Deploy to bera testnet #833
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces a new network entry for "beratest" across various configuration files and scripts. Key modifications include adding properties for the "beratest" network in multiple JSON files, creating new deployment files for a diamond architecture, and updating several scripts with new functions and mappings. These changes enhance the overall structure and functionality related to the "beratest" network within the project. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
foundry.toml (1)
64-64: LGTM! Consider adding a comment for clarity.The addition of the beratest RPC endpoint is correct and follows the established pattern. Good job using an environment variable for the URI.
Consider adding a comment above this line to indicate it's part of the testnet section, improving readability:
# testnets goerli = "${ETH_NODE_URI_GOERLI}" bsc-testnet = "${ETH_NODE_URI_BSCTEST}" lineatest = "${ETH_NODE_URI_LINEATEST}" localanvil = "${ETH_NODE_URI_LOCALANVIL}" mumbai = "${ETH_NODE_URI_MUMBAI}" base = "${ETH_NODE_URI_BASE}" +# beratest beratest = "${ETH_NODE_URI_BERATEST}"config/global.json (1)
Line range hint
7-7: Remove duplicate "pauserWallet" key.There are two "pauserWallet" keys in the file with different values:
- "0x3b6211981d47Fb6375E0125A6a401830616f7906" (line 7)
- "0x29DaCdF7cCaDf4eE67c923b4C22255A4B2494eD7" (line 11)
Duplicate keys in JSON can lead to unexpected behavior. Please remove one of these entries or clarify which one should be used.
Also applies to: 11-11
config/amarok.json (1)
304-308: LGTM! Consider adding a comment for the Bera testnet.The addition of the "beratest" entry looks good. The structure and values are consistent with other testnet entries in the file. For improved clarity and consistency with some other entries, consider adding a comment above the "beratest" entry to indicate that it's a testnet.
You could add a comment like this:
+ // Bera testnet "beratest": { "chainId": 80084, "connextHandler": "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000", "domain": "", "tokensToApprove": [] }config/networks.json (1)
263-271: LGTM! Consider repositioning the entry.The new "beratest" entry for Berachain Testnet looks good. All required fields are present and correctly formatted. The "inactive" status and "testnet" type are appropriate for a new testnet entry.
For better organization, consider moving this entry to be grouped with other testnet configurations (after line 271). This would maintain a clear separation between mainnet and testnet entries in the file.
config/dexs.json (1)
679-679: LGTM. Consider adding a comment for the empty "beratest" array.The addition of the "beratest" network is good. However, an empty array might be confusing for other developers. Consider adding a comment explaining why there are no addresses yet, e.g., if the network is new or if DEXs are not yet deployed.
You could modify the line like this:
- "beratest": [] + "beratest": [] // TODO: Add DEX addresses once deployed on beratest networkscript/deploy/_targetState.json (1)
Line range hint
1-2371: Summary of changes and issues in _targetState.json
- A new network "beratest" has been added with a basic configuration.
- Several contracts (OFTWrapperFacet, AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet, AcrossFacetV3, AcrossFacetPackedV3, and OpBNBBridgeFacet) are showing errors due to invalid filepaths across multiple networks.
- The "beratest" configuration is more minimal compared to other networks, which may be intentional for a testnet but should be verified.
- There's an inconsistency in the "beratest" configuration where the "TokenWrapper" contract is missing from "LiFiDiamond" but present in "LiFiDiamondImmutable".
Please address these issues, particularly the missing filepaths, to ensure the configuration file is complete and consistent across all networks.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (14)
- config/amarok.json (1 hunks)
- config/dexs.json (1 hunks)
- config/global.json (1 hunks)
- config/networks.json (1 hunks)
- config/stargate.json (2 hunks)
- config/tokenwrapper.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/beratest.diamond.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/beratest.json (1 hunks)
- foundry.toml (2 hunks)
- networks (1 hunks)
- script/deploy/_targetState.json (29 hunks)
- script/deploy/safe/confirm-safe-tx.ts (1 hunks)
- script/helperFunctions.sh (1 hunks)
- script/utils/viemScriptHelpers.ts (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Gitleaks
deployments/beratest.json
6-6: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
🔇 Additional comments (20)
networks (1)
36-36: LGTM: Addition of "beratest" networkThe addition of "beratest" to the list of networks is consistent with the PR objective of deploying to the bera testnet. The naming convention and placement in the list are appropriate.
