💬 fanquake commented on issue "build: RFC Coverage build type":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31047#issuecomment-2396679207)
> For me it seems best to use each compiler's native workflow.

Sure, anyone can still use whatever they like. However our build system doesn't need to (and shouldn't have to) handle all possible combinations of compiler + tooling. Providing a single convenience build type that is the same as what is used by the majority of the developers seems fine, however I don't think we need to natively support anything outside of that, given it's unlikely to be tested/used, or work properly, and just fu
...

💬 vasild commented on issue "Listen on random port by default (not 8333)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31036#issuecomment-2396705062)
Alright, looks like getting the DNS seeds to propagate ports would be really nice to have or an outright blocker for this.

Currently, about 7% of my IPv4/IPv6 addrman entries use non 8333 port.

```sh
$ bitcoin-cli getnodeaddresses 0 | jq -r 'map(select((.network == "ipv6" or .network == "ipv4") and .port != 8333)) | length'
$ bitcoin-cli getnodeaddresses 0 | jq -r 'map(select(.network == "ipv6" or .network == "ipv4")) | length'
```

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "rpc: getorphantxs follow-up":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31043#discussion_r1790087981)
Thanks.

The following passed. Will push.

```diff
diff --git a/test/functional/rpc_orphans.py b/test/functional/rpc_orphans.py
index 207647f548..825657a1ed 100755
--- a/test/functional/rpc_orphans.py
+++ b/test/functional/rpc_orphans.py
@@ -96,11 +96,15 @@ class OrphanRPCsTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
tx_child_2 = self.wallet.create_self_transfer(utxo_to_spend=tx_parent_2["new_utxo"])
peer_1 = node.add_p2p_connection(P2PInterface())
peer_2 = node.add_p2p_co
...

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "rpc: getorphantxs follow-up":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31043#issuecomment-2396730642)
Pushed to ae17f9050e0c2a6fd31cd9f5d2f3ad8066f02cc9 to replace `assert_approx` with `assert_equal` (using `setmocktime`)

👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "ci: set a ctest test timeout of 1200 (20 minutes)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31026#pullrequestreview-2351756890)
re ACK 56aad83307e46983a397236bd0959e634207f83e

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Windows bitcoind stall debugging [NOMERGE, DRAFT]":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30956#discussion_r1790111622)
Any reason to filter to only mempool_?

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: ConnectionRefusedError: [WinError 10061] No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30390#issuecomment-2396787199)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/11164991068/job/31035622913?pr=30982#step:12:242

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2396818224)
It's nice to keep macOS 11 support, but I don't have a (easy) way to test it, so I wouldn't put too much effort in it.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Add -pausebackgroundsync startup option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31023#issuecomment-2396823190)
I tend to agree with https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31023#issuecomment-2391695605. Adding a test-only option in this way won't be useful to benchmark previous releases (and compare them), and seems more work than just using a test-only datadir dump.

> The main use case I have in mind is some who doesn't want to do background validation.

There are reasons to do the background validation, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28616#issuecomment-2022485737 . If you are adding a
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "ci: set a ctest test timeout of 1200 (20 minutes)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31026)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2396830039)
IIUC macOS 11 does not receive security patches, so it may be better to remove it either way, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1789897798

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "docs: Add instructions on how to self-sign bitcoin-core binaries for macOS":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30982#discussion_r1790160328)
This might be a bit confusing, because you don't need to self-sign the main drag & drop release.

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "net: fuzz: bypass network magic and checksum validation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31012#issuecomment-2396845482)
> Copy and pasting the command from the docs doesn't work:

Just fixed it. Can you check it?

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on issue "[Testnet] Insufficient data or no feerate found":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31032#issuecomment-2396883367)
> I'd like to think that this is a problem caused by not having enough data, but that doesn't seem to be the case for me.

> I have two Bitcoin testnet nodes running (let's call them A and B).

> Sometimes node A throws the error "Insufficient data or no feerate found," while node B returns a feerate without any issue.

> Other times, both nodes A and B encounter the same error.

This behavior is inherent to the fee estimator, which collects data and decays it over time. As a result, you
...

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "test: Assert that when we add the max orphan amount that we cannot add anymore and that a random orphan gets dropped":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31040#issuecomment-2396883806)
> Concept ACK Thanks, this is useful! I'm uncertain if this check is better suited for `p2p_orphan_handling` or `rpc_getorphantxs` (or for a `feature_orphanage` or `mempool_orphanage`). If `p2p_orphan_handling` is the preferred location, I'm happy to include your commit (preserving you as author) in #31037.
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/README.md#naming-guidelines
>
> Can also check unit tests (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/test/orp
...

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "kernel: Move block tree db open to block manager":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30965#discussion_r1790201191)
See #31046

📝 hebasto opened a pull request: "build: Bump minimum supported macOS to 12.0"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31048)
Running Bitcoin Core on unsupported OSes may expose users to security issues.

macOS Big Sur 11 received its last security update ([11.7.10](https://support.apple.com/en-us/106338)) over a year ago.

Addresses https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2396830039.

💬 vasild commented on issue "build: RFC Coverage build type":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31047#issuecomment-2396896391)
> our build system doesn't need to (and shouldn't have to) handle all possible combinations of compiler + tooling

It is just two:
1. gcc compiler + gcov/lcov and
2. clang compiler + llvm-cov (source based).

(I think it is a waste of time and we should ignore a third option where we try to use the gcov/lcov workflow with clang).

> Providing a single convenience build type that is the same as what is used by the majority of the developers seems fine

I do not object this, but then if
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2396896509)
> IIUC macOS 11 does not receive security patches, so it may be better to remove it either way, see [#30997 (comment)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1789897798)

Addressed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31048.

🤔 pablomartin4btc reviewed a pull request: "Decouple WalletModel from RPCExecutor"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/841#pullrequestreview-2351869077)
tACK 002b792b9a85100d89e47706c29cf1fd355d9727

Tested the rpc console with and without `-DENABLE_WALLET`. I think the refactor makes sense as the rpc just needs the wallet name for the related commands.

Out of the scope of this PR, I noticed that the order of the wallets in the combo-boxes corresponds to the `settings.json` file and if the user changes the wallet in the main window, when the rpc console is open, the wallet in the console combo doesn't correspond with the one in the main win
...

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "Decouple WalletModel from RPCExecutor":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/841#discussion_r1790172791)
nit: describe wallet_name as a param[in] (wallet_model wasn't there either)
```suggestion
* @param[out] pstrFilteredOut Command line, filtered to remove any sensitive data
* @param[in] wallet_mame ...
```