Use height check for overwinter invalid

This commit is contained in:
jl777
2018-12-15 03:25:41 -11:00
parent 151645ce9e
commit 2546ae048d

View File

@@ -1020,7 +1020,8 @@ bool ContextualCheckTransaction(
// If Sprout rules apply, reject transactions which are intended for Overwinter and beyond
if (isSprout && tx.fOverwintered) {
return state.DoS(nHeight < Params().GetConsensus().vUpgrades[Consensus::UPGRADE_OVERWINTER].nActivationHeight ? 0 : dosLevel,error("ContextualCheckTransaction(): ht.%d activates.%d dosLevel.%d overwinter is not active yet",nHeight, Params().GetConsensus().vUpgrades[Consensus::UPGRADE_OVERWINTER].nActivationHeight, dosLevel),REJECT_INVALID, "tx-overwinter-not-active");
int32_t ht = Params().GetConsensus().vUpgrades[Consensus::UPGRADE_OVERWINTER].nActivationHeight;
return state.DoS((ht < 0 || nHeight < ht) ? 0 : dosLevel,error("ContextualCheckTransaction(): ht.%d activates.%d dosLevel.%d overwinter is not active yet",nHeight, Params().GetConsensus().vUpgrades[Consensus::UPGRADE_OVERWINTER].nActivationHeight, dosLevel),REJECT_INVALID, "tx-overwinter-not-active");
//return state.DoS(isInitBlockDownload() ? 0 : dosLevel,error("ContextualCheckTransaction(): ht.%d activates.%d dosLevel.%d overwinter is not active yet",nHeight, Params().GetConsensus().vUpgrades[Consensus::UPGRADE_OVERWINTER].nActivationHeight, dosLevel),REJECT_INVALID, "tx-overwinter-not-active");
}