To ensure proper integration, please run the following script to verify that "beratest" is correctly referenced in other relevant configuration files:
This script will help identify any places where the new network should be referenced but might have been missed.
✅ Verification successful
Verified: "beratest" network integration confirmed
All references to "beratest" have been found in configuration files, JavaScript/TypeScript files, and deployment scripts. The new network is properly integrated across the project.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the integration of "beratest" network across the project # Search for "beratest" in JSON configuration files echo "Checking JSON configuration files:" rg --type json "beratest" # Search for "beratest" in JavaScript/TypeScript files echo "Checking JavaScript/TypeScript files:" rg --type js --type ts "beratest" # Search for "beratest" in deployment scripts echo "Checking deployment scripts:" rg --type sh --type py "beratest"Length of output: 920
script/utils/viemScriptHelpers.ts (1)
8-8: LGTM! Verify Viem support for the new chain.The addition of
beratest: 'berachainTestnetbArtio'to thechainNameMappingsobject is consistent with the existing entries and aligns with the PR objective of deploying to the bera testnet.To ensure full compatibility, please verify that the 'berachainTestnetbArtio' chain is supported by Viem. Run the following script to check:
If the script doesn't return any results, you may need to add support for this chain or update Viem to a version that includes it.
deployments/beratest.json (1)
1-21: LGTM! Verify contract addresses and consider adding documentation.The JSON structure is valid, and all contract addresses appear to be in the correct format for Ethereum addresses. This file seems to be setting up a diamond proxy pattern implementation on the "beratest" network, which aligns with the PR objective of deploying to the bera testnet.
To enhance this implementation:
- Verify that all contract addresses are correct and correspond to the intended deployed contracts on the "beratest" network.
- Consider adding comments or separate documentation explaining the purpose of each contract/facet, especially for less common ones like
LIFuelFacetorCalldataVerificationFacet.To verify the contract addresses, you can use the following script:
This script will output the bytecode for each contract. If a contract is not deployed, it will return "0x". Ensure all contracts return valid bytecode.
Regarding the static analysis hint about a Generic API Key on line 6: This appears to be a false positive. The value
0xfC25728DBD6C4FE500d586CeA632a9c2CAa4adF3is a valid Ethereum address for theAccessManagerFacetcontract, not an API key. No action is required for this hint.🧰 Tools
🪛 Gitleaks
6-6: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
config/tokenwrapper.json (1)
44-44: LGTM: Confirmed "immutablezkevm" entry.The "immutablezkevm" entry has been confirmed and remains unchanged. The address format is correct and consistent with Ethereum standards.
deployments/beratest.diamond.json (3)
3-52: Verify completeness and versioning of Facets.The Facets section is well-structured and includes 12 different facets, each with a unique Ethereum address, name, and version. All facets are currently set to version "1.0.0".
Please run the following script to verify the completeness of facets and check version consistency:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify facets and their versions across network configurations # Test: Compare facets and their versions with other network configurations for file in deployments/*.diamond.json; do echo "Facets in $file:" jq -r '.LiFiDiamond.Facets | to_entries[] | "\(.value.Name): \(.value.Version)"' "$file" | sort echo "---" done # Test: Check for any facets with versions other than 1.0.0 echo "Facets with versions other than 1.0.0:" grep -rn '"Version":' deployments/*.diamond.json | grep -v '"1.0.0"' || echo "All facets are version 1.0.0"Additionally, please confirm that all necessary facets for the diamond architecture are included and that the version numbering is correct for this deployment.
53-60: Verify completeness and address consistency of Periphery components.The Periphery section is well-structured and includes 6 different components, each with a descriptive name and an Ethereum address.
