💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Release: Prepare "Open Transifex translations for v30.0" step":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33152#issuecomment-3163638263)
Could fix the typo in the source string (found by the llm)?

```diff
diff --git a/src/wallet/wallet.cpp b/src/wallet/wallet.cpp
index 91a494c379..5aeb39283b 100644
--- a/src/wallet/wallet.cpp
+++ b/src/wallet/wallet.cpp
@@ -3149,7 +3149,7 @@ bool CWallet::AttachChain(const std::shared_ptr<CWallet>& walletInstance, interf
// but fail the rescan with a generic error.

error = chain.havePruned() ?
- _("Prune: last wallet synchronisat
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Release: Prepare "Open Transifex translations for v30.0" step":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33152#issuecomment-3163679296)
> Could fix the typo in the source string (found by the llm)?
>
> ```diff
> diff --git a/src/wallet/wallet.cpp b/src/wallet/wallet.cpp
> index 91a494c379..5aeb39283b 100644
> --- a/src/wallet/wallet.cpp
> +++ b/src/wallet/wallet.cpp
> @@ -3149,7 +3149,7 @@ bool CWallet::AttachChain(const std::shared_ptr<CWallet>& walletInstance, interf
> // but fail the rescan with a generic error.
>
> error = chain.havePruned() ?
> - _("Prune:
...

💬 musaHaruna commented on pull request "rpc: Distinguish between vsize and sigop adjusted mempool vsize":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32800#issuecomment-3163734910)
> Reviewed [1523e8d](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/1523e8d6c981efff1394bd1669fbbbea5ff7ac97)
>
> Still had some late suggestions which will hopefully get this in better shape for other reviewers too.
>
Addressed and fixed as suggested. Thanks!!!
> Might be worth pinging some participants from #27591 at this point to see what they think.

Hi @glozow, @ajtowns, @Sjors — since you were involved in [#27591](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27591), I’d really appreciate yo
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Release: Prepare "Open Transifex translations for v30.0" step":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33152#issuecomment-3163863156)
> Could fix the typo in the source string (found by the llm)?

Should be done now.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "subtree: update crc32c subtree":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33151#issuecomment-3163874867)
Guix Build:
```bash
6a67327e256f21f227d00a86d47c043cb3560052fcc00a7fc9c044fd88abba2b guix-build-8ef8dd6871dd/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
d6f9a74ad71de627e02128b06e73174bf2f9960d83c57bededd266a0ff98c76b guix-build-8ef8dd6871dd/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-8ef8dd6871dd-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
90a00f866defe961409a6edf4ec2ae1d4a6f2667e1f4a8ca8814b18f02eb008a guix-build-8ef8dd6871dd/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-8ef8dd6871dd-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
fb8e4d04400398dc
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "subtree: update crc32c subtree"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33151)

💬 KaueTech commented on pull request "Add Docker support with multi-arch build and user permissions handling":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33139#discussion_r2260142850)
I mentioned her — initially it wasn't copy-pasted, but I changed it because Willcl-ark said his version was better, and it really was

