💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "coins: remove SetFresh method from CCoinsCacheEntry":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33018#discussion_r2218079735)
Ah right, removed.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "coins: remove SetFresh method from CCoinsCacheEntry":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33018#discussion_r2218080120)
I suppose its legal to call SetDirty on a coin that is already DIRTY-and-FRESH. I'm not sure we need to do anything here in that case.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "coins: remove SetFresh method from CCoinsCacheEntry":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33018#discussion_r2218081257)
Should we remove its freshness in that case?

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "coins: remove SetFresh method from CCoinsCacheEntry":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33018#discussion_r2218084376)
No, that would make this a behavior change rather than a refactor. We only added flags before, so we must only do that now as well.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "coins: remove SetFresh method from CCoinsCacheEntry":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33018#discussion_r2218086462)
But we have prohibited one of the states here, we can document that with code now instead of comments. If we think it's a behavior change the PR is incorrect, isn't it?

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "coins: remove SetFresh method from CCoinsCacheEntry":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33018#discussion_r2218086535)
I can make a follow-up to remove spent fresh and dirty entries from the test cases as well. I don't think that should happen in this PR though to keep it focused.
The previous PR also did this.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "coins: remove SetFresh method from CCoinsCacheEntry":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33018#discussion_r2218092689)
Your suggestion is to assert that if fresh is false then the entry cannot already be fresh. This is not the case. An entry can be made DIRTY-and-FRESH, and then it can be made DIRTY again while already DIRTY-and-FRESH. The current behavior allows this to happen and keeps the entry DIRTY-and-FRESH when SetDirty is called. If we assert that we can't call SetDirty on a DIRTY-and-FRESH entry then it is a behavior change.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "coins: remove SetFresh method from CCoinsCacheEntry":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33018#discussion_r2218093659)
Nah, I'm just on a phone and thought I'm commenting on SetDirty and SetFresh.

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "Reduce minrelaytxfee to 100 sats/kvB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3095260286)
> Sure, though at the same time the situation being discussed here isn't price up 10x means default down 10x. Compared to when this was last adjusted the price is up 500x and this proposes down by 10x. :P

Previous settings have been:

* 2015/10/13 - 5sat/vb to 1sat/vb
* $250/BTC
* 1sat*200vb = 0.5c
* 1sat/vb*1Mvb/25BTC = 0.04% of block reward
* 2015/10/09 - 1sat/vb to 5at/vb
* $250/BTC
* 5sat*200vb = 2.5c
* 5sat/vb*1Mvb/25BTC = 0.2% of block reward
* 2013/04/13
...

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "test: add unit test for psbt_wallet error messages"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33025)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: add unit test for psbt_wallet error messages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33025#issuecomment-3095412719)
Closing for now. You can open a new pull request for the new approach, once there is one.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Do not pass tests on unhandled exceptions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33001#issuecomment-3095471139)
@OrangeDoro Every LLM generated point in your comment is wrong and completely misses the point. This is trivial to see, if you took a look at the previous comments and commit messages.

⚠️ sybot99 opened an issue: "IP leak using bitcoin core"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33027)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [x] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

Is there any IP leak when I use bitcoin core ?
1. Sync wallet
2. Sending btc

### Expected behaviour

IP leak

### Steps to reproduce

check IP

### Relevant log output

_No response_

### How did you obtain Bitcoin Core

Compiled from source

### What version of Bitcoin Core are you using?

29

### Operating system and version

Win 11 x64

### Machine specifications

_No response_

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "A missing import to the src/chainparamsbase.h"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33019)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "A missing import to the src/chainparamsbase.h":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33019#issuecomment-3095495511)
Fixed in 138f8671569f7ebb8c84e9d80c44cddeda9e3845

💬 maflcko commented on issue "A missing import to the src/chainparamsbase.h":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33019#issuecomment-3095504166)
@totdking As this was fixed in all supported versions of bitcoin core, you are likely running an EOL version. It could make sense to consider updating it. See https://bitcoincore.org/en/lifecycle/

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "IP leak using bitcoin core"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33027)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "IP leak using bitcoin core":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33027#issuecomment-3095524743)
Not sure what your question is, but Bitcoin Core connects to other P2P nodes. If you to connect to them over tor, please refer to the existing docs, such as https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/tor.md, or the config help.


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 channe
...

💬 Sjors commented on issue "intermittent timeout in wallet_signer.py : sendall timed out":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33015#issuecomment-3095573346)
Same underlying issue as https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32855#issuecomment-3092571841? Both `send` and `sendall` use the external signer method to send the PSBT over to the device (mock).

The additional logging from #32928 may be helpful to narrow down where the stalling happens.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "tests: speed up coins_tests by parallelizing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32945#issuecomment-3095605427)
lgtm ACK 2a8fdddd4df4b630c0a580f4df6521cb3af01804