Please run the following script to verify the completeness of periphery components and check address consistency:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify periphery components and their addresses across network configurations # Test: Compare periphery components and their addresses with other network configurations for file in deployments/*.diamond.json; do echo "Periphery components in $file:" jq -r '.LiFiDiamond.Periphery | to_entries[] | "\(.key): \(.value)"' "$file" | sort echo "---" done # Test: Check for any periphery components with different addresses across configurations echo "Periphery components with different addresses across configurations:" for component in ERC20Proxy Executor FeeCollector Receiver LiFuelFeeCollector LiFiDEXAggregator; do echo "$component:" grep -h "\"$component\":" deployments/*.diamond.json | sort | uniq -c echo "---" doneAdditionally, please confirm that all necessary periphery components for the system are included and that the addresses are correct for this deployment.
1-62: LGTM: Well-structured JSON configuration.The overall structure of the JSON file is well-organized and easy to read. It clearly defines the LiFiDiamond architecture with separate sections for Facets and Periphery components.
To ensure consistency across the project, please run the following script to compare this structure with other network configurations:
foundry.toml (2)
101-101: LGTM! Please verify the Routescan URL and chain ID.The addition of the beratest Etherscan entry is correct and follows the established pattern. Good job using an environment variable for the API key.
Please confirm that:
- The Routescan URL "https://api.routescan.io/v2/network/testnet/evm/80084/etherscan/api" is the correct and official API endpoint for the beratest network.
- The chain ID "80084" is correct for the beratest network.
You can verify this information by checking the official documentation or contacting the beratest network team.
64-64: Overall, the changes look good and enhance beratest network support.The additions to both the RPC endpoints and Etherscan sections are consistent with the existing configuration structure and follow best practices. These changes successfully enable support for the beratest network in Foundry.
Make sure to update any relevant documentation or README files to mention the newly added beratest network support.
Also applies to: 101-101
script/deploy/safe/confirm-safe-tx.ts (1)
10-10: LGTM! Verify the new import path.The import statement has been updated to reflect a change in the project structure. The functionality should remain the same as long as the
getViemChainForNetworkNamefunction is available at the new location.Let's verify that the new import path is correct:
✅ Verification successful
Import path verified successfully.
The
getViemChainForNetworkNamefunction is correctly exported fromscript/utils/viemScriptHelpers.ts, and the updated import path inscript/deploy/safe/confirm-safe-tx.tsis accurate. No issues found.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the existence of the imported file and function # Test 1: Check if the file exists fd -p "utils/viemScriptHelpers.(ts|js)" -d 3 # Test 2: Check if the function is exported from the file rg -t typescript -t javascript "export.*function.*getViemChainForNetworkName" utils/viemScriptHelpers.ts utils/viemScriptHelpers.jsLength of output: 249
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the export of the 'getViemChainForNetworkName' function with corrected file types # Test 1: Check if the file exists (already successful) fd -p "utils/viemScriptHelpers\.(ts|js)" -d 3 # Test 2: Check if the function is exported from the file with correct file types rg -t ts -t js -w "export\s+function\s+getViemChainForNetworkName" utils/viemScriptHelpers.ts utils/viemScriptHelpers.jsLength of output: 338
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the export of the 'getViemChainForNetworkName' function with corrected file path and enhanced pattern # Test 1: Check if the file exists (already successful) fd -p "utils/viemScriptHelpers\.(ts|js)" -d 3 # Test 2: Check if the function is exported from the correct TypeScript file rg -t ts -w "export\s+(?:function|const|let|var)\s+getViemChainForNetworkName" script/utils/viemScriptHelpers.tsLength of output: 272
config/global.json (2)
142-142: LGTM: Addition of "beratest" entry is correct and consistent.The new entry for "beratest" in the "nativeAddress" section is correctly formatted and uses the zero address, which is consistent with most other entries in this section.
