AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 15 Bitcoin

test: use ModuleNotFoundError in interface_ipc.py

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by fanquake

98/100 · Strong
test: use ModuleNotFoundError in interface_ipc.py

Change this so we catch the case where the capnp shared libs have been
updated, and can no-longer be loaded by the Python module, resulting in
a skipped test, even though pycapnp is installed. i.e:
```bash
stderr:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/root/ci_scratch/build/test/functional/interface_ipc.py", line 20, in <module>
import capnp # type: ignore[import] # noqa: F401
^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "/usr/local/lib64/python3.14/site-packages/capnp/__init__.py", line 36, in <module>
from .version import version as __version__
File "/usr/local/lib64/python3.14/site-packages/capnp/version.py", line 1, in <module>
from .lib.capnp import _CAPNP_VERSION_MAJOR as LIBCAPNP_VERSION_MAJOR # noqa: F401
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ImportError: libcapnpc.so.1.0.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
```

Failing in this way should make it clear that `pycapnp` needs to be
reinstalled/rebuilt.

If `pycapnp` is not installed, the test still skips as expected:
```bash
Remaining jobs: [interface_ipc.py]
1/1 - interface_ipc.py skipped (capnp module not available.)

TEST | STATUS | DURATION

interface_ipc.py | ○ Skipped | 0 s
```

Fixes: #34016.

Co-authored-by: Ryan Ofsky <ryan@ofsky.org>
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Uses a recognizable type or scope✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Mentions testing or verification✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This is a tiny change to a single Bitcoin Core test file. It makes the test skip cleanly when the optional capnp Python library is broken or missing, instead of crashing with a confusing error. It does not affect normal Bitcoin node operation, wallets, consensus, networking, or any user-facing security behavior.

Recommended action

No security action needed. Treat as a normal test-quality improvement.

Security signals we found

No strong security signals were identified.

Risk score

Why this scored 15/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 0/30
Exploitability 0/25
Stealth signal 0/15
Affected reach 0/15
Confidence 10/10
Evidence quality 5/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.