build: set minimum required Boost to 1.64.0 - #22320
Conversation
Now that we require Boost 1.64.0+, Boost Process will be available.
b8bcaa5 to
957f358
Compare
|
Concept ACK |
|
Concept ACK. |
|
Boost Process was introduced in 1.64. Debian stretch has boost 1.62, other main distros have 1.65+, right? If so, will we have any benefit of bumping boost version to 1.65 (instead of 1.64)? |
The only benefit might be being able to take advantage of any new Boost Test related features. However it doesn't look like there is anything substantial in that regard. |
|
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers. ConflictsReviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:
If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first. |
|
review ACK 957f358 didn't test |
|
Please check at least RHEL next time. For reference, looks like it's got 1.66 so should be fine here. |
This was somewhat covered by the fact that RHEL is based off a semi-recent Fedora. It would be fine in any case, because if it had a too-old version of Boost, anyone wanting to compile on that system can use depends. |
9ba7c44 refactor: get wallet path relative to wallet_dir (Michael Dietz) Pull request description: Now that boost has been updated > 1.60 (see #22320), we can simplify how we get wallet path relative to wallet_dir by using: `boost::filesystem::lexically_relative`, removing a TODO. Test coverage comes from `test/functional/wallet_multiwallet.py` I first tried this in #20265 which was my first attempted PR, and funny enough exactly 1 year later I'm opening this one to hopefully finally close this. ACKs for top commit: ryanofsky: Code review ACK 9ba7c44. Basically this same code change is made in #20744 commit b70c84348ac7a8e427a1183f894c73e52c734529, so this PR helps simplify that one lsilva01: Code Review ACK 9ba7c44 Tree-SHA512: 6ccb91a18bcb52c3ae0c789a94a18fb5be7db7769fd1121552d63f259fbd32b50c3dcf169cec0b02f978321db3bc60eb4b881b8327e9764f32e700236e0d8a35
6 participants
Setting a newer minimum required Boost means we can remove the awkward header / compile check for Boost Process.
If we don't do this, we should at-least make Boost Process being missing no longer a failure, otherwise anyone building using Boost < 1.64.0 would have to pass
--disable-external-signeras well.The only system I can see that is affected here, (doesn't have new enough system packages) is Debian Oldstable. However, anyone compiling there, can use depends. They can also no-longer use the system GCC (6.0), and I'd assume would be using Clang 7, which would be the newest compiler available to them. It's extended, LTS support also end in 1 year from now, so anyone still using it should be considering upgrading.
Debian Buster (Stable) has 1.67+, Ubuntu Bionic has 1.65+, any of the BSDs, recent Fedora, macOS etc all also have well and truly new enough Boost versions available.
I think this is something we should just do for 22.0. If not, definitely for 23.0.
Fixes #22319. Compiling Bitcoin Core should work, as
windows.hwill be included.Alternative to #22294.
Would also close #22269.
#19128 could be re-opened.