Bitcoin Core Github
44 subscribers
121K links
Download Telegram
💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: opportunistically accept 1-parent-1-child packages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28970#discussion_r1566907728)
Yes I think we could use either `m_recent_rejects_reconsiderable` and `m_recent_rejects` right now to get the same behavior.

I suppose one mild benefit of using `m_recent_rejects_reconsiderable` is that our `m_recent_rejects` bloom filter churns less frequently.

The other benefit is extensibility in the future. In more general ancestor package relay, we could reject a parent+child for being too low feerate, but later accept it as parent+child+grandchild (where the grandchild is very high f
...
💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-2058490446)
Maybe related to the races seen in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29871#issuecomment-2057480445 ?
📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "doc: archive 27.0 release notes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29886)
💬 laanwj commented on pull request "guix: replace GCC unaligned VMOV patch with binutils patch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29846#issuecomment-2058516921)
- I get the same output (for win32) as @hebasto
- I've checked the resulting binaries for instructions that enforce aligned memory accesses, and didn't find any dangerous ones

Code review ACK a0dc2ebcda9e33aa5320221cd4ea371f84d221fd
🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "fuzz: explicitly cap the vsize of RBFs for diagram checks"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29879#pullrequestreview-2002964571)
Approach of breaking when adding another tx would overflow seems fine to me. Did you forget to squash?
fanquake closed an issue: "Oksang"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29887)
:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "Oksang"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29887)
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Add missing Assert(mock_time_in >= 0s) to SetMockTime":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29872#discussion_r1566955575)
Both can be used. In this context they are exactly the same.
💬 fanquake commented on issue "Release schedule for 27.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29028#issuecomment-2058539546)
v27.0 has now been tagged: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v27.0.
fanquake closed an issue: "Release schedule for 27.0"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29028)
💬 laanwj commented on pull request "doc: archive 27.0 release notes":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29886#issuecomment-2058543218)
ACK c08754971d207bd2b60ba9c4faf34396a97bbc26
No output for
```
git diff c08754971d207bd2b60ba9c4faf34396a97bbc26:doc/release-notes/release-notes-27.0.md v27.0:doc/release-notes.md
```
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "guix: use GCC 13 to builds releases":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29881#issuecomment-2058544837)
For reference, the previous bump was e1ce5b8ae9124717c00dca71a5c5b43a7f5ad177, which is in master only and not yet in a release branch.
💬 hebasto commented on issue "`test/streams_tests.cpp` fails to compile on SunOS / illumos":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29884#issuecomment-2058578466)
> However, my preference would be to completely avoid `signed char` and just use `int8_t` in the serialization code. That is, fix the test to use `int8_t`.

I lean to agree, considering that `signed char` is used in tests only.
👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "guix: remove `gcc-toolchain static` from Windows build"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29828#pullrequestreview-2003064639)
ACK 05da2460db895374ea1fd89e4b8b4b73689f8faf,

My Guix build:
```
450c0c4f45f9cb7ed7fc2ef6e7557b6a23004b82c951399da3b7635e8451a076 guix-build-05da2460db89/output/dist-archive/bitcoin-05da2460db89.tar.gz
5df68ab18636090c387bc90297356d0e148b02931d3a99c0f6d33cd268aa072b guix-build-05da2460db89/output/x86_64-w64-mingw32/SHA256SUMS.part
13e979f60d9296aa11081fbbb360404da9fbb797bb4663ed2d1189d800659b4f guix-build-05da2460db89/output/x86_64-w64-mingw32/bitcoin-05da2460db89-win64-debug.zip
d1cc
...
💬 maflcko commented on issue "`test/streams_tests.cpp` fails to compile on SunOS / illumos":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29884#issuecomment-2058600361)
Happy to review a pull, if someone creates one.
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "util: remove unused cpp-subprocess options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29865#issuecomment-2058610414)
> FWIW I think it's a valid choice to remove what we're not using and re-introduce it when we do, the code is out there there's little point in keeping unused code in the repository.

I agree.
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build: Fix false positive `CHECK_ATOMIC` test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29859#issuecomment-2058623912)
review ACK dd3e0fa12534c9e782dc9c24d2e30b70a0d73176
⚠️ maflcko opened an issue: "Intermittent issue in test/ipc_tests.cpp Fatal glibc error: pthread_mutex_lock.c:450 (__pthread_mutex_lock_full): assertion failed: e != ESRCH || !robust"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29889)
Happened on current master d29fc3a245c070494155dad4cf68b9c95d99c13e in ci_i686_multiprocess

```
Running tests: wallet_util_tests from wallet/test/rpc_util_tests.cpp
Running tests: scriptpubkeyman_tests from wallet/test/scriptpubkeyman_tests.cpp
Running tests: walletload_tests from wallet/test/walletload_tests.cpp
Running tests: group_outputs_tests from wallet/test/group_outputs_tests.cpp
Running tests: db_tests from wallet/test/db_tests.cpp
Running tests: ipc_tests from test/ipc_tests.c
...
💬 maflcko commented on issue "Intermittent issue in test/ipc_tests.cpp Fatal glibc error: pthread_mutex_lock.c:450 (__pthread_mutex_lock_full): assertion failed: e != ESRCH || !robust":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29889#issuecomment-2058655310)
```
# podman exec ci_i686_multiprocess uname -a
Linux a943c4649ecd 5.14.21-150400.24.100-default #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Mon Dec 4 19:12:13 UTC 2023 (3f5cd84) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux