💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "doc: fuzz: fix AFL++ link":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32713#discussion_r2137951693)
> Anecdotally, I've had at least one situation where afl-clang-lto wouldn't build but I forget which clang version I was on.

Same here. From the build summary: `LLVM LTO mode could not be built, it is optional, if you want it, please install LLVM 11-14. More information at instrumentation/README.lto.md on how to build it`

💬 hMsats commented on issue "bitcoind 29.0 much slower than 28.0 on my system: cause found":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32455#issuecomment-2959329032)
@l0rinc in a few days a 4 tb ssd will arrive. I will copy the data and do a `-reindex` (with 32 MiB) using a different machine. That way my server will be up most of the time. It's a a good way to test the ssd and the blocks directory.

💬 yuvicc commented on pull request "p2p: When close to the tip, download blocks in parallel from additional peers to prevent stalling":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29664#issuecomment-2959334467)
Concept ACK

👍 ryanofsky approved a pull request: "validation: stricter internal handling of invalid blocks"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31405#pullrequestreview-2913549953)
This seems ready to merge, but it's also a subtle change so it could be helpful if more reviewers want to take a look and ack. I'm planning to merge this in a day or two if nothing new comes up.

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "validation: stricter internal handling of invalid blocks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31405#discussion_r2137888077)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31405#discussion_r2135886621

In commit "validation: in invalidateblock, calculate m_best_header right away" (9a70883002e1fee76c24810808af4fb43f2c8cf5)

Thanks. I was just thinking of moving it right before the CheckBlockIndex call, but didn't think about the fact that CheckBlockIndex could be called by other threads during this time.

> Maybe one possibility would be to add a parameter to `InvalidChainFound` to skip `RecalculateBestHeader`

Ye
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "doc: fuzz: fix AFL++ link":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32713#issuecomment-2959364597)
lgtm ACK a39b7071cfb430fd51352562c717fab68fa52efe

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: Add witness mutation check inside FillBlock":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32646#discussion_r2137985406)
stale comment, I just removed it as it's not particularly helpful

📝 hebasto opened a pull request: "depends: Override host compilers for FreeBSD and OpenBSD"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32716)
When building depends on FreeBSD/OpenBSD `aarch64`, the host compilers default to `default_host_{CC,CXX}`, which resolves to `gcc`/`g++`. This is incorrect on these systems, where Clang is the default system compiler.

To ensure proper compiler selection, this PR adopts the same approach used for `darwin`:https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/c1d4253d316ea627f46b26e395d7b48842258381/depends/builders/darwin.mk#L12-L14

Fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32691.

💬 hebasto commented on issue "depends: OpenBSD (aarch64) needs gcc (instruction) for libevent":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32691#issuecomment-2959391183)
> Can you open a PR with it?

Sure :)

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32716.

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "depends: fix cmake compatibility error for freetype":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32693#issuecomment-2959408887)
Another approach might be to bump freetype itself to 2.12.1 where `cmake` version has been bumped from 2.5 to 3.0: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/freetype/freetype/-/blob/VER-2-12-1/CMakeLists.txt?ref_type=tags#L111

This appears to be available on most platforms: https://repology.org/project/freetype/versions although I did not fully cross-reference against all our supported platforms. It is available on CentOS, but is not available on Debian 11 bullseye nor Ubuntu 22.04.

Bumping to this v
...

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "p2p: Add witness mutation check inside FillBlock":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32646#discussion_r2138012635)
almost forgot, done

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "doc: fuzz: fix AFL++ link"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32713)

👍 fanquake approved a pull request: "guix: warn and abort when SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is set"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32678#pullrequestreview-2913817407)
ACK 5c4a0f8009cef758be9412428515bfed57b0c923

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "guix: SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is already set in some environments"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29935)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "guix: warn and abort when SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is set"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32678)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "depends: fix cmake compatibility error for freetype":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32693#issuecomment-2959462816)
> This appears to be available on most platforms:

Depends uses static linking, even for the GUI, so I don't think package versions shipped by distros are relevant here? If they were, the previous freetype version in depends would have caused issues on quite a few distros?

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "guix: warn and abort when SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is set":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32678#issuecomment-2959462840)
Backported to 29.x in #32589.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: fix cmake compatibility error for freetype":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32693#issuecomment-2959488316)
> Depends uses static linking, even for the GUI,

Freetype (and the majority of the GUI deps) aren't statically linked. See here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/fe39050a66c73e82a8e5f7371dd9e3d70f5a1482/contrib/guix/symbol-check.py#L108-L127

Discrepancy amongst the versions used, is already causing issues, see #29977, however it's hard to know if anyone is using the affected systems, given no users seem to have complained about the GUI not working.

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "init, doc: Replace datacarrier(size) deprecation with non-recommendation text":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32714#issuecomment-2959520626)
> While deprecation obviously means that the options are not recommended for use, many users seem to believe that it also means that the options will be imminently removed.

Given "deprecation obviously means that the options are not recommended for use" I think that trying to differentiate "not recommended for use" and "deprecated" will only lead to more confusion, so I think we should either (a) recommend the option not be used and mark it deprecated; or (b) not mark it deprecated, and leave
...

💬 donaldevine commented on issue "Internal bug detected: Fee needed > fee paid":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32683#issuecomment-2959535663)
Should you be allowed to create a transaction on a watch only wallet?