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "cmake: Install internal binaries to <prefix>/libexec/":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31679#issuecomment-3163951080)
Guix Build (x86_64):
```bash
9080e91998fa6f384c00a2e3aab6316fdd2174a89a303b0a602880daf515defb guix-build-f49840dd902c/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
c4061ae7a239ea148d2423f7414d9dd03cefbdfd25c2142476fc400b57ccfef8 guix-build-f49840dd902c/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-f49840dd902c-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
878588692759d57a0ebb00f3ceded73c53e0c2d9f53dbd0a83549a22d48c007c guix-build-f49840dd902c/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-f49840dd902c-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
1ce7c5b
...

✅ KaueTech closed a pull request: "Add Docker support with multi-arch build and user permissions handling"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33139)

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "rpc: Distinguish between vsize and sigop adjusted mempool vsize"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32800#pullrequestreview-3096897867)
I think documentation is definitely helpful, but I'm not sure an extra `vsize_bip141` field is really necessary (they can just divide weight by 4) and I don't really see a reason for ca16b18c0eaae270091ede4967002a4c8174090d

💬 glozow commented on pull request "rpc: Distinguish between vsize and sigop adjusted mempool vsize":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32800#discussion_r2260150760)
This contradicts the earlier statement that the purpose of sigop-adjusted vsize is to avoid 2D knapsack in block template building.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "rpc: Distinguish between vsize and sigop adjusted mempool vsize":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32800#discussion_r2260153906)
I don't think the problem is this severe. Rolling the two cost metrics into one helps simplify the template building algorithm.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "rpc: Distinguish between vsize and sigop adjusted mempool vsize":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32800#discussion_r2260156138)
I think you can just say that there is an additional field now that gives the bip141 virtual size, in case you don't want the sigop-adjusted one.

⚠️ fanquake opened an issue: "cmake: Errors not actually errors?"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33153)
Using current master (6a2bb0fd835977637e0f43db76121bbfd21565f6), if you configure with the following, CMake will "Error":
```bash
# gcc --version
# gcc (Ubuntu 14.2.0-4ubuntu2~24.04) 14.2.0

cmake -B build -DBUILD_KERNEL_LIB=ON -DCMAKE_INTERPROCEDURAL_OPTIMIZATION=ON
<snip>
Cross compiling ....................... FALSE
C++ compiler .......................... GNU 14.2.0, /usr/bin/c++
CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE ...................... RelWithDebInfo
Preprocessor defined macros ...........
C++ compiler flags
...

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "Add Docker support with multi-arch build and user permissions handling":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33139#issuecomment-3164000357)
@KaueTech Thanks for the contribution, I encourage you to learn more about the codebase and find other ways you make Bitcoin great. Here's some good onboarding resources:

https://bitcoincore.academy/

https://bitcoindevs.xyz/

💬 maflcko commented on issue "cmake: Errors not actually errors?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33153#issuecomment-3164013236)
> in the Guix build, errors will just be silently ignored.

I think the guix build has `set -e`, so it should be fine and not proceed here.

💬 hebasto commented on issue "cmake: Errors not actually errors?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33153#issuecomment-3164031554)
> Using current master ([6a2bb0f](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/6a2bb0fd835977637e0f43db76121bbfd21565f6)), if you configure with the following, CMake will "Error"

What version of CMake are you using?

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: never check tx rejections by txid":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33066#issuecomment-3164046002)
I've removed #32379 and mention of witness-stripping from the PR description; I think we can regard this as irrelevant for removing the triple validation (though it doesn't hurt).

The primary motivation now is to clean up logic that doesn't really get used.

> Others include base size > 100k, non-standard output types, min feerate not met (when counting just base size), too many sigops, and probably a few more.

Also: large scriptSig, nonstandard output type, dust, OP_RETURN size and coun
...

💬 kdmukai commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-3164047001)
I successfully completed an end-to-end test:

I configured the Bitcoin Keeper android wallet (v2.5.1) to connect to my electrs instance (v0.10.10) which in turn connected to bitcoind at dbd76e6 on testnet4.

A basic transaction created in Keeper was sent through electrs and out to the network via private broadcast without any complaints. No modifications needed in Keeper or electrs.

As far as electrs was concerned, nothing was out of the ordinary:
```
[2025-08-07T11:56:21.829Z DEBUG ele
...

💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "Removing Bitcoin core text where unnecessary":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33126#discussion_r2260251692)
True, maybe one could make it possible for *build.sh* to override the bundle name when doing the deploy:
```shell
BUNDLE_NAME="${DISTNAME}-${HOST}-unsigned"
cmake --build build --target deploy ${V:+--verbose} "-DBUNDLE_NAME=${BUNDLE_NAME}"
mv "build/dist/${BUNDLE_NAME}.zip" "${OUTDIR}/"
```
Then have *Maintenance.cmake* pick that up if set, otherwise fall back to `CLIENT_NAME`.