💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "mempool / rpc: add getprioritisationmap, delete a mapDeltas entry when delta==0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27501#discussion_r1173574801)
```suggestion
RPCResult::Type::OBJ_DYN, "prioritisation-map", "prioritisation keyed by txid",
```

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "mempool / rpc: add getprioritisationmap, delete a mapDeltas entry when delta==0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27501#discussion_r1173597419)
Slight rephrasing suggestion:
```suggestion
/** Return a map of all entries in mapDeltas with as value their fee delta and whether the transaction is present in the mempoool. */
```

💬 batriskaweb3 commented on issue "Compiling a bitcoin core version that accepts transactions over 100vkb":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27490#issuecomment-1517608382)
thanks alot
any idea why this error could be occurring?
`Making all in src
make[1]: Entering directory '/home/doodles/bitcoin/src'
make[2]: Entering directory '/home/doodles/bitcoin/src'
CXX bitcoind-bitcoind.o
CXX init/bitcoind-bitcoind.o
CXX libbitcoin_node_a-addrdb.o
CXX libbitcoin_node_a-addrman.o
CXX libbitcoin_node_a-banman.o
CXX libbitcoin_node_a-blockencodings.o
In file included from ./txmempool.h:24,
from blockencodi
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "move-only: Extract common/args from util/system"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27419)

👍 fanquake approved a pull request: "test: Remove unused sanitizer suppressions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27498#pullrequestreview-1395513861)
ACK fa15a9934ee1d331737c631e6ffc2ddfafaddb7f

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#discussion_r1173586914)
Why is the `banman` moved into the options?

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#discussion_r1173594457)
Doesn't this leave us with two pointers, one in `m_banman` and the other in `m_opts.banman` that is never used?

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#discussion_r1173600064)
Could reading from the args be moved to their own `ApplyArgsManOptions` function like in various `node/*_args.cpp` files? Then the test code wouldn't have to repeat the logic here.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: Remove unused sanitizer suppressions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27498)

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#discussion_r1173615788)
I thought it makes sense because the banman is optional but happy to move it out, no strong opinion on this. Let me know what you prefer.

Will leave this unresolved for a bit to let others chime in as well.

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#discussion_r1173616551)
Yea, could get rid of m_banman or not have banman in the options in the first place...

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "net processing, refactor: Decouple PeerManager from gArgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27499#issuecomment-1517635032)
Concept ACK

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Bump python minimum version to 3.8":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27483#issuecomment-1517638047)
Should also bump the lint DOckerfile to `python:3.8-buster`?

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "build: use latest config.{guess,sub} in depends"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27508)
Been a few years since we last updated these.
Also related to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26422#issuecomment-1421178967.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "fuzz: re-enable prioritisetransaction & analyzepsbt RPC"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27464)

👋 fanquake's pull request is ready for review: "[23.x] Additional backports for 23.x"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27475)

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: use latest config.{guess,sub} in depends":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27508#issuecomment-1517649284)
Concept ACK.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci: use LLVM/clang-16 in native_asan job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27360#discussion_r1173636442)
@fkorotkov can you offer any insight here? Should we be able to use non-LTS Ubuntu images?

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "net: use interruptible async getaddrinfo wrapper from libevent for DNS":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27505#issuecomment-1517682872)
@dergoegge I think the CI failures are memory leaks from my code, I'm going to fix that. But I hear your point about the arcane library. Any suggestions?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "refactor: Make `CCheckQueue` RAII-styled":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26762#issuecomment-1517728829)
Rebased d462e3da7fc6be75269e88928fd80fc98c405474 -> 52129e335cbc68ac5d863f283f7d1a328ce79581 ([pr26762.07](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/commits/pr26762.07) -> [pr26762.08](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/commits/pr26762.08)) due to the conflict with #27419.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "Bump python minimum version to 3.8":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27483#issuecomment-1517739626)
> Should also bump the lint Dockerfile to python:3.8-buster?

buster is EOL and unmaintained, which is one of the reasons I created this pull, as can be seen in the pull request description. I don't really understand why the lint Dockerfile isn't simply using the exact same distro and setup like the lint CI. Using something else is just going to make it less reproducible and harder to maintain. Though, those changes should probably be made in a separate follow-up pull.