💬 redmsqt commented on pull request "Add base fileBaseb":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33703#issuecomment-3447957799)
Base
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33703#issuecomment-3447957799)
Base
📝 mccoyadd opened a pull request: "Add CI workflow for C/C++ projects"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33704)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33704)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
📝 mccoyadd opened a pull request: "Delete test directory"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33705)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33705)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
📝 mccoyadd opened a pull request: "Patch 1"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33706)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33706)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
📝 mccoyadd opened a pull request: "Update README to reflect active line status"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33707)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33707)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
📝 mccoyadd opened a pull request: "29.x"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33708)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33708)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->
<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...
✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "Delete test directory"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33705)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33705)
💬 ubbabeck commented on pull request "rest: allow reading partial block data from storage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33657#issuecomment-3448550601)
> @ubbabeck could you please test it too?
Sure here her my results for the same test using the same params and ApacheBench, Version 2.3
<details>
| SIZE | Time per request [ms] |
| ---- | --------------------- |
| 1 | 0.046 |
| 10 | 0.046 |
| 100 | 0.050 |
| 1k | 0.050 |
| 10k | 0.054 |
| 100k | 0.113 |
| 1m | 0.803 |
Fetching on average tx on my system is
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33657#issuecomment-3448550601)
> @ubbabeck could you please test it too?
Sure here her my results for the same test using the same params and ApacheBench, Version 2.3
<details>
| SIZE | Time per request [ms] |
| ---- | --------------------- |
| 1 | 0.046 |
| 10 | 0.046 |
| 100 | 0.050 |
| 1k | 0.050 |
| 10k | 0.054 |
| 100k | 0.113 |
| 1m | 0.803 |
Fetching on average tx on my system is
...
💬 Raimo33 commented on pull request "refactor: optimize: avoid allocations in script & policy verification":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33645#issuecomment-3448567609)
As suggested, I've removed some commits to keep this PR simple. I'll open a follow up PR with the more complex but related commits that change the API.
As per the benchmarks, there currently is no benchmark that realistically measures the impacted methods, and I'm afraid I'll not be able to code one. we'd need to measure `AreInputsStandard()`, `IsWitnessStandard()` and `Solver()` which depend on too many variables.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33645#issuecomment-3448567609)
As suggested, I've removed some commits to keep this PR simple. I'll open a follow up PR with the more complex but related commits that change the API.
As per the benchmarks, there currently is no benchmark that realistically measures the impacted methods, and I'm afraid I'll not be able to code one. we'd need to measure `AreInputsStandard()`, `IsWitnessStandard()` and `Solver()` which depend on too many variables.
⚠️ darosior opened an issue: "GetSerializeSize's return type should not be platform dependent"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33709)
That `GetSerializeSize` returns a `size_t` is the root cause behind low-severity [CVE-2025-46597](https://bitcoincore.org/en/2025/10/24/disclose-cve-2025-46597/). Now that the advisory is published, we should fix this.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33709)
That `GetSerializeSize` returns a `size_t` is the root cause behind low-severity [CVE-2025-46597](https://bitcoincore.org/en/2025/10/24/disclose-cve-2025-46597/). Now that the advisory is published, we should fix this.
💬 mansiverma897993 commented on issue "GetSerializeSize's return type should not be platform dependent":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33709#issuecomment-3448669054)
Please assign me this issue .
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33709#issuecomment-3448669054)
Please assign me this issue .
🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "p2p: reduce false-positives in addr rate-limiting"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33699#pullrequestreview-3381256003)
utACK fdf4863d66ed09a6b45fb6cd0d0c48a02e0e267d
I think that while the existing rate limit is sufficient, the observed events where the rate limit kicks in are just due to statistical fluctuation (which wouldn't lead to rate limiting later on because the node will usually have saved up some cushion) - having fewer of those could prevent a peer's self-announcement from being ignored, and could make monitoring a bit easier.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33699#pullrequestreview-3381256003)
utACK fdf4863d66ed09a6b45fb6cd0d0c48a02e0e267d
I think that while the existing rate limit is sufficient, the observed events where the rate limit kicks in are just due to statistical fluctuation (which wouldn't lead to rate limiting later on because the node will usually have saved up some cushion) - having fewer of those could prevent a peer's self-announcement from being ignored, and could make monitoring a bit easier.
✅ Christewart closed a pull request: "test: Add `leaf_version` parameter to `taproot_tree_helper()`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29371)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29371)
💬 Christewart commented on pull request "test: Add `leaf_version` parameter to `taproot_tree_helper()`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29371#issuecomment-3448896232)
> > Previously the leaf version was hard coded, because we only currently support 1 leaf version.
>
> Unless I'm missing something, this is untrue?
