💬 Pimpim11 commented on issue "Double Poisson Sum: Enhancing Energy Distribution in Bitcoin Proof of Work with Main Formula γ^(i/R) + ∑(S[0:i]·τ·φ^j)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32348#issuecomment-2830349113)
@willcl-ark

I am Farrel Al Feshal who is currently active as a Cryptographer, and I want to realize this Syamailcoin, a Layer-1 that I know has never existed in our country, despite the trust because of artistic tokens and exchange tokens not being obstacles for me. This is not just referential reading, but I did Muscle Memory in Math in 2016 where I felt Mathematics is not just numbers but I can travel within Mathematics itself.

In short, I have successfully launched it but according to CMC,
...

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "Double Poisson Sum: Enhancing Energy Distribution in Bitcoin Proof of Work with Main Formula γ^(i/R) + ∑(S[0:i]·τ·φ^j)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32348)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: Increase stack size for "Debug" builds with MSVC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32349#discussion_r2060189048)
Where does this reserve value come from?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "wallet: Disable creating and loading legacy wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31250#discussion_r2060197072)
the test doesn't look wallet related, so can probably remove this (albeit harmless)

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "test: Increase stack size for "Debug" builds with MSVC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32349#issuecomment-2830372296)
I'm not against increasing the Windows stack depth, but the underlying problem may be that we're ignoring warnings such as `misc-no-recursion`, even when the fix is quite simple.

`FindChallenges` looks like a depth-first search, which should be straightforward to rewrite as a simple iterative function:
```diff
diff --git a/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp b/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp
index f253562a2f..14ac44e2c6 100644
--- a/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp
+++ b/src/test/miniscript_tests.c
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "test: Increase stack size for "Debug" builds with MSVC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32349#discussion_r2060209140)
Determined empirically—this value was found to be sufficient during testing.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "test: Increase stack size for "Debug" builds with MSVC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32349#issuecomment-2830396855)
> I'm not against increasing the Windows stack depth, but the underlying problem may be that we're ignoring warnings such as `misc-no-recursion`, even when the fix is quite simple.
>
> `FindChallenges` looks like a simple depth-first search, which should be straightforward to rewrite as an iterative walk:
>
> ```diff
> diff --git a/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp b/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp
> index f253562a2f..14ac44e2c6 100644
> --- a/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp
> +++ b/src/test/m
...

💬 darosior commented on pull request "test: Increase stack size for "Debug" builds with MSVC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32349#issuecomment-2830408233)
That sounds sensible, can you open a PR with this patch and tag me?

💬 vasild commented on pull request "net: remove unnecessary check from AlreadyConnectedToAddress()":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32338#issuecomment-2830421188)
`0eac006a00...f1b142856a`: address suggestions - add fuzz test and an unit test.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add checkBlock() to Mining interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31981#discussion_r2060244002)
None of the `Assume` checks seem problematic in production. They would just be inconsistent with (my understanding of) previous behavior. I dropped them, since none of the tests and fuzzers tripped over them.

I dropped the `!block.fChecked `Assert`. The remaining `Assert`s are where we would crash anyway.

Finally I changed the pre-existing `assert` at the end into an Assume along with a LogError.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add checkBlock() to Mining interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31981#issuecomment-2830435612)
Forgot to adjust the capnp file. Fixed more typos.

I moved `TestBlockValidity` out of `ChainstateManager` again, and pass in a `chainstate` parameter as suggested in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31981#discussion_r2035713597.

> Probably also better for it not to `LOCK(cs_main)` to avoid unnecessary recursive mutex locking.

Can you elaborate on this?

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "wallet: Disable creating and loading legacy wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31250#issuecomment-2830439480)
> Looks like `is_bdb_compiled` & `skip_if_no_bdb` should have been dropped.

That's done in #28710 (commit: "_build, wallet, doc: Remove BDB_").

💬 vasild commented on pull request "common: Close non-std fds before exec in RunCommandJSON":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32343#issuecomment-2830461557)
> /proc/self/fd

I would try something like this to check if `/proc/self/fd` is available:

```diff
--- i/ci/test/03_test_script.sh
+++ w/ci/test/03_test_script.sh
@@ -145,12 +145,17 @@ if [ "$RUN_UNIT_TESTS" = "true" ]; then
fi

if [ "$RUN_UNIT_TESTS_SEQUENTIAL" = "true" ]; then
DIR_UNIT_TEST_DATA="${DIR_UNIT_TEST_DATA}" LD_LIBRARY_PATH="${DEPENDS_DIR}/${HOST}/lib" "${BASE_OUTDIR}"/bin/test_bi
fi

+ls -l /proc || :
+ls -l /proc/self || :
+ls -l /proc/self/fd || :
+mount
...

📝 maflcko opened a pull request: "test: Slim down previous releases bdb check "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32350)
The check iterates over several previous BDB-only releases to check that descriptor wallets are considered "corrupt" when loading. It is unclear why this needs to be done for more than one release.

Avoid the confusion by removing the unused releases from the test and from the download script.

📝 l0rinc opened a pull request: "test: avoid stack overflow in `FindChallenges` via manual iteration"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32351)
`FindChallenges` explores the `Miniscript` node tree by going deep into the first child's subtree, then the second, and so on - effectively performing a Post-order Traversal (Depth-First Search) recursively, using the call stack which can result in stack overflows on Windows debug builds.

This change replaces the recursive implementation with an iterative version using an explicit stack.
It is an alternative to increasing the Windows stack size, as proposed in #32349, and addresses the issue
...

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "test: Increase stack size for "Debug" builds with MSVC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32349#issuecomment-2830559713)
Opened https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32351 as an alternative fix, cc: @darosior

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "psbt: add non-default sighash types to PSBTs and unify sighash type match checking":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31622#issuecomment-2830562388)
I'm reviewing the PR again and will share a final review in the coming days.

📝 hebasto opened a pull request: "[29.x] qt: 29.1 translations update"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32352)
This PR fetches the recent translation updates from Transifex.

Closes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32295.

**Notes for reviewers:**

1. "fr_CM" and "fr_LU" have been dropped as part of [phasing out of territory-specific translations](https://app.transifex.com/bitcoin/communication/d:402657d1-6254-4ce9-8d26-e7827652c627/?q=project%3Abitcoin).

2. The translations for the following languages, which appear to be the result of a mistake or an act of vandalism, have been discard
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "[29.x] qt: 29.1 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32352#issuecomment-2830588111)
> Closes #32295.

However, the Polish (pl) translation still have a couple of issues:

1. String 160: Mismatch between 'S&how' and '%Wyświetl'

2. String 452: Mismatch between 'Transaction broadcast successfully! Transaction ID: %1' and 'transakcja'

💬 hebasto commented on issue "gui: translation spam?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32295#issuecomment-2830591421)
> I'm happy we give it another whirl after Transifex changes go in.

Translations from Transifex have been fetched in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32352.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "test: avoid stack overflow in `FindChallenges` via manual iteration":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32351#issuecomment-2830600873)
cc @darosior