Bitcoin Core Github
44 subscribers
120K links
Download Telegram
πŸ’¬ sweep-the-lotus commented on issue "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069#issuecomment-2408389062)
there is an easier way , found this at stackexchange :

"On the new Mac OS X you can't see the Bitcoin folder in the library under /application support/. You have to use Finder and in the menu look for GO and then GO TO type ~/Library in the box. After that you can see the Bitcoin folder under /application support/. " so open a folder and in the right hand upper corner click on the magnifing glass ie search and paste in or type ~/Library hit enter
from there it will beclear wha
...
πŸ’¬ DpTheSaint commented on issue "Please....Big Noob here..(this right place?)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31075#issuecomment-2408392209)
hmm running with 1 ram stick appears to have fixed the issue........ what a pain in the a@#
πŸ’¬ diivvy commented on issue "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069#issuecomment-2408397794)
Okay so I have figured out that bitcoin core doesn't work with the macbook's latest software update. So backing up my data and transferring it to another mac with an older software version should load the wallet along with the funds right?
πŸ’¬ diivvy commented on issue "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069#issuecomment-2408398160)
@hebasto Could you check if there is any version of bitcoin core that works with macOS 15.0.1 Sequoia? I tried version 28 and it gives me the "Bitcoin core 'not opened' " error. Contacted Apple regarding this, they said there's nothing they can do. Contact the application devs to ask or check for an update.
πŸ’¬ Julietnacy commented on issue "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069#issuecomment-2408399599)
@diivvy Yes, transferring your data to another Mac with an older software version should help you load the wallet along with the funds. Just make sure to back up all your wallet data carefully before making the transfer. This should include your wallet.dat file and any other relevant data. Once transferred, you should be able to access your wallet and funds on the older Mac.
πŸ’¬ diivvy commented on issue "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069#issuecomment-2408400208)
@Julietnacy Great, I have ordered a new mac and I'll write a final note if it is all successfully completed. Appreciate the info!
πŸ’¬ Julietnacy commented on issue "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069#issuecomment-2408400916)
@diivvy Good luck with the setup, and feel free to share a final note once everything’s up and running! Appreciate you keeping me in the loop. 😊
βœ… achow101 closed an issue: "Please....Big Noob here..(this right place?)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31075)
πŸ’¬ achow101 commented on issue "Please....Big Noob here..(this right place?)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31075#issuecomment-2408411278)
Bitcoin Core makes heavy use of CPU, RAM and disk IO. Hardware defects might only become visible when running Bitcoin Core. You might want to check your hardware for defects.

* memtest86 to check your RAM
* to check the CPU behaviour under load, use linpack or Prime95
* to test your storage device use smartctl or CrystalDiskInfo

Source: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/12206
βœ… achow101 closed an issue: "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069)
πŸ’¬ achow101 commented on issue "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069#issuecomment-2408411862)
Usually the issue tracker is used to track technical issues related to the Bitcoin Core code base. General bitcoin questions and/or support requests are best directed to the [Bitcoin StackExchange](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com) or the `#bitcoin` IRC channel on Libera Chat.
πŸ’¬ achow101 commented on issue "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069#issuecomment-2408412911)
Highly likely this is related to MacOS notarization requirements. See #15774
πŸ€” BrandonOdiwuor reviewed a pull request: "rpc: Add support to populate PSBT input utxos via rpc"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30886#pullrequestreview-2363885753)
Concept ACK
:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "Wallet usdt"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31076)
⚠️ paboum opened an issue: "Tx blockout"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31077)
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.

Maybe it's silly, but I suppose Bitcoin protocol could introduce via soft fork a possibility (a new script opcode) for specifying that the new transaction should either be mined in block number less than X or void (X is an user-defined value). Miners could, perhaps, demand more fee for X values significantly larger than the current block number.

I understand this would be a huge change in blockchain whatsoever and expect complex analys
...
βœ… pinheadmz closed an issue: "Tx blockout"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31077)
πŸ’¬ pinheadmz commented on issue "Tx blockout":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31077#issuecomment-2408546351)
See relevant discussions:

https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/op-checkmaxtimeverify/581/8

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2023-October/022042.html


I'm going to close this issue since it is not relevant to bitcoin core as a software project. Protocol ideas like this are better expressed on the mailing list or Delving.
πŸ’¬ jonatack commented on issue "Bitcoin Core "not opened" after software update to macOS Sequoia 15.0.1 (24A348)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31069#issuecomment-2408582520)
@diivvy I am running current Bitcoin Core with macOS 15.0.1 without issues. I can see the wallets via either the Finder or the command line (i.e. with Terminal, iTerm2, etc.)
πŸ€” marcofleon reviewed a pull request: "p2p: Fill reconciliation sets (Erlay) attempt 2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30116#pullrequestreview-2363929991)
I fuzzed the `txreconciliation` class with `-DSANITIZERS=fuzzer,undefined,integer` and two related runtime errors occurred:

<details>
<summary>errors</summary>

```bash
../../src/node/txreconciliation.cpp:457:46: runtime error: unsigned integer overflow: 1 - 3 cannot be represented in type 'size_t' (aka 'unsigned long')
#0 0x55ddab3b7d99 in TxReconciliationTracker::Impl::ShouldFanoutTo(transaction_identifier<true> const&, long, unsigned long, unsigned long) erlayfuzzbuild/src/../../s
...
πŸ’¬ marcofleon commented on pull request "p2p: Fill reconciliation sets (Erlay) attempt 2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30116#discussion_r1797721753)
Can `outbounds_fanout_tx_relay` ever be greater than 1 here? I think if we have two (or more) unregistered outbound peers and at least one registered peer, then this results in an unsigned integer overflow. Which then overflows `targets_size` in `IsFanoutTarget`.
πŸ’¬ LarryRuane commented on pull request "netinfo: add peer services column and outbound-only peers list":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30930#discussion_r1797381849)
I like @vasild's observation that having a separate option (instead of using level 5) allows 0-4 to be used in both modes -- that's very flexible.

However, I suggest that the new option be `netinfo-outonly` (instead of `outonly`) and it would imply `netinfo` (`netinfo` wouldn't need to be specified) because it would be weird to have an option (`outonly`) that does nothing without `netinfo`. It would also be less convenient to have to specify both.

If both `netinfo` and `netinfo-outonly` ar
...