💬 jonatack commented on pull request "Raise on invalid -debug and -loglevel config options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27632#discussion_r1211826908)
Kept the translation -- thank you.

💬 sipa commented on issue "Indicate RBF replaceability, also after transactions have been confirmed ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27794#issuecomment-1570364914)
@torkelrogstad Oh, I think I understand now, re-reading your earlier comments.

Having `bip125-replacable` return true for confirmed transaction is not a solution to your issue, because it can already change over time. Imagine a transaction T1 (which does signal) and a descendant transaction T2 (which does not signal), both unconfirmed. `bip125-replaceable` will be true for both, because the BIP125 rules say both are replaceable. Once T1 confirms, however, T2's `bip125-replaceable` will become
...

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "Raise on invalid -debug and -loglevel config options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27632#discussion_r1211830118)
Rebased to current master to be able to use `Result` with support for `<void>` and updated the return types from bool to void.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "Spurious (?) valgrind failure for p2p_compactblocks.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27741#issuecomment-1570372707)
> Looks like valgrind 3.21 still has this issue.

Valgrind 3.22 (master @ e3602b3eec0696b183722ea21da14588cf205c74) also still fails.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Add public Boost headers explicitly":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27783#discussion_r1211838351)
> Feel free to take:

Taken. Thank you!

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Add public Boost headers explicitly":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27783#issuecomment-1570376358)
Taken @MarcoFalke's [suggestion](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27783#discussion_r1211170115).

💬 theuni commented on pull request "macOS: Bump minimum required runtime version and prepare for building with upstream LLVM":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27676#issuecomment-1570410809)
> Note that you'l have to drop the `lazy_bind` check (we'll follow up with a `fixup_chains` test later). I've got a branch here with that change, which Guix builds successfully: https://github.com/fanquake/bitcoin/tree/27676_minus_lazy_bind.

Whoops, yes, thanks. Patch taken.

So this is now 100% working, just need to decide out what to do about guix.

📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "rpc, net: add erlay status in `getpeerinfo`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27797)
Fixes #26602

Adds `m_tx_reconciliation` in `Peer` struct
to know whether the peer supports Erlay and
exposes it in `getpeerinfo` rpc.

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "rpc, net: add erlay status in `getpeerinfo`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27797#issuecomment-1570411351)
cc: @Sjors

💬 jamesob commented on pull request "assumeutxo (2)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27596#discussion_r1211880620)
Fixed, thanks

💬 jamesob commented on pull request "assumeutxo (2)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27596#discussion_r1211880971)
Fixed, thanks all.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "refactor: Make `CCheckQueue` RAII-styled":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26762#issuecomment-1570428398)
Rebased 2076d846cc917cbafe61937a99b7867067011341 -> b023c26eb8eda4c7f80ad2e7ebe1fb046e87d2ee ([pr26762.09](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/commits/pr26762.09) -> [pr26762.10](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/commits/pr26762.10)) due to the conflict with #27636.

💬 jamesob commented on pull request "assumeutxo (2)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27596#issuecomment-1570432290)
Rebased

Also fixed the minor issues with the `test_utxo_snapshots.sh` demo script.

Since last push, I've completed a full test of the mainnet snapshot; after a few days having finished the background sync, `-prune=550` (and everything else) working as expected.

```
759M /home/james/tmp/bitcoin-au-testing/blocks
total 650M
drwx------ 3 james users 4.0K May 31 10:54 .
drwx------ 5 james users 4.0K May 31 11:09 ..
-rw------- 1 james users 127M May 29 15:33 blk03626.dat
-rw-------
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc, net: add erlay status in `getpeerinfo`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27797#issuecomment-1570438683)
Concept ACK

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "rpc, net: add erlay status in `getpeerinfo`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27797#issuecomment-1570459426)
I'd definitely like this eventually, but I'm not sure how much sense it makes to have it before Erlay is functional (unfortunately, there hasn't been much progress lately in #26283, and even after this is merged Erlay still won't be functional yet).

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: finish addressbook encapsulation and simplify addressbook migration":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26836#issuecomment-1570466415)
rebased

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc, net: add erlay status in `getpeerinfo`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27797#issuecomment-1570469083)
@mzumsande given that we have `-txreconciliation` I think it's fine to add this. We can always drop it if Erlay is given up on. Making it easier to test, makes it more likely to ever get finished though.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "RPC: Accept options as named-only parameters":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26485#issuecomment-1570475171)
> One alternative could be to avoid the need to process arguments on the client side at all and and add a new `exec` RPC method that takes an `args` array of strings and an optional `stdin` string parameter to figure out on the server side where there is full type information what RPC method to call and how to convert the string args to JSON. An `exec` method could also do more interpretation like #20273 if that is desirable. The bitcoin client could have a new `-exec` or `-dumb` option to invok
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "macOS: Bump minimum required runtime version and prepare for building with upstream LLVM":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27676#issuecomment-1570487179)
> just need to decide out what to do about guix.

What options are currently being considered. Is an upstream patch still possible?

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "rpc, net: add erlay status in `getpeerinfo`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27797#issuecomment-1570503893)
> given that we have `-txreconciliation` I think it's fine to add this.

But `-txreconciliation` is off-by default and not exposed to users, this field exposes Erlay-related info unconditionally in a popular RPC, which could create confusion (why is this field there if I can't turn Erlay on yet?) and seems premature given that Erlay could still be years away (if it makes it at all, which I do hope!). So I'd prefer it if these commits were part of #21515 (which anyone wanting to actually test E
...