Skip to content

Enable bitcoin_hashes v0.14.0 #76

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 13, 2025
+3 −2
Merged

Enable bitcoin_hashes v0.14.0 #76

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions Cargo.toml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -49,13 +49,13 @@ serde = { version = "1.0", default-features = false, features = [ "alloc" ], opt
zeroize = { version = "1.5", features = ["zeroize_derive"], optional = true }

# Unexported dependnecies
bitcoin_hashes = { version = ">=0.12, <=0.13", default-features = false }
bitcoin_hashes = { version = ">=0.12,<0.15", default-features = false }
unicode-normalization = { version = "0.1.22", default-features = false, optional = true }

[dev-dependencies]
# Enabling the "rand" feature by default to run the benches
bip39 = { path = ".", features = ["rand"] }
bitcoin_hashes = ">=0.12,<0.14" # enable default features for test
bitcoin_hashes = ">=0.12,<0.15" # enable default features for test


[package.metadata.docs.rs]
Expand Down
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ The `bitcoin_hashes` range dependency effects the MSRV as follows

- `bitcoin_hashes v0.12`: MSRV v1.41.1
- `bitcoin_hashes v0.13`: MSRV v1.48.0
- `bitcoin_hashes v0.14`: MSRV v1.56.0
Copy link
Collaborator

@elsirion elsirion Nov 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I haven't verified this claim given that we decided to forgo CI checks for now and manually figuring out the necessary pinning is a pita. It seems benign enough and a reasonable assumption that the MSRV will be dictated by bitcoin_hashes and there aren't any further interactions in the code base.


When using older version of Rust, you might have to pin the versions of several crates, for an up-to-date list refer to [`contrib/test.sh`](contrib/test.sh):
Copy link
Collaborator

@tnull tnull Oct 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is this no longer true, i.e., why don't we have to pin back the other dependencies below?

Copy link
Collaborator

@elsirion elsirion Oct 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Possibly a faulty rebase conflict resolution? I made changes to these lines in #86 and this PR was open forever. @tcharding

Copy link
Member Author

@tcharding tcharding Oct 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh I just clobbered them because over the last year (since edition 2018 came into rust-bitcoin) I've barely ever had to pin anymore. Admittedly not the best reason for the change, I've put it back how it was.

Copy link
Collaborator

@elsirion elsirion Oct 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it depends which MSRV you are targeting, a lot of the bip39 deps seem to have bumped their MSRV in minor version releases. I only had to pin for the old rust version tests back then.

Copy link
Member

@apoelstra apoelstra Oct 28, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In rust-bitcoin and related crates we've avoided pinning by using fixed lockfiles, which we basically never update even though we should. That's why you haven't had to deal with this crap @tcharding.

Copy link
Collaborator

@tnull tnull Oct 28, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, eventually we might want to discuss doing a conservative MSRV bump here (1.41 seems very old by now, for every standard), potentially just aligning it with the rust-bitcoin policy.

But, for now, that's out-of-scope of this PR. And if we already have the checks in place, there probably is no rush to do so.


Expand Down