[29.x] Backports #34855

1. 
   fanquake commented at 6:46 AM on March 19, 2026: member

   Backports:

   • #34848
   • #35175
   • #35202
2. cmake: Migrate away from deprecated SQLite3 target

   CMake version 4.3 deprecated the imported target `Sqlite::Sqlite3`.
   Use the preferred name `Sqlite3::Sqlite3` instead and provide an
   alias for older versions of CMake. Also define the same alias when
   using vcpkg.
   
   Github-Pull: #34848
   Rebased-From: 498b6eb6b5e8aceb372d3097df2715d9c7fc416b

   0fb5e167e8
3. fanquake added this to the milestone 29.4 on Mar 19, 2026
4. DrahtBot added the label Backport on Mar 19, 2026
5. 
   DrahtBot commented at 6:46 AM on March 19, 2026: contributor

   <!--e57a25ab6845829454e8d69fc972939a-->

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

   <!--006a51241073e994b41acfe9ec718e94-->

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/34855.

   <!--021abf342d371248e50ceaed478a90ca-->

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	willcl-ark, achow101

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please copy-paste <code>&lt;!--meta-tag:bot-skip--&gt;</code> into the comment that the bot should ignore.

   <!--5faf32d7da4f0f540f40219e4f7537a3-->

6. fanquake force-pushed on Apr 30, 2026
7. fanquake marked this as ready for review on Apr 30, 2026
8. 
   willcl-ark commented at 1:29 PM on April 30, 2026: member

   in 76e63c36dc524da8682b8b18d07ce78d027122a4, do we need to also update https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/76e63c36dc524da8682b8b18d07ce78d027122a4/src/node/miner.h#L105-L118 ?

   CI seems happy, but I think that's because we are boost 1.81 in depends here.

   Suspect this may want to be inlined into the boost::multi_index_container as per the rest of the commit. I'm running 1.89 here only so didn't test with >= 1.91 (and nixpkgs unstable only has 1.89 currently)

9. multi_index: fix compilation failure with boost >= 1.91

   This effectively reverts a3cb309e7c31853f272bffaa65fb6ab0a7cc4083 from PR #30194.
   
   That PR reduced the multi_index type signatures as recommended upstream, but
   this is no longer supported as of boost 1.91 because it is no longer necessary.
   1.91 drops support for the pre-c++11 work-arounds that bloated the type
   signatures to begin with.
   
   The upstream `BOOST_MULTI_INDEX_ENABLE_MPL_SUPPORT` define is meant to provide
   compatibility with removed features, but it does not work for this case. Using
   `indexed_by` directly when defining the `multi_index` (as opposed to inheriting
   from it) works with all versions, and avoids the use of the back-compat define.
   
   This is a slight regression when building against boost < 1.91 because the
   bloated type signatures are reintroduced in that case, but it's not significant
   enough to go to the trouble of introducing version detection and ifdefs.
   
   Github-Pull: #35175
   Rebased-From: 0bc9d354dfd8074d1c36a891a69b6585a8775c65

   546598b736
10. fanquake force-pushed on Apr 30, 2026
11. willcl-ark approved
12. 
    willcl-ark commented at 8:34 PM on April 30, 2026: member

    utACK 4e7a990148d47cf129c245bc17d0f228eb06a3e6

    This looks correct to me now, though I didn't test myself with boost 1.91+

13. ci: unconfine seccomp for i686 no IPC

    Docker 29.4.2 blocks `socketcall(2)` in the default seccomp profile:
    https://docs.docker.com/engine/release-notes/29/#2942
    https://github.com/moby/profiles/releases/tag/seccomp%2Fv0.2.2
    https://github.com/moby/moby/pull/52501
    
    That affects the `i686, no IPC` job because it runs 32-bit Linux test binaries inside Docker.
    
    Add Docker's documented `--security-opt seccomp=unconfined` workaround to this job's `CI_CONTAINER_CAP` - the hook `ci/test/02_run_container.py` already appends to `docker run`.
    
    This restores socket availability for the 32-bit test binaries throughout the job:
    https://docs.docker.com/engine/security/seccomp/#run-without-the-default-seccomp-profile
    
    Github-Pull: #35202
    Rebased-From: 11c9ef92a8daf030f75f88f324396b2248c65a64

    18739ec488
14. doc: update release notes for v29.x 83b46506a1
15. fanquake force-pushed on May 5, 2026
16. fanquake requested review from marcofleon on May 5, 2026
17. 
    willcl-ark commented at 1:55 PM on May 5, 2026: member

    reACK 83b46506a10

    git range-diff since last ACK is clean:

    ❯ git range-diff 4e7a990...83b465
    -:  ----------- > 1:  18739ec4886 ci: unconfine seccomp for i686 no IPC
    1:  4e7a990148d ! 2:  83b46506a10 doc: update release notes for v29.x
        @@ doc/release-notes.md: Notable changes
          - [#34561](/github-metadata-backup-bitcoin-bitcoin/34561/) wallet: rpc: manpage: fix example missing `fee_rate` argument
          - [#34671](/github-metadata-backup-bitcoin-bitcoin/34671/) doc: Update Guix install for Debian/Ubuntu
    
        ++### CI
        ++
        ++- [#35202](/github-metadata-backup-bitcoin-bitcoin/35202/) ci: restore sockets in i686, no IPC job
        ++
         +### Misc
         +
         +- [#35175](/github-metadata-backup-bitcoin-bitcoin/35175/) multi_index: fix compilation failure with boost >= 1.91
        @@ doc/release-notes.md: Notable changes
         +- Daniel Pfeifer
          - Hennadii Stepanov
          - jayvaliya
        ++- Lőrinc
          - MarcoFalke
        + - SomberNight
        + - ToRyVand
    

    The CI failure looks like it is a transport error of some sort, or some GH flakiness?

18. 
    fanquake commented at 3:19 PM on May 5, 2026: member

    The CI failure looks like it is a transport error of some sort, or some GH flakiness?

    Yea. Have kicked that job.

19. 
    achow101 commented at 7:54 AM on May 6, 2026: member

    ACK 83b46506a1096154f9619066e81b1b234c71a274

20. achow101 merged this on May 6, 2026
21. achow101 closed this on May 6, 2026

    ---

22. fanquake deleted the branch on May 6, 2026

Review Requested
marcofleon

Milestone
29.4