🤔 yuvicc reviewed a pull request: "log: always print initial signature verification state"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#pullrequestreview-3195377066)
Concept ACK.

The approach of switching to `std::optional<bool>` here avoids the overhead of atomic operations relying on `cs_main` for synchronization makes sense.

<details> <summary>Initial script verification state is always logged without unnecessary complexity.</summary>

```bash
2025-09-08T07:43:58Z Disabling signature validations at block #16893 (00000000113c355415c3417c734a45b62790b91b41ff08028580254c584f5ea8).
```

</details>

🤔 Sjors reviewed a pull request: "Interfaces: Expose UTXO Snapshot Loading and Add Progress Notifications"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33117#pullrequestreview-3195338293)
At first glance this looks very reasonable. I also tested it in the (current) GUI with https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/870

I had a similar concern as @ryanofsky about how to go about passing the snapshot file (path) over the interface. The current approach in 3c8b578836dd0d8438a8aac81a1166df84811562 is the same as how we handle wallet backups, so probably fine?

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Interfaces: Expose UTXO Snapshot Loading and Add Progress Notifications":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33117#discussion_r2329435219)
In 3c8b578836dd0d8438a8aac81a1166df84811562 _interfaces: expose UTXO snapshot loading in node interface_: a good way to add test coverage to this new interface would be to use it in the `loadtxoutset` RPC.

For an example, see the various uses of `EnsureMining(node);`

📝 Snezhkko opened a pull request: "chore: compare against keys.size() in writeObject comma check"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33337)
Replace values.size() with keys.size() in the comma condition inside UniValue::writeObject. The loop iterates over keys.size(), and other UniValue methods consistently treat keys and values as parallel arrays. Using keys.size() here ensures internal consistency, avoids relying on the implicit invariant that keys.size() == values.size(

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "RFC: blocks: add `-reobfuscate-blocks` arg to xor existing blk/rev on startup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33324#issuecomment-3265136162)
Concept ACK

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "RFC: coins: warn on oversized `-dbcache`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33333#issuecomment-3265143719)
Concept ACK

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "Update libmultiprocess subtree to improve build and logs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33322)

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "build: indefinite mpgen hang on Ubuntu 22.04"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33176)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "build: indefinite mpgen hang on Ubuntu 22.04":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33176#issuecomment-3265327251)
Closing this with #33322. If there are new / more issues, lets open new issues.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "clang-tidy: Disable `UndefinedBinaryOperatorResult` check in `src/ipc`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33312#issuecomment-3265331404)
> Is it possible to move this into the capnp subdirectory to further narrow the scope of this exception?

The most recent CI log shows false-positive `clang-analyzer-core.UndefinedBinaryOperatorResult` warnings in the following files:
- `/home/admin/actions-runner/_work/_temp/build/src/ipc/capnp/init.capnp.proxy-server.c++`
- `/home/admin/actions-runner/_work/_temp/build/src/ipc/capnp/echo.capnp.proxy-server.c++`
- `/home/admin/actions-runner/_work/_temp/build/src/ipc/capnp/mining.capnp.pro
...

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r2329682120)
Changed locally, will be in the next push, thanks!

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "contrib: update fixed seeds"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33283)

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "build: clang build broken on Debian Bookworm"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33279)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "build: clang build broken on Debian Bookworm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33279#issuecomment-3265439112)
Going to close this for now, based on https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/205 (which was pulled in via #33322). We can followup further if any similar issues surface while testing `30.x`.

💬 ryanofsky commented on issue "build: indefinite mpgen hang on Ubuntu 22.04":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33176#issuecomment-3265458641)
Makes sense to close. Since #33241 which includes https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/194, the build hang using old versions of GCC with v0.8.0 and v0.8.1 was fixed, but a cmake error was added warning about a CVE in v0.8.0, which means that Ubuntu 22.04 triggers this error. Ubuntu security team evaluated the CVE and opted not to fix it based on the severity and fact that is fix is in a library, so could cause other packages to need to be recompiled. #33322 improves the situatio
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci: reduce runner sizes on various jobs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33319#issuecomment-3265467783)
cc @maflcko

💬 deyvid61 commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#discussion_r2329727735)
__

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "Interfaces: Expose UTXO Snapshot Loading and Add Progress Notifications":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33117#issuecomment-3265507664)
Approach ACK

💬 jesterhodl commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3265513185)
Hey @hebasto
I'm curious why the 30.x resources have a lot of untranslated labels. I know I completed 29.x
Could it be that they have been copied from 29.x to 30.x before I finished?

In screenshot below, the first one is a 29.x resource, the lower one is 30.x
<img width="1152" height="478" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d2603008-d4af-4ab7-a444-4a47431a5802" />

Aside from the brand new labels, I can sync them up manually in Transifex, but just wanted to ask
...

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "multiprocess: Don't require bitcoin -m argument when IPC options are used":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33229#issuecomment-3265524908)
> Looks like Windows CI is still unhappy:
>
> ```
> File "D:\a\bitcoin\bitcoin/test/functional/tool_bitcoin.py", line 62, in run_test
> self.test_args([], [], expect_exe="bitcoind")
> ```
>
> Maybe @hebasto has an idea?
>
> I would be nice to get this in v30 so we don't have to teach people to use `-m` only for that to become unnecessary in the next release. But it's not a huge deal.

Yes I'd like to include / backport it in v30.

The code
...

💬 77fdvarvam commented on something "":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/c9b7a792e2d8cfe5be14829ee6108d24abf8fcf6#r165346850)
@sweatybridge @alaister @charislam @kiwicopple @vantezzenbot @ivan-dalmet @jeannegrenet @gregnr @gokhanarkan @ioitiki @berson86 @atol71 @ILIYANGERMANOV @mfkl @fregante hi followings, anyone wanna chat?