Line range hint
1-145: LGTM: Overall file structure and consistency.The general structure and content of the
config/global.jsonfile are consistent and well-organized. The addition of the "beratest" entry maintains this consistency. No other issues were found apart from the previously mentioned duplicate "pauserWallet" key.config/stargate.json (3)
Line range hint
1-280: Summary of changes and next stepsThe changes to add the "beratest" network to the "endpointV2" and "composers" sections are consistent with the file's structure and initialization practices. The use of zero addresses (0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000) for new entries is appropriate for initialization.
Next steps:
- Clarify if "beratest" should be added to other sections (tokenMessaging, endpointIds, chains, routers).
- If needed, add "beratest" entries to the missing sections.
- Ensure that the zero addresses will be updated with actual contract addresses before deployment to the bera testnet.
Once these points are addressed, the changes can be considered ready for the next stage of the review process.
42-42: Verify completeness of "beratest" network configurationThe "beratest" network has been successfully added to the "endpointV2" and "composers" sections. However, it's worth noting that "beratest" is not present in other sections such as "tokenMessaging", "endpointIds", "chains", and "routers".
Could you please clarify if this is intentional? If "beratest" should be included in these other sections, consider adding the necessary entries to ensure consistency across the entire configuration file.
To assist in this verification, you can use the following script to check which sections are missing the "beratest" entry:
#!/bin/bash # Check sections where "beratest" is not present sections=("tokenMessaging" "endpointIds" "chains" "routers") for section in "${sections[@]}"; do if ! jq ".$section | keys" config/stargate.json | grep -q "beratest"; then echo "beratest is missing in $section section" fi doneAlso applies to: 214-214
214-214: New network "beratest" added to composers sectionThe addition of the "beratest" network with a zero address (0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000) in the composers section is consistent with the entry in the endpointV2 section and follows the pattern for other networks in this file.
Let's verify if the "beratest" network has been added to all necessary sections:
#!/bin/bash # Check sections where "beratest" is not present sections=("tokenMessaging" "endpointIds" "chains" "routers") for section in "${sections[@]}"; do if ! jq ".$section | keys" config/stargate.json | grep -q "beratest"; then echo "beratest is missing in $section section" fi doneconfig/dexs.json (1)
Line range hint
674-678: LGTM. Verify new addresses for the "kaia" network.The addition of new addresses for the "kaia" network looks good. However, it's important to ensure that these addresses are correct and correspond to the intended DEXs on the "kaia" network.
To verify the addresses, you can run the following script:
script/deploy/_targetState.json (4)
Line range hint
1-2324: LGTM for existing network configurations.The existing network configurations appear to be consistent and well-structured. No issues found in this section.
54-54:⚠️ Potential issueMissing filepath for AcrossFacetV3 contract.
The AcrossFacetV3 contract is showing an error due to an invalid filepath across multiple networks. This issue needs to be addressed.
To resolve this, please:
- Verify the correct location of the AcrossFacetV3 contract file.
- Update the filepath in the build or deployment scripts.
- Regenerate this configuration file with the correct filepath.
To help locate the AcrossFacetV3 contract file, run the following script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for AcrossFacetV3 contract file echo "Searching for AcrossFacetV3 contract file:" find . -type f -name "*AcrossFacetV3*.sol"This script will search for any Solidity files that might contain the AcrossFacetV3 contract, which can help in identifying the correct filepath.
Also applies to: 107-107, 157-157, 203-203, 545-545, 592-592, 641-641, 686-686, 1042-1042, 1073-1073, 1247-1247, 1287-1287, 1429-1429, 1461-1461, 1493-1493, 1521-1521
55-55:⚠️ Potential issueMissing filepath for AcrossFacetPackedV3 contract.
The AcrossFacetPackedV3 contract is showing an error due to an invalid filepath across multiple networks. This issue needs to be addressed.
To resolve this, please:
- Verify the correct location of the AcrossFacetPackedV3 contract file.
- Update the filepath in the build or deployment scripts.
- Regenerate this configuration file with the correct filepath.
To help locate the AcrossFacetPackedV3 contract file, run the following script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for AcrossFacetPackedV3 contract file echo "Searching for AcrossFacetPackedV3 contract file:" find . -type f -name "*AcrossFacetPackedV3*.sol"This script will search for any Solidity files that might contain the AcrossFacetPackedV3 contract, which can help in identifying the correct filepath.
