The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Code Coverage & Benchmarks

For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/31609.

Reviews

See the guideline for information on the review process.

If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

Conflicts

No conflicts as of last run.

No objection, but this will just create a conflict with the bdb removal, at which point the test will be deleted as well?

No objection, but this will just create a conflict with the bdb removal, at which point the test will be deleted as well?

The check will still exist in importdescriptors. But you're right, the legacy wallet iteration in this functional test will be removed, so it's better to move this check to wallet_migration test.

Huh? Now you are adding a test for a previous release, which does not increase the test coverage, see also https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/31609 .

If you want to test a previous release, it would be better to submit the test against the previous release branch. But I am not sure if this is worth it.

Also, I don't understand why the check should be kept after the bdb removal. Why would one want to guard against bdb at runtime when it is impossible to load bdb?

Huh? Now you are adding a test for a previous release, which does not increase the test coverage, see also https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/31609 .

Nevermind, my bad, I did it quickly and did not notice it. I'm gonna close it because I believe this check could be removed within bdb removal.