🤔 brunoerg reviewed a pull request: "fuzz: Add tests for `CCoinControl` methods"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34026#pullrequestreview-3587941467)
The improved harness from this PR increased the mutation score of the `coin_control` target compared to the master branch. See:

<img width="1211" height="534" alt="Screenshot 2025-12-17 at 11 03 36" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/39e8a407-4d86-4800-b777-e073cc09ca97" />

The only uncaught mutant is:

```diff
diff --git a/src/wallet/coincontrol.cpp b/src/wallet/coincontrol.cpp
index 873c5ab383..e83f8d451a 100644
--- a/src/wallet/coincontrol.cpp
+++ b/src/wallet/coincon
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: Pin native tests on cross-builds to same commit":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34080#issuecomment-3665643550)

> I'm surprised the Windows runners are able to find the commit resulting from a merge between PR & master that happened on an Ubuntu runner. But looking at the CI logs that does appear to be the case.

The merge happens on the github infra, and anyone can fetch any commit. I have a local function to do that:


```sh
$ type gfbb
gfbb is a function
gfbb ()
{
git fetch https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin "$1"
}
```

💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "test: address self-announcement":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34039#discussion_r2627328886)
Thanks rkrux, included!

💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "test: address self-announcement":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34039#discussion_r2627331006)
done!

💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "test: address self-announcement":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34039#issuecomment-3665661325)
Included both suggestions, thanks!
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34039#discussion_r2607756886
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34039#discussion_r2610717344

👍 rkrux approved a pull request: "rpc: Add optional peer_ids param to filter getpeerinfo"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32741#pullrequestreview-3588075627)
lgtm re-ACK 9b6090d8d985f3ce61eaa587511bbeeeedf28cb9

💬 Crypt-iQ commented on pull request "log: Use `__func__` for -logsourcelocations":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34088#issuecomment-3665671949)
Concept ACK. The debug logs are harder to read now.

🤔 sipa reviewed a pull request: "contrib: asmap-tool.py - Don't write binary to TTY"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34089#pullrequestreview-3588088416)
ACK e7e51952dc24531932b6c06e4599be3a3d6bede8

📝 hebasto opened a pull request: "net: Fix `-Wmissing-braces`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34090)
On some non-POSIX platforms, Clang emits `-Wmissing-braces` warnings for the `IN6ADDR_ANY_INIT` and `IN6ADDR_LOOPBACK_INIT` macros. For example, on OpenIndiana / illumos:
```
$ uname -srv
SunOS 5.11 illumos-325e0fc8bb
$ clang --version
clang version 21.1.7 (https://github.com/OpenIndiana/oi-userland.git 36a81bf5e5d307d4e85893422600678d46328010)
Target: x86_64-pc-solaris2.11
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /usr/clang/21/bin
$ cmake -B build -DCMAKE_GENERATOR=Ninja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER=cl
...

💬 gmaxwell commented on pull request "fees: Introduce Mempool Based Fee Estimation to reduce overestimation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34075#issuecomment-3665733085)
I think enabling it by default probably makes sense, that particular sub comment was more about having a ready way to choose not to use it when transacting.

As far as the initial defaults I think there I meant that that it shouldn't target too close to the bottom of the mempool as even if that currently gets high success that may not be true after wide deployment. Though on reflection I'm not sure that thats true as this only lowers feerates, so other people using this should only increase y
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "A few followups after introducing `/rest/blockpart/` endpoint"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34074)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "net: Fix `-Wmissing-braces`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34090#issuecomment-3665787525)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/20307057596/job/58327346295?pr=34090#step:11:495:
```bash
net_processing.cpp
netgroup.cpp
D:\a\bitcoin\bitcoin\src\net.cpp(3309,41): error C2440: '<function-style-cast>': cannot convert from 'initializer list' to 'in6_addr' [D:\a\bitcoin\bitcoin\build\src\bitcoin_node.vcxproj]
D:\a\bitcoin\bitcoin\src\net.cpp(3309,41):
'in6_addr::in6_addr': no overloaded function could convert all the argument types
C:\Program File
...

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "contrib: asmap-tool.py - Don't write binary to TTY":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34089#issuecomment-3665802808)
tACK e7e51952dc24531932b6c06e4599be3a3d6bede8

Thanks!

```
$ ./contrib/asmap/asmap-tool.py encode ../../python/kartograf/out/1765638546/final_result.txt
Not much use in writing binary to a TTY. Please specify an output file or pipe output to another process.
```

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "log: Use `__func__` for -logsourcelocations":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34088#discussion_r2627467520)
Not sure if `__func__` is guaranteed to be consteval/constexpr?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "log: Use `__func__` for -logsourcelocations":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34088#discussion_r2627471486)
Not sure about the implicit `operator const std::source_location&(){ return m_loc; };`. This seems like it could silently make some places use the wrong function name.

> function_name_short

Thx, done

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "ci: Pin native tests on cross-builds to same commit"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34080)

📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "fuzz: doc: remove any mention to `address_deserialize_v2`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34091)
We don't have `address_deserialize_v2` target anymore since fac81affb527132945773a5315bd27fec61ec52f (we used to have `address_deserialize_v1_notime`, `address_deserialize_v1_withtime` and `address_deserialize_v2` but now we only have a single `address_deserialize` target) so it removes any mention to it.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "rpc, doc: clarify the response of listtransactions RPC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32737#discussion_r2627466348)
Could use "transaction" instead of "blockchain transaction".

Also, I think the example could be improved, something like:

"For instance, a wallet transaction that sends funds to three addresses - one belonging to the wallet itself and two external— will produce four entries (one per output, including the change output).
As a result, the response of 'listransactions' will contain one entry in the 'receive' category and three entries in the 'send' category."

(feel free to add stuff to it
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "contrib: asmap-tool.py - Don't write binary to TTY"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34089)

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "fuzz: doc: remove any mention to `address_deserialize_v2`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/34091#issuecomment-3665817873)
cc @maflcko

🤔 danielabrozzoni reviewed a pull request: "log: show reindex progress in `ImportBlocks`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33353#pullrequestreview-3588239911)
tACK d7de5b109f69293b375729363b4e5038f3fb6b15 - code reviewed and tested on my archival node.

Nice to see this!

It’s true that not every file will take the same amount of time to reindex, but I think it’s better to have a rough estimate than no estimate at all.