Also applies to: 108-108, 158-158, 204-204, 546-546, 593-593, 642-642, 687-687, 1043-1043, 1074-1074, 1248-1248, 1288-1288, 1430-1430, 1462-1462, 1494-1494, 1522-1522
241-241:⚠️ Potential issueMissing filepath for OpBNBBridgeFacet contract.
The OpBNBBridgeFacet contract is showing an error due to an invalid filepath in the BSC network configuration. This issue needs to be addressed.
To resolve this, please:
- Verify the correct location of the OpBNBBridgeFacet contract file.
- Update the filepath in the build or deployment scripts.
- Regenerate this configuration file with the correct filepath.
To help locate the OpBNBBridgeFacet contract file, run the following script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for OpBNBBridgeFacet contract file echo "Searching for OpBNBBridgeFacet contract file:" find . -type f -name "*OpBNBBridgeFacet*.sol"This script will search for any Solidity files that might contain the OpBNBBridgeFacet contract, which can help in identifying the correct filepath.
Also applies to: 280-280
| @@ -41,5 +41,6 @@ | |||
| "rootstock": "0x542fda317318ebf1d3deaf76e0b632741a7e677d", | |||
| "sei": "0xE30feDd158A2e3b13e9badaeABaFc5516e95e8C7", | |||
| "taiko": "0xA51894664A773981C6C112C43ce576f315d5b1B6", | |||
| "immutablezkevm": "0x3a0c2ba54d6cbd3121f01b96dfd20e99d1696c9d" | |||
| "immutablezkevm": "0x3a0c2ba54d6cbd3121f01b96dfd20e99d1696c9d", | |||
| "beratest": "0x7507c1dc16935B82698e4C63f2746A2fCf994dF8" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Inconsistent "beratest" Token Wrapper Address Across Configurations.
The "beratest" token wrapper address in config/tokenwrapper.json is set to "0x7507c1dc16935B82698e4C63f2746A2fCf994dF8". However, other configuration files such as config/stargate.json and config/global.json reference "beratest" with a zero address ("0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000"), indicating an inconsistency.
- Ensure that the "beratest" address is consistently defined across all configuration files.
- Confirm whether the zero addresses in other configs should be updated to the specified token wrapper address or if they serve different purposes.
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify the "beratest" token wrapper address.
The new entry for "beratest" has been added with the address "0x7507c1dc16935B82698e4C63f2746A2fCf994dF8". The format is correct and consistent with other entries.
Please confirm that this is the correct token wrapper address for the Bera testnet. You can use the following script to check for any references to this address in the codebase:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for references to the Bera testnet token wrapper address
# Test: Search for the address in the codebase
rg --type-add 'config:*.{json,js,ts}' --type config '0x7507c1dc16935B82698e4C63f2746A2fCf994dF8'
# Test: Search for any mentions of 'beratest' or 'bera testnet' in the codebase
rg --type-add 'config:*.{json,js,ts}' --type config -i 'beratest|bera.?testnet'
Length of output: 913
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the consistency and usage of the "beratest" configuration across the codebase
# Search for all occurrences of "beratest" to understand its context and ensure consistent usage
rg --type-add 'config:*.{json,js,ts}' --type config 'beratest'
# Check if the address "0x7507c1dc16935B82698e4C63f2746A2fCf994dF8" is referenced in any documentation or comments
rg --type-add 'docs:*.md' --type docs 'beratest'
rg --type-add 'config:*.{json,js,ts}' --type config '0x7507c1dc16935B82698e4C63f2746A2fCf994dF8' --context=2
Length of output: 1387
| @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ | |||
| "sei": "0x1a44076050125825900e736c501f859c50fE728c", | |||
| "localanvil": "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000", | |||
| "mumbai": "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000", | |||
| "beratest": "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Add "beratest" to missing sections in config/stargate.json
To ensure consistency, "beratest" should be added to the following sections:
tokenMessagingendpointIdschainsrouters
This will ensure that the "beratest" network is fully integrated across all configurations.
