[Buildroot] [PATCH v2, 1/1] package/bitcoin: bump to version 0.19.0.1

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2, 1/1] package/bitcoin: bump to version 0.19.0.1

[Fabrice Fontaine]

- Retrieve official tarball instead of using github as specified in
  https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v0.19.0.1
- Remove patch (already in version)
- Update hash of COPYING (update in year:
  https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ae5594d51b489826f2f2315c92e8df5ee0267efc)

Signed-off-by: Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com>
---
Changes v1 -> v2:
 - Fix version in title

 ...sing-header-bootlegged-by-boost-1-72.patch | 28 -------------------
 package/bitcoin/bitcoin.hash                  |  8 ++++--
 package/bitcoin/bitcoin.mk                    |  4 +--
 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 package/bitcoin/0001-http-add-missing-header-bootlegged-by-boost-1-72.patch

diff --git a/package/bitcoin/0001-http-add-missing-header-bootlegged-by-boost-1-72.patch b/package/bitcoin/0001-http-add-missing-header-bootlegged-by-boost-1-72.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 84e0cf2570..0000000000
--- a/package/bitcoin/0001-http-add-missing-header-bootlegged-by-boost-1-72.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,28 +0,0 @@
-From a5929130223973636f3fd25fbfaf2953f2ec96a9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Jan Beich <jbeich@FreeBSD.org>
-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:05:17 +0000
-Subject: [PATCH] http: add missing header bootlegged by boost < 1.72
-
-httpserver.cpp:74:10: error: no template named 'deque' in namespace 'std'
-    std::deque<std::unique_ptr<WorkItem>> queue;
-    ~~~~~^
-
-[Retrieved from:
-https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a5929130223973636f3fd25fbfaf2953f2ec96a9]
-Signed-off-by: Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com>
----
- src/httpserver.cpp | 1 +
- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
-
-diff --git a/src/httpserver.cpp b/src/httpserver.cpp
-index 81137771871f..d9c711332358 100644
---- a/src/httpserver.cpp
-+++ b/src/httpserver.cpp
-@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
- #include <sync.h>
- #include <ui_interface.h>
- 
-+#include <deque>
- #include <memory>
- #include <stdio.h>
- #include <stdlib.h>
diff --git a/package/bitcoin/bitcoin.hash b/package/bitcoin/bitcoin.hash
index 2a71084d97..fe7c1562a8 100644
--- a/package/bitcoin/bitcoin.hash
+++ b/package/bitcoin/bitcoin.hash
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
-# Locally calculated
-sha256 c8557b6df5f5cdf67b3ddf6fe501cfc6e0be698f175f16927dd08d6040df7d9f  bitcoin-0.16.3.tar.gz
-sha256 70223369f70e8cb550e75aa74eb86bfa5220fb09c0ba0549d91c36587d15d1a0  COPYING
+# From https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.19.0.1/SHA256SUMS.asc
+sha256 7ac9f972249a0a16ed01352ca2a199a5448fe87a4ea74923404a40b4086de284  bitcoin-0.19.0.1.tar.gz
+
+# Hash for license file
+sha256 9a0f75d688e9cf5c69d3efdaa2a83af496700d252b212ec6a72f7784b47fed0c  COPYING
diff --git a/package/bitcoin/bitcoin.mk b/package/bitcoin/bitcoin.mk
index a3ac45e104..040c55b8a6 100644
--- a/package/bitcoin/bitcoin.mk
+++ b/package/bitcoin/bitcoin.mk
@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
 #
 ################################################################################
 
-BITCOIN_VERSION = 0.16.3
-BITCOIN_SITE = $(call github,bitcoin,bitcoin,v$(BITCOIN_VERSION))
+BITCOIN_VERSION = 0.19.0.1
+BITCOIN_SITE = https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-$(BITCOIN_VERSION)
 BITCOIN_AUTORECONF = YES
 BITCOIN_LICENSE = MIT
 BITCOIN_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING
-- 
2.24.1

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2, 1/1] package/bitcoin: bump to version 0.19.0.1

[Thomas Petazzoni]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 22:26:37 +0100
Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com> wrote:

> - Retrieve official tarball instead of using github as specified in
>   https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v0.19.0.1
> - Remove patch (already in version)
> - Update hash of COPYING (update in year:
>   https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ae5594d51b489826f2f2315c92e8df5ee0267efc)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com>
> ---
> Changes v1 -> v2:
>  - Fix version in title

Applied to master, thanks.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2, 1/1] package/bitcoin: bump to version 0.19.0.1

[James Hilliard]

On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 1:07 AM Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 22:26:37 +0100
> Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > - Retrieve official tarball instead of using github as specified in
> >   https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v0.19.0.1
