build: 💥 update to secp256k1 v2.1.0 w/ breaking changes #39
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
New and removed dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎
🚮 Removed packages: npm/@dashincubator/[email protected], npm/[email protected], npm/[email protected], npm/[email protected] |
jojobyte
force-pushed
the
ref-secp256k1-2.1.0-compat
branch
2 times, most recently
from
2144c90 to
d11be84
Compare
jojobyte
force-pushed
the
ref-secp256k1-2.1.0-compat
branch
from
d11be84 to
a201184
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Per paulmillr/noble-secp256k1#upgrading,
sign&verifyhad their defaults renamed, andsignis now sync and requireshmacSha256Syncto be defined, which may require additional repositories, however using theasyncversion does not.Due to that
test/hdkey.test.jswas updated to use theSecp256k1.signAsync, however the returned Signature no longer matched the rest of what the test was looking for, so it was modified further to addtoCompactRawBytes()and therSizeIndexandoffsetswere adjusted to make this work.