✅ gikol876934 closed a pull request: "Update .editorconfig"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33523)

⚠️ gikol876934 opened an issue: "crash"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33524)
crash on win11

✅ gikol876934 closed an issue: "crash"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33524)

📝 timkon99 opened a pull request: "Create amazing"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33525)
faster fixes and tools

⚠️ timkon99 opened an issue: "error"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33526)

✅ timkon99 closed an issue: "error"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33526)

🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "net: support overriding the proxy selection in ConnectNode()"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33454#pullrequestreview-3295630375)
Code Review ACK c76de2eea18076f91dd80b52f66ba790f071a2b1

🤔 danielabrozzoni reviewed a pull request: "p2p: Correct unrealistic headerssync unit test behavior"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32579#pullrequestreview-3295765688)
reACK cc5dda1de333cf7aa10e2237ee2c9221f705dbd9

I checked the diff since my last view (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32579#pullrequestreview-3182000020 + subspan nit + https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32579#issuecomment-3287698877), and read the whole code once again to make sure I still understand what's going on :)

👍 pablomartin4btc approved a pull request: "rpc: refactor: use string_view in Arg/MaybeArg"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32983#pullrequestreview-3295778939)
re-ACK [b63428a](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/b63428ac9ce2c903670409b3e47b9f6730917ae8)

_(tiny nit - sorry, just realised this - only if you have to retouch or rebase again, it would be good to update the copyrights on the files changed that requires it)_

💬 enirox001 commented on pull request "test: Replace legacy wallet with MiniWallet in rpc_getblockstats.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33184#discussion_r2399696431)
> This is basically testing that two results of `getblockstats` match each other. It doesn't actually determine the `expected_tip_stats` in the test and then compare against the actual result of `getblockstats`.

This is a good observation. I've reverted to using hardcoded expected values instead of circular getblockstats comparisons, ensuring the test validates actual correctness rather than just consistency.

📝 ujok777 opened a pull request: "Create simpl2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33527)
patches

💬 polespinasa commented on pull request "RPC: add sendrawtransactiontopeer":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33507#issuecomment-3362532664)
> Maybe it should just do validation then, and can be followed up by the raw send?

If this is the flow we want to follow then this PR is not necessary at all. We can already do that with `testmempoolaccept` and then `sendmsgtopeer`

> > Additionally, peer_id argument could take an array of ids and send the tx to multiple peers. (this is not implemented, but shouldn't be difficult to)
>
> Sounds like a job for batching.

Yeah that's why I didn't implement it in the first place, but it's
...

👍 davidgumberg approved a pull request: "ci: remove 3rd party js from windows dll gha job"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32513#pullrequestreview-3296059963)
crACK 156927903d64297

Nice! Was bad that we were depending on 3rd party JS before this.

This branch also extends the executable manifest check to all binaries, which would have caught the missing manifest in #31375 which #32634 caught.

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "depends: static libxcb-cursor":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33434#issuecomment-3362609863)
(matching) Guix hashes from my x64 build:

```
❯ find guix-build-$(git rev-parse --short=12 HEAD)/output/ -type f -print0 | env LC_ALL=C sort -z | xargs -r0 sha256sum
cf7f86d91288477c11afdc767969d6b19b0ba1e62c73924e72b22a2527374653 guix-build-eca50854e1cb/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
5afe50eb76079f96a5129b5e51e2ede657f10c5031abe24a875410f006c55511 guix-build-eca50854e1cb/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-eca50854e1cb-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
ba6f7937c5d333e64560abcd95dbb
...

👍 willcl-ark approved a pull request: "depends: static libxcb-cursor"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33434#pullrequestreview-3296113693)
Code review ACK eca50854e1cb04e20478bd3df4762e18520a3611

I have not tested this on Ubuntu, but the changes look correct to me. After doing a guix build, I verified that the bitcoin-qt binary did not link to `libxcb-cursor`

```
❯ ldd bitcoin-eca50854e1cb/bin/bitcoin-qt
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007f4e3afa5000)
libfontconfig.so.1 => not found
libfreetype.so.6 => not found
libxkbcommon.so.0 => not found
libxkbcommon-x11.so.0 => not found
libxc
...

💬 theuni commented on pull request "RPC: add sendrawtransactiontopeer":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33507#issuecomment-3362707310)
> Overall sending a tx to multiple desired peers can be already done with `testmempoolaccept` + N * (`sendmsgtopeer`). IMHO is worth having it all with one RPC.

Strongly disagree. This seems like a case of feature creep to me. RPCs are easy to add and very tough to remove. If there were an issue with atomicity between calls or something, I might agree. But otherwise, chaining rpc calls sounds like the reasonable thing to do.

> Additionally, peer_id argument could take an array of ids and
...

💬 polespinasa commented on pull request "RPC: add sendrawtransactiontopeer":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33507#issuecomment-3362739329)
I'm closing the PR for lack of support. Thank you all for your time commenting and reviewing :)

> Allowing `sendmsgtopeer` to send to multiple peers (or a new rpc call to do so) would fill in the missing functionality without catering to a single use-case.

This approach makes sense to me as long as there are more network messages that might be worth sending to multiple peers. I might investigate that and if so open a PR with `sendmsgtopeer[M..N]` (probably a new rpc to keep backward compat
...

✅ polespinasa closed a pull request: "RPC: add sendrawtransactiontopeer"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33507)

💬 Rustix69 commented on issue "Use compact blocks while doing background validation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33431#issuecomment-3362748510)
@maflcko @willcl-ark Hi, I’d like to work on enabling Compact Blocks after loading a snapshot and syncing to the chain tip, even when `assumetxoutset` is used. Please assign this to me. Thanks!

💬 polespinasa commented on issue "Use compact blocks while doing background validation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33431#issuecomment-3362809710)
Hey @Rustix69 you can see a bit more context here:
https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2025-09-03#1756937607-1756942864;
https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2025-09-04#1756944505-1756998050;