💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "coins: remove logic for spent-and-FRESH cache entries and writing non-DIRTY entries":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30673#discussion_r2206104394)
```suggestion
CCoinsCacheEntry::SetDirty(n2, sentinel, /*fresh*/true);
```

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "coins: remove logic for spent-and-FRESH cache entries and writing non-DIRTY entries":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30673#discussion_r2206105073)
we should be able to do this safely in a prefactor PR regardless of the other changes

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "rpc: add optional nodeid param to filter getpeerinfo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32741#discussion_r2206206502)
?

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "test: Improve getbalance minconf behavior documentation and testing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32974#issuecomment-3071776952)
Spent coins should never be included in the balance (though the change should be)

However, getbalance has basically been completely broken in Core since 2018. My last attempt to fix it "properly" was here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14602 (but there were still bugs)

Knots has a mostly-functional getbalance by reverting the 2018 changes: https://github.com/luke-jr/bitcoin/tree/bugfix_rpc_getbalance_hacky

Happy to discuss at more length if you're up for fixing getbalance.

👍 stratospher approved a pull request: "test: headers sync timeout"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32677#pullrequestreview-3018395027)
reACK 61e800e7.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "test: Improve getbalance minconf behavior documentation and testing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32974#issuecomment-3071807669)
> Spent coins should never be included in the balance

Spentness checks are still problematic all over coins caching as well - not sure it helps, but @andrewtoth attempted a cleanup in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30673

📝 l0rinc opened a pull request: "[IBD] log start of script validation past `assumevalid` block"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32975)
The `-assumevalid` option skips script verification for a specified block and all its ancestors during Initial Block Download.
Many first-time users are surprised when this suddenly slows their node to a halt.
This commit adds a log message to clearly indicate when this optimization ends and full validation begins.

The message is logged exactly once, when script validation is enabled **and** the previous block's hash matches the one set by [`-assumevalid`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
...

💬 PJJacobowitz commented on issue "ARM Windows build and release":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31388#issuecomment-3072000666)
Hey all, it looks like QT6.5 supports ARM64 in Windows. Does this mean there can be a Bitcoin Core that runs native on Windows on ARM?

💬 fgarau commented on pull request "test: Improve getbalance minconf behavior documentation and testing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32974#issuecomment-3072129354)
Closing to make additional improvements before resubmission

✅ fgarau closed a pull request: "test: Improve getbalance minconf behavior documentation and testing"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32974)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ARM Windows build and release":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31388#issuecomment-3072162723)
compiling with msvc is already possible, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31388#issuecomment-2545994885. It is just a matter of updating https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/build-windows-msvc.md#triplets-and-presets to include the triplet. About cross-compilation, the above comment also explains the status.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "[IBD] log start of script validation past `assumevalid` block":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32975#discussion_r2206528725)
i don't think this is correct. With `-minimumchainwork=0` the two weeks worth of headers may be missing, and this log will never appear

🤔 maflcko reviewed a pull request: "rpc,net: Add getpeerbyid and listpeersbyids RPCs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32972#pullrequestreview-3018930766)
seems better to just push to the other pull?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc,net: Add getpeerbyid and listpeersbyids RPCs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32972#discussion_r2206564582)
how's that different from a batch call or just filtering `getpeerinfo`? Not sure we need three RPCs where the input is None, int, array, but everything else is the same. I can understand the use case of server-side filtering here, but it should be fine to just add the filtering to `getpeerinfo` whether that is int- or array-based. One filtering should be sufficient?

⚠️ sybot99 opened an issue: "GUI bitcoin core shows wrong amount"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32976)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [x] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

I have in my bitcoin core 2 addresses for deposit. I see in GUI bitcoin core 0.3 btc, but if I check both addresses by blockchain I will see that one address 0.2 btc and the second one is empty
So I dont understand where I miss 0.1 btc, I dont see it on addresses, but I see it in programm GUI

### Expected behaviour

I dont know

### Steps to reproduce

I dont know if someone have this bug
...

💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "Silent Payments: Receiving":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32966#discussion_r2206657562)
Thanks @Sjors. I'll fix it

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Bitcoin Core v29.0 incorrectly enters IBD mode when only ~600 blocks behind, preventing normal sync":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32955#issuecomment-3072447852)
stalling probably doesn't apply here, if it is less than 600 blocks, but a remote timeout can still be hit: (which is variable, but in your case could be 10 minutes)

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/b53fab1467fde73c40402e2022b25edfff1e4668/src/net_processing.cpp#L5844-L5873

`getpeerinfo` should give an `"inflight"` array of blocks for each peer.

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "GUI bitcoin core shows wrong amount"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32976)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "GUI bitcoin core shows wrong amount":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32976#issuecomment-3072455397)
That is likely a change address, which is created normally. See for example https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/736/how-does-change-work-in-a-bitcoin-transaction


Usually the issue tracker is used to track technical issues related to the Bitcoin Core code base.

General bitcoin questions and/or support requests are best directed to the [Bitcoin StackExchange](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com) or the `#bitcoin` IRC channel on Libera Chat, or one of the Bitcoin subreddits, or any other p
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: headers sync timeout":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32677#issuecomment-3072510986)
re-ACK 61e800e75cffa256ccdbc2ffc7a1739c00880ce0 🗝

<details><summary>Show signature</summary>

Signature:

```
untrusted comment: signature from minisign secret key on empty file; verify via: minisign -Vm "${path_to_any_empty_file}" -P RWTRmVTMeKV5noAMqVlsMugDDCyyTSbA3Re5AkUrhvLVln0tSaFWglOw -x "${path_to_this_whole_four_line_signature_blob}"
RUTRmVTMeKV5npGrKx1nqXCw5zeVHdtdYURB/KlyA/LMFgpNCs+SkW9a8N95d+U4AP1RJMi+krxU1A3Yux4bpwZNLvVBKy0wLgM=
trusted comment: re-ACK 61e800e75cffa256ccdb
...