💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "Wallet: Add `max_tx_weight` to transaction funding options (take 2)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29523#issuecomment-2036840812)
Force pushed from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/53ee67de7e388703cb672e67ffaecdde53eb01de to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29523/commits/3a64b3a339fe55c2642369b00a382231871c2838 [compare diff](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/53ee67de7e388703cb672e67ffaecdde53eb01de..3a64b3a339fe55c2642369b00a382231871c2838)

- Addressed [review comment ](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29523#discussion_r1542667882)
- Rebased on master after #29788

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "guix: use GCC 11 in macOS build env"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29673)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: add new LLVM debug macro":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29781#discussion_r1551480469)
> It seems fine to require clang 18, if someone want to use clang, depends, and D_LIBCPP_HARDENING_MODE.
> Is there anyone other than OSS-Fuzz and a CI config interested in this?

Yea; my main interest is our CIs, fuzzing infra and other external test infra, which is all running LLVM 18 (oss-fuzz soon to be).

🤔 jonasnick reviewed a pull request: "Update libsecp256k1 subtree to latest master"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29803#pullrequestreview-1979639772)
utACK 4654cc32248d788ac1160ca320ea68d31357d0c9

There should be no changes in libsecp that would require a change in the Bitcoin codebase.

💬 Willtech commented on issue "Signmessage doesn't work with segwit addresses":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10542#issuecomment-2037011586)
@adiabat It is supported someone has to work on the feature and produce some programming the repository will publish meeting the consensus

Why do you think the feature was included in the earlier release?

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "test: Run framework unit tests in parallel":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29771#discussion_r1551580912)
Ah, makes sense. Pushed an update to address this.

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "test: Run framework unit tests in parallel":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29771#issuecomment-2037050232)
Pushed update to address comment and simplify `feature_framework_unit_tests.py`; providing output when running with or without test runner. Rebased as well.

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1551588051)
Indeed the `Find()` method does not modify any of the members. I tried to make it `const`, but it has to return non-const iterators to the members... :(

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "refactor: Remove gmtime*":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29081#issuecomment-2037073226)
cc @theuni you might want to circle back here now that this is unblocked.

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1551600727)
Done

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1551600883)
Done

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1551601200)
Done

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-2037088808)
`390e628a07...9297437af2`: rebase and address suggestions

> Do we need test coverage for retrying stale txs and having multiple concurrent txs queued for private broadcast?

Yes.

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "Wallet: Add `max_tx_weight` to transaction funding options (take 2)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29523#pullrequestreview-1979773330)
Any chance to turn the first commit into an scripted-diff?

💬 vostrnad commented on issue "IBD performance regression in 27.0rc1 on Windows":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29785#issuecomment-2037129737)
Ran the original benchmark again (pre-built binaries on Windows) with only these configuration options:

- `-connect`
- `-datadir`
- `-port`
- `-rpcport`
- `-rpcuser`
- `-rpcpassword`

This time 27.0rc1 was about 5% slower on average than 26.0, still with a much higher variance. Measured around 250 runs of each.

26.0:

27.0rc1:
![ibd27rc1noconfig](https://github.com/bitcoin/b
...

📝 fjahr opened a pull request: "test: Fix debug recommendation in argsman_tests"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29805)
There are recommendations in the `argsman_tests` comments on how to re-run and debug a test failure to see if it reflects an expected or unexpected change. The command tries to run a test in `util_tests` but this is in `argsman_tests` so the command doesn't work with just copy+paste. I didn't investigate further but I suspect that these tests were moved between files.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "Don't permit port in proxy IP option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/813#discussion_r1551654604)
What about using `SplitHostPort()` from `#include <util/strencodings.h>` instead?
Would only need to verify that the port isn't set.

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "Don't permit port in proxy IP option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/813#discussion_r1551664405)
That certainly looks like it could be what is needed here!

✅ ryanofsky closed an issue: "ThreadSanitizer: data race src/flatfile.cpp:47:13 in FlatFileSeq::Open(FlatFilePos const&, bool)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29767)

🚀 ryanofsky merged a pull request: "ThreadSanitizer: Fix #29767"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29776)

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "test: failure in feature_coinstatsindex.py "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29746)