💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "cmake: make missing Python interpreter behaviour more explicit":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33278#issuecomment-3249158729)
Force-pushed to default `BUILD_FUNCTIONAL_TESTS` to `ON` instead of to `BUILD_TESTS`, reducing behaviour change and addressing @purpleKarrot's [feedback](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33278#discussion_r2318148580).

👋 fanquake's pull request is ready for review: "[29.x] finalise v29.1"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33271)

💬 0xB10C commented on issue "tracing: test `interface_usdt_net.py` fails due to garbage message type in `net:outbound_message` tracepoint":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33246#issuecomment-3249195811)
These arguments translate to the `net:outbound_message` tracepoint arguments.

| arg | broken | `-fno-inline` working |
|-------------------------------------------|-------------|-----------------------|
| `pnode->GetId()` | -8@x21 | -8@x23 |
| `pnode->m_addr_name.c_str()` | 8@x24 | 8@x24 |
| `pnode->ConnectionTypeAsString().c_str()` | 8@[sp, 136] | 8@x25 |
|
...

🤔 rkrux reviewed a pull request: "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#pullrequestreview-3180181577)
Concept ACK 69eeb11bc585e92a3b56811c3251f13dba05aa5f

Agree with the intent. Nit in PR description because specifically `IsFromMe` is updated in the PR:

```diff
- One of the ways that the wallet would determine if a transaction belonged to the wallet was by checking
+ One of the ways that the wallet would determine if a transaction was sent from the wallet was by checking
```

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2318702489)
In 69eeb11bc585e92a3b56811c3251f13dba05aa5f "wallet: Add m_cached_from_me to cache "from me" status"

Maybe switch the order of the last 2 commits so that this commit also has coverage?

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2318698691)
In 009b273df8ad8a7470276a31f3cb900e480aa99b "test: Test wallet 'from me' status change"

Are these necessary? The test passes without them even with a re-scan.
```diff
if confirm:
self.generate(self.nodes[0], 1, sync_fun=self.no_op)
- # Mock time forward and generate blocks so that the import does not rescan the transaction
- self.nodes[0].setmocktime(int(time.time()) + MAX_FUTURE_BLOCK_TIME + 1)
- self.generate(s
...

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2318656200)
In 009b273df8ad8a7470276a31f3cb900e480aa99b "test: Test wallet 'from me' status change"

Probably can also assert on any detail entry being in send category after the descriptor is imported in the concerned wallet and not so before the import. Makes testing more explicit imho.

```diff
diff --git a/test/functional/wallet_listtransactions.py b/test/functional/wallet_listtransactions.py
index a19a1a32b1..0c60d4839d 100755
--- a/test/functional/wallet_listtransactions.py
+++ b/test/function
...

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2318929377)
In https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/69eeb11bc585e92a3b56811c3251f13dba05aa5f "wallet: Add m_cached_from_me to cache "from me" status"

nit to shorten:
```diff
diff --git a/src/wallet/receive.cpp b/src/wallet/receive.cpp
index 4ed98c6d55..13a25b3632 100644
--- a/src/wallet/receive.cpp
+++ b/src/wallet/receive.cpp
@@ -195,8 +195,9 @@ void CachedTxGetAmounts(const CWallet& wallet, const CWalletTx& wtx,

bool CachedTxIsFromMe(const CWallet& wallet, const CWalletTx& wtx)
{
-
...

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2318869615)
In https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/1cd57c67b10a771d2eb1c2324b241533c0b1f287 "test: Add a test for anchor outputs in the wallet"

While passing the `inputs` in this RPC is fine, I feel another frequently used way of calling `sendall` RPC could be to not pass the `inputs` in the request, in which case the RPC throws `Internal bug detected`.

```zsh
test_framework.authproxy.JSONRPCException: Internal bug detected: output.input_bytes > 0
wallet/rpc/spend.cpp:1524 (operator())
Bitcoi
...

