Update secp256k1 library to version 0.6.0

[legleux]

High Level Overview of Change

Updates secp256k1 to 0.6.0.

Type of Change

• Chore (no impact to binary, e.g. .gitignore, formatting, dropping support for older tooling)

Test Plan

No discrepancies in unit tests were observed.

Future Tasks

This library should be integrated with CMake or Conan for easier maintenance.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.0%. Comparing base (ed4870c) to head (5ff72ad).
Report is 1 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop   #5254     +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage     78.0%   78.0%   -0.0%     
=========================================
  Files          789     789             
  Lines        67007   67007             
  Branches      8110    8108      -2     
=========================================
- Hits         52274   52273      -1     
- Misses       14733   14734      +1     

see 5 files with indirect coverage changes

[bthomee]

@legleux was updating the library only a matter of removing all the old files and copying in the new ones, or did you have to massage one or more of them to get it to compile?

While this change may have been a small chore to create, I think as "type of change" it should be modified to something else, since the binary is definitely affected by this PR.

[Bronek]

While this change may have been a small chore to create, I think as "type of change" it should be modified to something else, since the binary is definitely affected by this PR.

Agree. I renamed the PR.

[bthomee]

While this change may have been a small chore to create, I think as "type of change" it should be modified to something else, since the binary is definitely affected by this PR.

Agree. I renamed the PR.

If Michael changes it in the description tomorrow as well, and confirms that this is the latest code without any changes, I'm good to approve. We'll need to run it through an extended testing cycle before including into 2.4.0 though.

[bthomee]

While this change may have been a small chore to create, I think as "type of change" it should be modified to something else, since the binary is definitely affected by this PR.

Agree. I renamed the PR.

If Michael changes it in the description tomorrow as well, and confirms that this is the latest code without any changes, I'm good to approve. We'll need to run it through an extended testing cycle before including into 2.4.0 though.

I did the check myself and confirm that dropping in v0.6.0 of secp256k1 matches this PR.