🔗 Analysis chain
New network "beratest" added to endpointV2 section
The addition of the "beratest" network with a zero address (0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000) in the endpointV2 section is consistent with how other networks are initialized in this file. This suggests that the actual contract address for the "beratest" network hasn't been deployed or determined yet.
To ensure consistency, let's verify if "beratest" has been added to other relevant sections of the file:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if "beratest" is present in other sections
grep -n "beratest" config/stargate.json
Length of output: 828
| @@ -48,7 +49,10 @@ | |||
| "StargateFacetV2": "1.0.1", | |||
| "ReceiverStargateV2": "1.0.0", | |||
| "SymbiosisFacet": "1.0.0", | |||
| "ThorSwapFacet": "1.2.0" | |||
| "ThorSwapFacet": "1.2.0", | |||
| "AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet": "\u001b[31m[error] the following filepath is invalid: \u001b[31m[error] could not find src FILE path for contract AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet\u001b[0m\u001b[0m", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Confirmed: Missing filepath for AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract.
- The
AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacetcontract file could not be found in the repository.
🔗 Analysis chain
Missing filepath for AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract.
The AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract is showing an error due to an invalid filepath across multiple networks. This issue needs to be addressed.
To resolve this, please:
- Verify the correct location of the AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract file.
- Update the filepath in the build or deployment scripts.
- Regenerate this configuration file with the correct filepath.
To help locate the AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract file, run the following script:
This script will search for any Solidity files that might contain the AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract, which can help in identifying the correct filepath.
Also applies to: 106-106, 156-156, 202-202, 456-456, 495-495, 640-640, 685-685, 1041-1041, 1072-1072, 1246-1246, 1286-1286
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract file
echo "Searching for AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract file:"
find . -type f -name "*AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet*.sol"
Length of output: 279
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Corrected search for AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract file
echo "Searching for AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet contract file:"
find . -type f -name "*AllbridgeCircleBridgeFacet*.sol"
Length of output: 178
| }, | ||
| "beratest": { | ||
| "production": { | ||
| "LiFiDiamond": { | ||
| "DiamondCutFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "DiamondLoupeFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "OwnershipFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "DexManagerFacet": "1.0.1", | ||
| "AccessManagerFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "WithdrawFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "PeripheryRegistryFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "GenericSwapFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "GenericSwapFacetV3": "1.0.1", | ||
| "LIFuelFacet": "1.0.1", | ||
| "CalldataVerificationFacet": "1.1.1", | ||
| "StandardizedCallFacet": "1.1.0", | ||
| "LiFiDiamond": "1.0.0", | ||
| "ERC20Proxy": "1.0.0", | ||
| "Executor": "2.0.0", | ||
| "FeeCollector": "1.0.0", | ||
| "Receiver": "2.0.2", | ||
| "LiFuelFeeCollector": "1.0.1", | ||
| "LiFiDEXAggregator": "1.0.0" | ||
| }, | ||
| "LiFiDiamondImmutable": { | ||
| "DiamondCutFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "DiamondLoupeFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "OwnershipFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "DexManagerFacet": "1.0.1", | ||
| "AccessManagerFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "WithdrawFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "PeripheryRegistryFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "GenericSwapFacet": "1.0.0", | ||
| "GenericSwapFacetV3": "1.0.1", | ||
| "LIFuelFacet": "1.0.1", | ||
| "CalldataVerificationFacet": "1.1.1", | ||
| "StandardizedCallFacet": "1.1.0", | ||
| "LiFiDiamondImmutable": "1.0.0", | ||
| "ERC20Proxy": "1.0.0", | ||
| "Executor": "2.0.0", | ||
| "FeeCollector": "1.0.0", | ||
| "Receiver": "2.0.2", | ||
| "LiFuelFeeCollector": "1.0.1", | ||
| "TokenWrapper": "1.0.0", | ||
| "LiFiDEXAggregator": "1.0.0" | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Inconsistencies Found in "beratest" Contract Configuration
The "beratest" configuration is missing several contracts that are present in other networks, including:
- AcrossFacet
- CalldataVerificationFacet
- CelerCircleBridgeFacet
- CelerIMFacetMutable
- CircleBridgeFacet
- GnosisBridgeFacet
- HopFacet
- MayansFacet
- OFTWrapperFacet
- OmniBridgeFacet
- OptimismBridgeFacet
- PolygonBridgeFacet
- ReceiverStargateV2
- RelayerCelerIM
- SquidFacet
- StargateFacet
- StargateFacetV2
- SymbiosisFacet
- ThorSwapFacet
- TokenWrapper
These omissions may lead to discrepancies in functionality and should be reviewed to ensure the "beratest" network configuration aligns with other network configurations.
🔗 Analysis chain
New network "beratest" added with basic configuration.
A new network entry "beratest" has been added to the configuration. The structure is consistent with other network entries, including both "LiFiDiamond" and "LiFiDiamondImmutable" configurations.
However, there are a few observations:
- The "beratest" configuration is more minimal compared to other networks. This might be intentional for a testnet, but it's worth confirming.
- The "TokenWrapper" contract is missing from the "LiFiDiamond" configuration but present in "LiFiDiamondImmutable". This inconsistency should be addressed.
To confirm the intentional omission of certain contracts in the "beratest" configuration, please run the following script:
This script will show the differences in contract configurations between "beratest" and other networks, helping to identify any unintentional omissions.
Action Required: Correct and Re-run Verification Script
Please execute the following corrected shell script to compare the contracts in "beratest" with "mainnet," "polygon," and "bsc":
Action Required: Use Temporary Files for Contract Comparison
Please execute the following revised shell script to compare the contracts in "beratest" with "mainnet," "polygon," and "bsc" using temporary files:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Compare the contracts in beratest with other networks
# Get the list of contracts for beratest
beratest_contracts=$(jq -r '.beratest.production.LiFiDiamond | keys[]' script/deploy/_targetState.json)
# Compare with a few other networks
for network in mainnet polygon bsc; do
echo "Comparing beratest with $network:"
diff <(echo "$beratest_contracts") <(jq -r ".$network.production.LiFiDiamond | keys[]" script/deploy/_targetState.json)
echo
done
Length of output: 239
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Compare the contracts in beratest with other networks
# Get the list of contracts for beratest
beratest_contracts=$(jq -r '.beratest.production.LiFiDiamond | keys[]' script/deploy/_targetState.json)
# Compare with a few other networks
for network in mainnet polygon bsc; do
echo "Comparing beratest with $network:"
network_contracts=$(jq -r ".$network.production.LiFiDiamond | keys[]" script/deploy/_targetState.json)
diff <(echo "$beratest_contracts" | sort) <(echo "$network_contracts" | sort)
echo
done
Length of output: 6682
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Compare the contracts in beratest with other networks using temporary files
# Create temporary files
beratest_tmp=$(mktemp)
network_tmp=$(mktemp)
# Ensure temporary files are removed on script exit
trap "rm -f $beratest_tmp $network_tmp" EXIT
# Get the list of contracts for beratest and sort them
jq -r '.beratest.production.LiFiDiamond | keys[]' script/deploy/_targetState.json | sort > "$beratest_tmp"
# Compare with a few other networks
for network in mainnet polygon bsc; do
echo "Comparing beratest with $network:"
# Get and sort the list of contracts for the current network
jq -r ".${network}.production.LiFiDiamond | keys[]" script/deploy/_targetState.json | sort > "$network_tmp"
# Perform the diff
diff "$beratest_tmp" "$network_tmp"
echo
done
Length of output: 2532
| @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ | |||
| "HopFacetOptimized": "2.0.0", | |||
| "HyphenFacet": "1.0.0", | |||
| "MayanFacet": "1.0.0", | |||
| "OFTWrapperFacet": "\u001b[31m[error] the following filepath is invalid: \u001b[31m[error] could not find src FILE path for contract OFTWrapperFacet\u001b[0m\u001b[0m", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Missing OFTWrapperFacet contract file detected.
The verification confirms that the OFTWrapperFacet contract file does not exist in the repository. Please ensure the contract file is added to the correct location and update the filepath in the build or deployment scripts accordingly.
🔗 Analysis chain
Missing filepath for OFTWrapperFacet contract.
The OFTWrapperFacet contract is showing an error due to an invalid filepath across multiple networks. This issue needs to be addressed.
To resolve this, please:
- Verify the correct location of the OFTWrapperFacet contract file.
- Update the filepath in the build or deployment scripts.
- Regenerate this configuration file with the correct filepath.
To help locate the OFTWrapperFacet contract file, run the following script:
This script will search for any Solidity files that might contain the OFTWrapperFacet contract, which can help in identifying the correct filepath.
Also applies to: 96-96, 150-150, 240-240, 381-381, 410-410, 449-449, 488-488, 538-538, 585-585, 635-635, 680-680, 1040-1040, 1071-1071, 1106-1106, 1135-1135
To resolve the syntax error and successfully locate the OFTWrapperFacet contract file, please run the following script:
To further locate the OFTWrapperFacet contract, please run the following script:
To successfully search for references to OFTWrapperFacet within Solidity files, please run the following corrected script:
To successfully search for references to OFTWrapperFacet within Solidity files, please run the following corrected script:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for OFTWrapperFacet contract file
echo "Searching for OFTWrapperFacet contract file:"
find . -type f -name "*OFTWrapperFacet*.sol"
Length of output: 239
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for OFTWrapperFacet contract file
echo "Searching for OFTWrapperFacet contract file:"
find . -type f -name "*OFTWrapperFacet*.sol"
Length of output: 145
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for references to OFTWrapperFacet within Solidity files
echo "Searching for references to OFTWrapperFacet in Solidity files:"
rg "OFTWrapperFacet" --type sol
Length of output: 194
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for references to OFTWrapperFacet within Solidity files
echo "Searching for references to OFTWrapperFacet in Solidity files:"
rg "OFTWrapperFacet" --type solidity
Length of output: 204
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for references to OFTWrapperFacet within Solidity (.sol) files
echo "Searching for references to OFTWrapperFacet in Solidity files:"
rg "OFTWrapperFacet" -g "*.sol"
Length of output: 166
| "beratest") | ||
| echo "80084" | ||
| return 0 | ||
| ;; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
'beratest' is missing in network-related functions
The verification reveals that 'beratest' is not included in the following functions:
getRPCUrlgetCreate3FactoryAddresscheckRequiredVariablesInDotEnvgetPrivateKeygetDeployerAddress
Please update these functions to include support for 'beratest' to ensure consistent network-specific behavior.
🔗 Analysis chain
Ensure 'beratest' is included in all network-related functions
While you've added support for beratest in the getChainId function, please verify that beratest is also included in other functions that handle network-specific logic. This includes functions like getRPCUrl, getCreate3FactoryAddress, checkRequiredVariablesInDotEnv, getPrivateKey, and any other places where network names are used to prevent unexpected behavior.
Run the following script to verify all occurrences:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that 'beratest' is included in all functions handling network names.
# Define the list of functions to check
functions=("getRPCUrl" "getCreate3FactoryAddress" "checkRequiredVariablesInDotEnv" "getPrivateKey" "getDeployerAddress")
# Loop through each function and check for 'beratest' in case statements
for func in "${functions[@]}"; do
echo "Checking function $func for 'beratest':"
# Extract the function definition
awk "/^function $func/,/^}/" script/helperFunctions.sh | grep -q '"beratest")'
if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
echo "'beratest' found in function $func"
else
echo "'beratest' **not found** in function $func"
fi
done
Length of output: 2102
Which Jira task belongs to this PR?
Why did I implement it this way?
Checklist before requesting a review
Checklist for reviewer (DO NOT DEPLOY and contracts BEFORE CHECKING THIS!!!)