💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Windows bitcoind stall debugging [NOMERGE, DRAFT]":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30956#issuecomment-2426002132)
> The call to RegQueryValueExA in RandAddSeedPerfmon:

I think you can open a PR to just remove this entirely.

💬 cdecker commented on pull request "chainparams: Re-add seed.bitcoinstats.com":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31086#issuecomment-2426003595)
From what I can tell it is working as expected:

```
dig x9.seed.bitcoinstats.com. @1.1.1.1

; <<>> DiG 9.18.28-0ubuntu0.22.04.1-Ubuntu <<>> x9.seed.bitcoinstats.com. @1.1.1.1
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 28948
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 24, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 1232
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;x9.seed.bitcoinstats.com. IN A

;; ANSWER SECTIO
...

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "doc: replace `-?` with `-h` for bench_bitcoin help":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31118#issuecomment-2426028146)
> > Wondering why is -h a hidden argument. Do you think it's worth making it non-hidden with its own message just like -??
>
> There's no reason to list both seperately. That would clutter the list. `-?` is the weird duck out in that it lists the short-name option as primary instead of the long one (`-help`). Might add the alternatives to the help message say,
>
> ```
> -help
> Print this help message and exit (also -h or -?)
> ```

@laanwj Yes, this^ seems better.

👍 fanquake approved a pull request: "Update libmultiprocess library"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31105#pullrequestreview-2381376853)
ACK 90b405516f7f3be522ced3e0c4d23b3892df0661

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Add imbued v3 based on template-matching":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29427#issuecomment-2426055128)
I believe this PR is no longer relevant, so closing for now.

✅ sdaftuar closed a pull request: "Add imbued v3 based on template-matching"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29427)

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "doc: replace `-?` with `-h` for bench_bitcoin help":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31118#issuecomment-2426061892)
I've pushed the default change in a separate commit, let me know if this is what you had in mind:
```bash
% build/src/bench/bench_bitcoin -h
[...]
-help
Print this help message and exit (also -h or -?)
```

💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "Windows bitcoind stall debugging [NOMERGE, DRAFT]":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30956#issuecomment-2426068240)
> I think you can open a PR to just remove this entirely.

On it. Will explore other possible fixes after publishing that PR.

💬 qk-santi commented on issue "estimateSmartFee error: "Insufficient data or no feerate found"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31116#issuecomment-2426084727)
Hey @pinheadmz !

Thanks for answering

Since upgrading to v27 around April, we've been having estimation issues.

Just after upgrade to v27, we had incorrect estimations both on Testnet and Mainnet on all nodes.

On Mainnet, it estimates got stuck to ~300 sats for several days, while network was asking for ~50 sats.
We waited a bit to check if mempool had to refresh and get newer transactions to get the pulse of the network, just in case if it had any improper batch of txs that were sk
...

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "chainparams: Re-add seed.bitcoinstats.com":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31086#issuecomment-2426116973)
> From what I can tell it is working as expected:

Yes. When using `@1.1.1.1` it works. Without, i get the following. Apparently my ISP's DNS server is behaving funny.
```
; <<>> DiG 9.18.28-0ubuntu0.24.04.1-Ubuntu <<>> x9.seed.bitcoinstats.com.
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 30929
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 65494
;; QUESTION SE
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "lint: commit-script-check.sh: echo to stderr"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31063)

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "Update libmultiprocess library"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31105#pullrequestreview-2381512774)
ACK 90b405516f7f3be522ced3e0c4d23b3892df0661

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "Update libmultiprocess library"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31105)

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "rpc: net: follow-ups for #30062":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30183#discussion_r1808467530)
I agree, but since we have some ACKs here, I can leave it for another PR or in case I need to touch it again.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "guix: Enable CET for `glibc` package":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31121#issuecomment-2426246720)
Guix Build:
```bash
f661515f39c1fef7b7ab7e1de3665ccf3efba9ffbcc6c4de396962e9c6b1a92e guix-build-4d3da08d1b9d/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
f4889a72693e3249ac5d59b83c23ddb74f15d9e844c131ae41e17fd5daa15772 guix-build-4d3da08d1b9d/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-4d3da08d1b9d-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
68dc8bb68f0682047357d292ee71e7b654e3aa1431f50a1ae9ef459f51318663 guix-build-4d3da08d1b9d/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-4d3da08d1b9d-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
9ad44c30be3db8fd
...

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Package validation: accept packages of size 1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31096#discussion_r1808495896)
I had similar thoughts, yes. I think the current description is correct but less helpful than it could be (even without this PR).

Suggested alternative:

"The package must solely consist of a child transaction and all, some or none of its unconfirmed parents. None of the parents may depend on each other.\n"

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Add multiprocess binaries to release build":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30975#issuecomment-2426256506)
See [cb3d8038b61440dff10316afd238603bd9f60924](https://github.com/fanquake/bitcoin/commit/cb3d8038b61440dff10316afd238603bd9f60924) for how I'd rework e76fdae837cea1384ea7fff231dd54ec5fbb0b19. Note that the `_multiprocess` suffix could be dropped from the `i686` job, however, we should have atleast one job building with `NO_MULTIPROCESS`, so maybe that could be reused for that with `_no_multiprocess`.

👍 rkrux approved a pull request: "doc: replace `-?` with `-h` for bench_bitcoin help"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31118#pullrequestreview-2381587440)
tACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/33a28e252a7349c0aa284005aee97873b965fcfe

Thanks @l0rinc for addressing the change quickly. Rebuilt and checked for bitcoin-cli as well, it's updated there too.

```
➜ bitcoin git:(l0rinc/bench-help) ✗ bitcoincli -h
Bitcoin Core RPC client version v28.99.0-33a28e252a73

Usage: bitcoin-cli [options] <command> [params] Send command to Bitcoin Core
or: bitcoin-cli [options] -named <command> [name=value]... Send command to Bitcoin Core
...

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "cmake: Switch to crc32c upstream build system"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30905)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "cmake: Switch to crc32c upstream build system":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30905#issuecomment-2426263301)
Closing, as the consensus between myself, @hebasto, @theuni and @TheCharlatan was to not make this change (for now, or not until we've adjusted upstream further).

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "guix: Enable CET for `glibc` package":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31121#issuecomment-2426337364)
i've built both this PR and the commit it's based on using guix, and the resulting x86_64 bitcoind binaries have the same size. There are subtle differences in the assembly, though:
```bash
objdump -dC --dwarf=follow-links a38603456e9a/bitcoind > a38603456e9a/bitcoind.s
objdump -dC --dwarf=follow-links 4d3da08d1b9d/bitcoind > 4d3da08d1b9d/bitcoind.s
diff -du a38603456e9a/bitcoind.s 4d3da08d1b9d/bitcoind.s > diff
```
```
--- a38603456e9a/bitcoind.s 2024-10-21 12:52:23.822751727 +0200
+++
...