> > - Remove patch (already in version)
> > - Update hash of COPYING (update in year:
> >   https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ae5594d51b489826f2f2315c92e8df5ee0267efc)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > Changes v1 -> v2:
> >  - Fix version in title
>
> Applied to master, thanks.
Any bitcoin core updates really need to be backported as well even
if they are a major version bump.

I should probably add that there are special security considerations
that need to be taken into account when packaging bitcoin core.
See:
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/linux-distribution-packaging-and-bitcoin-1374549783
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020292

There are very few Linux distributions that package bitcoin core
as very few have a suitable release model for properly handling
updates. In general if a distribution can not keep Bitcoin Core on
the latest version for all supported releases then it really should
not be packaged at all.

One way to mitigate the risk is to explicitly remove the bitcoin core
package or replace it with a non-functional dummy package for
any stable branches where it can't be kept fully up to date. This
should probably be done as the final step when a stable branch is
no longer supported as well.
>
> Thomas
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> https://bootlin.com
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2, 1/1] package/bitcoin: bump to version 0.19.0.1

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "James" == James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com> writes:

Hi,

 > Any bitcoin core updates really need to be backported as well even
 > if they are a major version bump.

 > I should probably add that there are special security considerations
 > that need to be taken into account when packaging bitcoin core.
 > See:
 > https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/linux-distribution-packaging-and-bitcoin-1374549783
 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020292

 > There are very few Linux distributions that package bitcoin core
 > as very few have a suitable release model for properly handling
 > updates. In general if a distribution can not keep Bitcoin Core on
 > the latest version for all supported releases then it really should
 > not be packaged at all.

 > One way to mitigate the risk is to explicitly remove the bitcoin core
 > package or replace it with a non-functional dummy package for
 > any stable branches where it can't be kept fully up to date. This
 > should probably be done as the final step when a stable branch is
 > no longer supported as well.

So what do you suggest? I take it that this means that you are using
bitcoin? Will you handle backports of it for our stable/lts releases?

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2, 1/1] package/bitcoin: bump to version 0.19.0.1

[James Hilliard]

On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 6:39 AM Peter Korsgaard <peter@korsgaard.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> "James" == James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com> writes:
>
> Hi,
>
>  > Any bitcoin core updates really need to be backported as well even
>  > if they are a major version bump.
>
>  > I should probably add that there are special security considerations
>  > that need to be taken into account when packaging bitcoin core.
>  > See:
>  > https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/linux-distribution-packaging-and-bitcoin-1374549783
>  > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1020292
>
>  > There are very few Linux distributions that package bitcoin core
>  > as very few have a suitable release model for properly handling
>  > updates. In general if a distribution can not keep Bitcoin Core on
>  > the latest version for all supported releases then it really should
>  > not be packaged at all.
>
>  > One way to mitigate the risk is to explicitly remove the bitcoin core
>  > package or replace it with a non-functional dummy package for
>  > any stable branches where it can't be kept fully up to date. This
>  > should probably be done as the final step when a stable branch is
>  > no longer supported as well.
>
> So what do you suggest? I take it that this means that you are using
> bitcoin? Will you handle backports of it for our stable/lts releases?
Well yes I use it but not with buildroot(I mean my preference is to
remove it entirely since it's kinda high risk using it with buildroot
in general without extensive testing). While most of my embedded
projects have connected to bitcoin core in some way it never ran
on the embedded devices. I can help out with backporting anytime
there's a conflict or other issue I guess since I know the software
fairly well.
>
> --
> Bye, Peter Korsgaard