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2318733172)
In 1cd57c67b10a771d2eb1c2324b241533c0b1f287 "test: Add a test for anchor outputs in the wallet"

supernit:

```diff
index 1d1435145a..a47f3c6b3c 100755
--- a/test/functional/wallet_anchor.py
+++ b/test/functional/wallet_anchor.py
@@ -71,13 +71,13 @@ class WalletAnchorTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
assert_equal(utxos[0]["txid"], anchor_txid)
assert_equal(utxos[0]["address"], ANCHOR_ADDRESS)
assert_equal(utxos[0]["amount"], 0)
- wallet.gettransaction(anch
...

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2318809119)
In 1cd57c67b10a771d2eb1c2324b241533c0b1f287 "test: Add a test for anchor outputs in the wallet"

There is a bit of duplication in all 3 tests. Maybe can remove this test altogether and put some of its functionality in the below test.
```diff
diff --git a/test/functional/wallet_anchor.py b/test/functional/wallet_anchor.py
index 1d1435145a..e6872deba0 100755
--- a/test/functional/wallet_anchor.py
+++ b/test/functional/wallet_anchor.py
@@ -79,40 +79,22 @@ class WalletAnchorTest(BitcoinTestF
...

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2318709095)
In 1cd57c67b10a771d2eb1c2324b241533c0b1f287 "test: Add a test for anchor outputs in the wallet"

Nit: Probably can stay in the util file where `PAY_TO_ANCHOR` is defined.

💬 0xB10C commented on issue "tracing: test `interface_usdt_net.py` fails due to garbage message type in `net:outbound_message` tracepoint":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33246#issuecomment-3249215214)
As per https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/blob/791bf81ad9ec18ce2899f79509e4de96ddc21e9d/src/cc/usdt/usdt_args.cc#L228-L231, bcc on `aarch64` claims to support parsing `8@[x0]` via `[-]<size>@[<reg>]`.

```c
// Support the following argument patterns:
// [-]<size>@<value>, [-]<size>@<reg>, [-]<size>@[<reg>], or
// [-]<size>@[<reg>,<offset>]
// [-]<size>@[<reg>,<index_reg>]
```

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "build: suggest -DENABLE_IPC=OFF when missing capnp"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33290#pullrequestreview-3180629451)
ACK f39a782ba8629bbca1587229f91ba2318d6b765c

PR adds warning text to cmake configure step if CAPNP is not installed. The CAPNP dependency is new, and this warning helps people that do not read the Releasenotes how to solve the error.

Although I do not recommend to upgrade without reading the Release notes / changelog, this warning can reduce the number of issues and guides (non-technical) users to avoid errors .

- code review ✅
- build with and without capnp to test warning. ✅

<de
...

👍 vasild approved a pull request: "Replace libevent with our own HTTP and socket-handling implementation"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32061#pullrequestreview-3180206398)
ACK e531a7cd2c17dfb8d075d02865dbc25f8a832b3a

All my suggestions above have been addressed or some reasoning has been given why not.

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Replace libevent with our own HTTP and socket-handling implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32061#discussion_r2318674837)
nit: I think that can be a bit shorter:

```suggestion
[](char c) {
// Avoid implicit-integer-sign-change UB by only
// processing ASCII.
if (c < 0) return c;
```

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Replace libevent with our own HTTP and socket-handling implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32061#discussion_r2318700631)
Maybe also check that the total length of all headers is as expected. That is, no extra, unexpected, stuff has been returned:

```diff
BOOST_REQUIRE(headers_string.ends_with("\r\n\r\n"));
+ BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(headers_string.length(), 67);
}
```

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Replace libevent with our own HTTP and socket-handling implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32061#discussion_r2318877575)
Similar to above:

```suggestion
actual.find("Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:47:09 GMT\r\n") != std::string::npos &&
actual.length() == 146
```

💬 vasild commented on pull request "Replace libevent with our own HTTP and socket-handling implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32061#discussion_r2318891980)
nit: no need for trailing `;` and some missing whitespace:

```suggestion
HTTPRequestMethod GetRequestMethod() const { return m_method; }
```

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Identify transactions spending 0-value outputs, and add tests for anchor outputs in a wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33268#discussion_r2318999432)
I think this particular error is appropriately specific. The error in `sendtoaddress`, while easier to parse, is thrown because it also tries to sign the transaction, though at an earlier stage in the RPC flow. Perhaps this particular test can avoid testing for this specific error because the different error is conspicuous.