💬 purpleKarrot commented on pull request "doc: clarify that the "-j N" goes after the "--build build" part":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32846#discussion_r2177295699)
`cmake --install` supports `-j` too!

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "depends: fix libevent `_WIN32_WINNT` usage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32837#discussion_r2177343557)
Isn't this change from another commit https://github.com/libevent/libevent/commit/dda8968c71f684235abb3cf6c26810751bf2c31a?

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "cmake: Improve robustness and usability"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31233#pullrequestreview-2975096506)
tACK 67dc7523f3e103c8359b546d38f28c1feb2b9b34

The PR changes the usage of the `Python3_EXECUTABLE` to the (indeed) more modern target-based approach of `TARGET Python3::Interpreter`

test outcome:
<details>

no python installed:


`cmake -S . -B build ` output gives warning:

```shell
CMake Warning at CMakeLists.txt:710 (message):
Minimum required Python not found. Rpcauth tests are disabled.
```

`ctest --test-dir build -j 8` skips / disables `util_rpcauth_test` (as int
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "cmake: Improve Python robustness and test usability":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31233#issuecomment-3023674710)
Updated the PR title.

🤔 danielabrozzoni reviewed a pull request: "test: Fix wait_for_getheaders() call in test_outbound_eviction_blocks_relay_only()"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32823#pullrequestreview-2975234206)
ACK ec004cdb86e6471915e1033f390c76ee0428e415

Code looks good to me, I like the rephrasing of the comments, the test is easier to follow now :)

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "test: Fix reorg patterns in tests to use proper fork-based approach":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32587#discussion_r2177503856)
actually this is wrong, the test is checking that `timelock_tx_id` is *not* in mempool. If we don't use `invalidateblock` it's essentially impossible to trigger this behavior since the chain should not move backwards in height ever.

Re-read this PR after writing up https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32838

Let me think about how to best do this test case and enhancing it possibly

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "docs: add guidance on initialism capitalisation in PascalCase identifiers."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32720#pullrequestreview-2975291425)
reACK b6f3b335002a6fa5095bedb8ad22a71fce5d35fb

Changes sinds last ACK:
- Author fixed some typo's

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "docs: add guidance on initialism capitalisation in PascalCase identifiers.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32720#issuecomment-3023891382)
lgtm ACK b6f3b335002a6fa5095bedb8ad22a71fce5d35fb

🚀 glozow merged a pull request: "wallet: Keep track of the wallet's own transaction outputs in memory"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286)

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "policy: make pathological transactions packed with legacy sigops non-standard":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32521#discussion_r2177518858)
Since it's a brand new helper function and you're not moving code, let's embrace the future:

```diff
diff --git a/src/policy/policy.cpp b/src/policy/policy.cpp
index 48dfa14a8f..327aa5a5cf 100644
--- a/src/policy/policy.cpp
+++ b/src/policy/policy.cpp
@@ -176,15 +176,15 @@ static bool CheckSigopsBIP54(const CTransaction& tx, const CCoinsViewCache& inpu
Assert(!tx.IsCoinBase());

unsigned int sigops{0};
- for (unsigned i{0}; i < tx.vin.size(); ++i) {
- const auto&
...

👍 Sjors approved a pull request: "policy: make pathological transactions packed with legacy sigops non-standard"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32521#pullrequestreview-2975300052)
ACK ceeb1ebb2f463919a44b0bf3ba24f9b7f814bb5e

⚠️ saravadeanil opened an issue: "[BTC signet v22.0] websocket not working as expect"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32848)
Hi, I am running bitcoin signet node v22.0 with below parameters. I am unable to get any response on websocket port.

```
- '-chain=signet'
- >-
-addnode=178.63.103.48,135.181.75.145,71.80.46.121,195.201.164.54,65.21.171.164,135.180.99.74,188.34.165.181,185.148.37.152
- '-rest'
- '-txindex'
- '-disablewallet'
- '-server'
- '-rpcbind=0.0.0.0'
- '-rpcport=38332'
- '-rpcallowip=
...

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "policy: make pathological transactions packed with legacy sigops non-standard"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32521#pullrequestreview-2975393556)
Strong concept ACK. However, it seems that "this might be a soft fork in the future" is only a secondary motivation (and a bit of a presumptuous one). The primary motivation should be the same as what's in BIP 54: to avoid long validation times.

Generally, a PR that restricts default policy should have a corresponding post on the mailing list. I'm not that concerned that there is someone who needs to relay pathological transactions, but it would feel weird for Core to merge this without any a
...

⚠️ ekrembal opened an issue: "Internal bug detected: FinalizeAndExtractPSBT(psbtx_copy, mtx)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32849)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [x] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

```
bitcoin-cli -testnet4 descriptorprocesspsbt cHNidP8BAF4CAAAAAfrAU8xRZDY7er/kAUGzVtup++LN4otxeOtANj9Tw8xYAAAAAAD9////AeAPlwAAAAAAIlEgmQIRpk7kW78uK6z/DBX37H4Pi4OLy3Fau0pXquQSXLUAAAAAAAEBK4CWmAAAAAAAIlEg5cugS+vKVwm3OSTEr0sIVU/ahEJzIS6iXjsvWNwJ0VUBAwSDAAAAAQhDAUFATOMkSjzzD+7k1AnzZgJ+G+sDZXX5ob0tlQ9mZIseDe73u4fU6SPKdtxve2Wm/mVNrRIP5cPEnkcMv0BJ2iIWgyEWtJa/uuFJh4F8U9WSvgqmbEXHuURDwfdFUTc/nONN
...

💬 romanz commented on pull request "doc: add `/spenttxouts` to REST-interface.md":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32842#issuecomment-3024141446)
Thanks!

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "threading: remove ancient CRITICAL_SECTION macros":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32592#issuecomment-3024157584)
@theuni want to rebase this now that #32465 is in?

💬 fanquake commented on issue "[BTC signet v22.0] websocket not working as expect":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32848#issuecomment-3024213036)
Is this `v22.0` or `v26.0`: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32762#issuecomment-2978990456? Please only open issues when using a maintained version of Bitcoin Core, which is currently `27.x`, `28.x` or `29.x`.

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "wallet: Fix relative path backup during migration.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32273#issuecomment-3024221935)
> Thanks, I've used parts of this suggestion but with some changes

Thanks for following up, and it's a good observation that calling `filename()` on an `fs::path` like I [suggested](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32273#issuecomment-2821309098) doesn't always always return a usable file prefix, since it can return odd fragments like ".." and doesn't handle trailing slashes.

But I feel like it would still be straightforward to address the problem of turning a wallet name into a safe
...

💬 saravadeanil commented on issue "[BTC signet v22.0] websocket not working as expect":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32848#issuecomment-3024230141)
@fanquake Thanks for checking I am using `v22.0` for signet node.

I was able to fix the initial sync issue by `addnode` referring https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32762#issuecomment-2977713689

💬 sipa commented on issue "[BTC signet v22.0] websocket not working as expect":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32848#issuecomment-3024239736)
Bitcoin Core has no websocket support whatsoever.