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/7d27af98c7cf858b5ab5a02e64f89a857cc53172/test/functional/test_framework/script.py#L870
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/7d27af98c7cf858b5ab5a02e64f89a857cc53172/test/functional/feature_taproot.py#L1683
>
> Can you explain why this is insufficient for usage?
Hi @instagibbs
I mis
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29371#issuecomment-3448896232)
> > Previously the leaf version was hard coded, because we only currently support 1 leaf version.
>
> Unless I'm missing something, this is untrue?
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/7d27af98c7cf858b5ab5a02e64f89a857cc53172/test/functional/test_framework/script.py#L870
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/7d27af98c7cf858b5ab5a02e64f89a857cc53172/test/functional/feature_taproot.py#L1683
>
> Can you explain why this is insufficient for usage?
Hi @instagibbs
I mis
...
💬 jonatack commented on pull request "BIP-322 basic support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24058#issuecomment-3448955451)
> @kallewoof could you leave a comment explaining why you closed this PR? It is not apparent from looking at the history of this PR what the state is of BIP-322 support in Bitcoin Core.
> Same question @kallewoof , why did you close this? It's a much needed feature.
Came here from reading BIP 322. Should this be marked as up for grabs? Still desired/needed?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24058#issuecomment-3448955451)
> @kallewoof could you leave a comment explaining why you closed this PR? It is not apparent from looking at the history of this PR what the state is of BIP-322 support in Bitcoin Core.
> Same question @kallewoof , why did you close this? It's a much needed feature.
Came here from reading BIP 322. Should this be marked as up for grabs? Still desired/needed?
💬 rico201 commented on pull request "[30.x] Finalise v30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33559#issuecomment-3449004729)
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/v30.0-Release-Notes-Draft
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33559#issuecomment-3449004729)
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/v30.0-Release-Notes-Draft
💬 Crypt-iQ commented on pull request "p2p: reduce false-positives in addr rate-limiting":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33699#issuecomment-3449008388)
crACK fdf4863d66ed09a6b45fb6cd0d0c48a02e0e267d
The graph is helpful, I wonder what's going on with those peers above and to the left of the staircase?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33699#issuecomment-3449008388)
crACK fdf4863d66ed09a6b45fb6cd0d0c48a02e0e267d
The graph is helpful, I wonder what's going on with those peers above and to the left of the staircase?
💬 kallewoof commented on pull request "BIP-322 basic support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24058#issuecomment-3449011853)
I closed it as the effort required to keep up with wallet changes vs the interest in the feature itself did not at all match up. If someone wants to pick it up then by all means.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24058#issuecomment-3449011853)
I closed it as the effort required to keep up with wallet changes vs the interest in the feature itself did not at all match up. If someone wants to pick it up then by all means.
💬 kallewoof commented on pull request "BIP-322 basic support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24058#issuecomment-3449013397)
Belated, but I completely missed the two other comments asking for clarification until now. Sorry @benma and @kilrau, didn't mean to ignore you.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24058#issuecomment-3449013397)
Belated, but I completely missed the two other comments asking for clarification until now. Sorry @benma and @kilrau, didn't mean to ignore you.
❤1
💬 jonatack commented on pull request "BIP-322 basic support":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24058#issuecomment-3449052702)
Thanks @kallewoof!
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24058#issuecomment-3449052702)
Thanks @kallewoof!
⚠️ kosuodhmwa opened an issue: "'ss -ltnp | grep 28332' and 'ss -ltnp | grep 28333' does not work (i need it for LND)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33710)
### Is there an existing issue for this?
- [x] I have searched the existing issues
### Current behaviour
Compile process:
`[GIT stuff here]
apt install -y cmake
cd ~/bitcoin
mkdir build
cd build
apt install -y capnproto libcapnp-dev
cmake .. -DBUILD_BITCOIN_WALLET=ON -DENABLE_ZMQ=ON -DBUILD_TESTING=OFF -DBUILD_BENCH=OFF
make -j$(nproc)
`
start process:
`root@debian12-btc-node:~# cat ./start-btcd.sh
set -x;
clear;
cd ~/;
#cd bitcoin/src;
cd bitcoin;
cd build;
cd bin;
./bitcoind | grep -v -
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33710)
### Is there an existing issue for this?
- [x] I have searched the existing issues
### Current behaviour
Compile process:
`[GIT stuff here]
apt install -y cmake
cd ~/bitcoin
mkdir build
cd build
apt install -y capnproto libcapnp-dev
cmake .. -DBUILD_BITCOIN_WALLET=ON -DENABLE_ZMQ=ON -DBUILD_TESTING=OFF -DBUILD_BENCH=OFF
make -j$(nproc)
`
start process:
`root@debian12-btc-node:~# cat ./start-btcd.sh
set -x;
clear;
cd ~/;
#cd bitcoin/src;
cd bitcoin;
cd build;
cd bin;
./bitcoind | grep -v -
...