💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: suggest -DENABLE_IPC=OFF when missing capnp":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33290#discussion_r2322369577)
NACK to adding any depends specific code. `CMAKE_TOOLCHAIN_FILE` also doesn't necessarily mean a depends build; anyone can bring/use a toolchain file.

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "depends: strip when installing qt binaries"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33304#pullrequestreview-3185602637)
ACK c9d5f211c119268d776af282dfd1e8b7590aaf56

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "Developers will end up in prison. do not excessively increase op_return size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33307#issuecomment-3253983897)
This is a duplicate of issues #33298 and #33240 Not to mention extensive discussion in pull requests #32381 #32359 and the meta discussion https://github.com/bitcoin-core/meta/discussions/18 and also the [mailing list post](https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/d6ZO7gXGYbQ/m/mJyek28lDAAJ).

In addition please keep in mind the Bitcoin Core issue tracker is used for bug reports and feature requests for this software implementation. Please see https://github.com/bitcoin-core/meta for moderation
...

⚠️ fanquake opened an issue: "GUI (?): Copying output from console causes large mem usage/OOM"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/887)
Moved from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33285.

### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [x] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

Running the GUI on mainnet, I open the console, run:

`getblocktemplate '{"rules": ["segwit"]}'`

everything acts normally until then. If I then try to copy the test, memory usage blows out:

on release build, jumps from <2GB to >7GB memory

on debug build, it jumps to dozens of GB, often causing OOM and kills the process.



###
...

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "GUI (?): Copying output from console causes large mem usage/OOM"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33285)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "GUI (?): Copying output from console causes large mem usage/OOM":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33285#issuecomment-3253986988)
Moved to https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/887.

💬 darosior commented on issue "Please restrict Data Carrier/OP Return to < 80 bytes please before releasing 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33298#issuecomment-3254037664)
I'd like to point out this concern was already addressed at length [here](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/addressing-community-concerns-and-objections-regarding-my-recent-proposal-to-relax-bitcoin-cores-standardness-limits-on-op-return-outputs/1697#p-5007-data-stored-in-an-op_return-output-doesnt-need-to-be-chunked-like-it-does-in-an-inscription-this-presents-a-risk-for-node-runners-as-it-allows-anyone-to-store-unobfuscated-data-on-their-disk-22), [here](https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/aBUlEOBqqrO
...

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "ci: Checkout latest merged pulls"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33303#pullrequestreview-3185655446)
ACK fa8f944eaa1955e4e2c376ce36f1b1cbb1897769, tested in my personal repo.

At some point, it might be useful to use YAML anchor and aliases for repeated "Checkout" steps. For example: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/1719/commits/50e73c6eee8be094ec75920b5b71cdc5984452de.

The new re-run behaviour will only be available for PRs that are rebased after this one is merged.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Checkout latest merged pulls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33303#discussion_r2322407937)
1. The `github.ref` can be used directly:
```suggestion
ref: ${{ github.event.pull_request.number && github.ref || '' }}
```

2. When combined with suggestion 1, the check can be made more explicit:
```suggestion
ref: ${{ github.event_name == 'pull_request' && github.ref || '' }}
```

3. Since this PR changes the documented behavior when re-running a CI job, it seems reasonable to add a comment to document:
- the new behavior;
- a caution not to rely on `github.sh
...

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "ci: Checkout latest merged pulls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33303#issuecomment-3254061326)
> At some point, it might be useful to use YAML anchor and aliases for repeated "Checkout" steps. For example: [bitcoin-core/secp256k1@50e73c6](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/commit/50e73c6eee8be094ec75920b5b71cdc5984452de).

Wow, I'm not sure why but I had in my head that GitHub did not support anchors (annoyingly so). And their alternative was basically "make your own action for it".

Will look at using a few anchors now I know they work, thanks.

💬 glozow commented on issue "Please restrict Data Carrier/OP Return to < 80 bytes please before releasing 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33298#issuecomment-3254071981)
The concerns outlined in the issue have been addressed. The discussion is now about open source developers' responsibility for usage, which is off topic.

A discussion page is available for feedback on moderation around this issue, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33240, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32381, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32359, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406 etc.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Checkout latest merged pulls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33303#issuecomment-3254079267)
> > At some point, it might be useful to use YAML anchor and aliases for repeated "Checkout" steps. For example: [bitcoin-core/secp256k1@50e73c6](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/commit/50e73c6eee8be094ec75920b5b71cdc5984452de).
>
> Wow, I'm not sure why but I had in my head that GitHub did not support anchors (annoyingly so). And their alternative was basically "make your own action for it".

It was introduced fairly [recently](https://github.com/actions/runner/issues/1182#issueco
...

👍 dergoegge approved a pull request: "contrib: update fixed seeds"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33283#pullrequestreview-3185709140)
ACK 939678940f6c3fdbc36d57a9c9ef6f8edf89d065

I ran the script myself and the diff of the result is quite large, which seems expected since none of this is deterministic.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: Checkout latest merged pulls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33303#issuecomment-3254113224)
> Will look at using a few anchors now I know they work, thanks.

The qa-assets repo actually uses the GitHub actions shipped by Bitcoin Core, so I think keeping them is preferable than anchors in this instance. Ref:

https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets/blob/fc42e64f6e664e15549f608e2cc90d8af9a515b1/.github/workflows/ci.yml#L56-L75

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Checkout latest merged pulls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33303#issuecomment-3254136840)
> > Will look at using a few anchors now I know they work, thanks.
>
> The qa-assets repo actually uses the GitHub actions shipped by Bitcoin Core, so I think keeping them is preferable than anchors in this instance. Ref:
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets/blob/fc42e64f6e664e15549f608e2cc90d8af9a515b1/.github/workflows/ci.yml#L56-L75

Then perhaps encapsulate customized `chceckout` action as well?

💬 theuni commented on pull request "depends: disable builtin rules and suffixes.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33045#issuecomment-3254157282)
Concept ACK and utACK 803a2f5e9f869502536560f5bbe5979a137a20e5.

I was going to suggest:
- Using `--no-builtin-rules` rather than `-r` to be a little more self-documenting
- Using `GNUMAKEFLAGS` rather than `MAKEFLAGS` for better compatibility

But...

BSD Make supports `-r`, so that pretty much moots both points. Also, I'm pretty sure we require GNU Make anyway.

Only nit: Does anything depend on the builtin variables, or could we use `-R` as well?

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "ci: cd into BASE_BUILD_DIR for GetCMakeLogFiles"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33291#pullrequestreview-3185794856)
ACK 9b76eef2d2b42703e2a30952d4c3474b533e360a, [obviously](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33290#issuecomment-3248645770).

🚀 hebasto merged a pull request: "ci: cd into BASE_BUILD_DIR for GetCMakeLogFiles"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33291)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Add functional test for IPC interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33201#discussion_r2322519068)
Looks like there might actually be a new `2.1.0` release shortly: https://github.com/capnproto/pycapnp/commit/3a3adfb5f1a8d1b52c98e4984f38ceb5b89a94a6. In which case, I think we should pin the checkout to that version, rather than cloning master (which may break at any point).

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "net, pcp: handle multi-part responses and filter for default route while querying default gateway":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32159#issuecomment-3254192254)
I moved variables as per https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32159#discussion_r2302222710 to try and fix this in here. I did not verify whether it worked, however.