and others added 5 commits March 1, 2018 10:46
Now that 0.16.0 is stable we should make use of it

Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
0.16.0 is required since we rely on it for some tests and the block
reduction allows us to waste less time during setup. 121 blocks were
chosen so that we have at least one mature output to spend.

Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
Since bitcoind 0.16 is already released it is safe to enable
this test already.
FWIW, the tests without valgrind take 662 seconds before we reduced
the number of blocks, and only 648 seconds now.

Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
@rustyrussell

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ack 985362c

@rustyrussell
rustyrussell merged commit e10a2b6 into ElementsProject:master Mar 1, 2018
@cdecker

cdecker commented Mar 1, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Wondering what the timing implications are :-)

@jsarenik

jsarenik commented Mar 2, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@rustyrussell One more thing. README mentions version 0.15 or above. Should this be changed now to 0.16?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants