fix(CI): Update test baselines in iota-adapter-transactional-tests

[DaughterOfMars]

Description of change

Updates the baseline tests data for this crate, and replaces the protocol version in the init commands. For context, the line numbers in these files changed due to the added copyright line at the top of each file.

Some of the .move files had to be changed additionally, due to objects being reordered in the test storage map. These objects are referred to by index, and some of those changed. However, this should not fundamentally change the test.

Links to any relevant issues

#806

[Thoralf-M]

More than just line changes

[Thoralf-M]

This and a few others with some number changes only are probably related to due to objects being reordered in the test storage map you mentioned, can you also tell why they are reordered now? Also where is this map defined?

[DaughterOfMars]

I assume they are reordered due to the packages/addresses changing but I am not 100% sure. However, they are clearly reordered, which you can see from the output. Whenever read-object is called in the script it outputs the object stored at those indexes (which I believe are package_index,index_within_package) and despite not changing the commands, many of these are in a new ordering. I can do a deeper dive into the specific reason they are reordered if you want.

[DaughterOfMars]

This is the fn that determines the ordering.

// stable way of sorting objects by type. Does not however, produce a stable
// sorting between objects of the same type
fn get_object_sorting_key(&self, id: &ObjectID) -> String {
    match &self.get_object(id, None).unwrap().data {
        object::Data::Move(obj) => self.stabilize_str(format!("{}", obj.type_())),
        object::Data::Package(pkg) => pkg
            .serialized_module_map()
            .keys()
            .map(|s| s.as_str())
            .collect::<Vec<_>>()
            .join(","),
    }
}

Before, the type names of some packages started with "s" and now they start with "i", which I assume caused those to be reordered above some of the others.

[Thoralf-M]

This makes sense, thanks for investigating, maybe also put it in the PR description
Btw what command did you run for these tests?

[DaughterOfMars]

I ran UB=1 cargo nextest run -p iota-adapter-transactional-tests (usually with the test name specified) in order to update the .exp whenever I made a change to the .move file. For simtests just replace cargo nextest run with scripts/simtest/cargo-simtest simtest.

But there was not an easy way to update the .move files, I had to manually inspect the output and determine what changed and how to update appropriately. It sucked.

And I think we can just leave this comment thread open for other folks to read.

[thibault-martinez]

So we don't really have an easy way to verify if these numbers are correct?

[DaughterOfMars]

Not really. I know the values are correct because the fundamental test case outlined in the .exp is unchanged, but that is not easy to check.