Genesis v6 from JSON v5 export and v5 JSON export

[simsekgokhan]

This PR covers two related/dependent features seen below as Step 1, 2 and fixes for some Move errors (see commits).

Steps:

1. v5 JSON export (new feature)
   cargo r -p ol-genesis-tools -- --recover /opt/rec.json --snapshot-path /opt/state_ver*
   state_ver: https://github.com/OLSF/epoch-archive/tree/main/359/state_ver_76353076.a0ff
   Resulting rec.json: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jaumaKdaGjWExNdUVqNZDvIAQPmppt19/view

2. Genesis v6 from JSON v5 (new feature)
   Create genesis blob using v6 code from JSON v5 export:
   cargo r -p ol-genesis-tools -- --fork --recovery-json-path /opt/rec.json --output-path /opt/genesis_from_recovery.blob
   Resulting genesis_from_recovery.blob: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f2gfISy5AecZIXGQEOgP4yQm3ArpYRO1/view?usp=sharing

3. Verify the validity of genesis blob by starting a v6 node in test mode with it:
   cargo r -p diem-node -- --test --genesis-modules /opt/genesis_from_recovery.blob
   Validator logs: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DCuKe4hY0VwzYS3nMsQie4o5uyt25coo/view?usp=sharing

[corynthian]

Two questions spring to mind on this set of changes:

1. Why is compiled bytecode included in the commit? Is this due to wanting to have binary compatibility across the board and if so, would it not be better instead to collate the files and produce a hash which can be verified, so that the codebase doesn't end up with binary artifacts?
2. It is not immediately clear to me where the tests are for the move contracts or rust code in this case. How are you checking that the migration from v5 to v6 behaved as expected (e.g. checking for equality between the accounts from v5 to v6)?

[0o-de-lally]

Two questions spring to mind on this set of changes:

1. Why is compiled bytecode included in the commit? Is this due to wanting to have binary compatibility across the board and if so, would it not be better instead to collate the files and produce a hash which can be verified, so that the codebase doesn't end up with binary artifacts?

This is legacy from FB. It's a real PITA but many of the tests and builds depend on finding these files. Not something that can be easily fixed, we've tried a number of things.

2. It is not immediately clear to me where the tests are for the move contracts or rust code in this case. How are you checking that the migration from v5 to v6 behaved as expected (e.g. checking for equality between the accounts from v5 to v6)?

@simsekgokhan is good about testing, so I'm guessing it's just not documented. Otherwise we need to ticket the e2e tests for this.

Edit: I see the steps to reproduce are here in the PR text. We likely just need to create some fixtures out of this and add the test.

[0o-de-lally]

This PR looks correct to me. Although we are missing e2e tests for this feature. Ordinarily we wouldn't merge this, but since we need to do cleaning up on the v6 branches I'll approve for merge. IBut I see the steps to reproduce in the PR text. We need to clean up branches so, it's approved assuming we add the task for the e2e test.w

[0o-de-lally]

OK if we add tests

[sirouk]

LGTM