💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "test: Add unit & functional test coverage for blockstore":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27850#discussion_r1228189310)
The actual error ends up being generic:

```
Error: A fatal internal error occurred, see debug.log for details
```

and actually before #27708 was merged yesterday, this code was even more messy!


The problem I'm having now is with CI: on only a few of the test platforms bitcoind does not crash as expected. This means that either the python line `os.chmod(...)` is not working to change the permissions of the `.blk` file OR for whatever reason the OS is happy to `open()` files with `rb
...

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1211719573)
nit: spurious?

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1211693431)
nit (here and below): redundant to check for emptiness before asserting the size is 1

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1211675298)
Looks spurious?

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1226847502)
Let's also cover Miniscript (along with `wsh`)?
```diff
diff --git a/src/test/descriptor_tests.cpp b/src/test/descriptor_tests.cpp
index 3ea8d63ab3..adbaf48e77 100644
--- a/src/test/descriptor_tests.cpp
+++ b/src/test/descriptor_tests.cpp
@@ -710,6 +710,31 @@ BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(descriptor_test)
{{6, 0}, {6, 1}, {6, 2}, {3, 0, 0}, {3, 0, 1}, {3, 0, 2}, {0, 0, 5, 0}, {0, 0, 5, 1}, {0, 0, 5, 2}},
}
);
+ CheckMultipath("wsh(or_d(pk([2557c640/48h/1h/0
...

🤔 darosior reviewed a pull request: "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#pullrequestreview-1444202031)
ACK on most of the core logic. Just found a small mistake in the parsing of the multipath step in the derivation path. I also have a couple questions on the modifications to the RPC interface. The rest is nits, feel free to ignore them. Nice set of unit tests!

One almost-nit but important for posterity IMO is that all your commit messages mention the previous iteration of the BIP that only allowed for 2 paths (change and receive) and should be adapted to mention "multiple" paths to avoid conf
...

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1226858466)
The error is specific to 2-paths multipaths. But it's removed in a following commit anyways.

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1226766049)
Maybe worth checking across the branches of a Miniscript too?

```diff
diff --git a/src/test/descriptor_tests.cpp b/src/test/descriptor_tests.cpp
index 3ea8d63ab3..e1864652d8 100644
--- a/src/test/descriptor_tests.cpp
+++ b/src/test/descriptor_tests.cpp
@@ -716,6 +731,7 @@ BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(descriptor_test)
CheckUnparsable("tr(xprv9s21ZrQH143K2Zu2kTVKcQi9nKhfgJUkYqG73wXsHuhATm1wkt6kcSZeTYEw2PL7krZtJopEYDvBdYWdAai3n3TWUTCVfHvPHqTYJv7smYe/<6;7;8;9>/*,{pk(xprvA1RpRA33e1JQ7ifknakTFpg
...

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1226687559)
nit: s/subscripts/derivation paths/

I guess "subscripts" is a copy pasta from the `tr()` error?

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1226859880)
This could be a `CHECKNONFATAL` that it's never empty, as any sane Miniscript must contain at least one key check.

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1227924512)
nit: the docstring could be updated with the new meaning and parameter.

💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "Use `int32_t` type for most transaction size/weight values":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/23962#issuecomment-1589403896)
ACK 3ef756a5b558a1dd2fcb93bc0d4237707aa04f3f. I've focused my testing and code review on the tracepoint related changes. The docs, the test, and the mempool_monitor.py demo script are updated. I ran the `interface_usdt_mempool.py` test and the `mempool_monitor.py` script. The `mempool_monitor.py` output looks correct.

>> Something that just occurred to me: do/should we consider tracepoints to be a stable api?
>
> No, we shouldn't. I think that classes like CTxMemPoolEntry and their public a
...

🤔 darosior reviewed a pull request: "wallet: Give deprecation warning when loading a legacy wallet"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27869#pullrequestreview-1477293036)
Concept ACK. How about also logging for wallets that are loaded on startup?

💬 darosior commented on pull request "wallet: Give deprecation warning when loading a legacy wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27869#discussion_r1228204662)
Maybe hint at how to migrate?

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "build: suppress external warnings by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27872#issuecomment-1589417552)
> so someone compiling bitcoind with sqlite shouldn't have to suppress warnings, no?

I get a large number of warnings from boost.

👍 dergoegge approved a pull request: "build: make sure we can overwrite config.{guess,sub} before doing so"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27875#pullrequestreview-1477330163)
tACK fc6c17b83887ef193f2b97264b1843c94dcb915d

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: make sure we can overwrite config.{guess,sub} before doing so":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27875#issuecomment-1589442718)
Concept ACK

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "Use `int32_t` type for most transaction size/weight values"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/23962)

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "test: (refactor) Use datadir from options in chainstatemanager test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27876#issuecomment-1589446124)
Concept ACK.

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "test: Add unit & functional test coverage for blockstore":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27850#discussion_r1228244278)
Yeah... CI fails because opening file in write mode is "OK" for read only file... what ??

```
[0;36m test 2023-06-13T14:33:55.813000Z TestFramework (DEBUG): Make the first block file read-only [0m
[0;36m test 2023-06-13T14:33:55.813000Z TestFramework (DEBUG): /tmp/cirrus-ci-build/ci/scratch/test_runner/test_runner_₿_🏃_20230613_143230/feature_reindex_205/node1/regtest/blocks/blk00000.dat stat: os.stat_result(st_mode=33024, st_ino=3929479, st_dev=2049, st_nlink=1, st_uid=0, st_gid=0, st
...

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "test: handle failed `assert_equal()` assertions in bcc callback functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27831#issuecomment-1589476815)
@willcl-ark If you want to "ack" a pull, and want the merge-script and bot to recognize it, you'll have to do it in all-upper-case