👍 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;

💬 Christewart commented on issue "v30.0 Testing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33368#issuecomment-3362837158)
One thing I noticed was the `getwalletinfo` RPC removed the fields `balance`, `immature_balance`, and `unconfirmed_balance` from the RPC result in 0ec255139be3745a135386e9db957fe81bc3d833. Is this worth a release note?

As a side note, it seems that [`walletversion`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/72c1f13c3374b23be6049a390b9d47748a495754/src/wallet/rpc/wallet.cpp#L43) might be able to be removed too as the comment indicates it has been deprecated and is related to now unsupported legac
...

💬 tehcmanmax commented on issue "Release Schedule for 30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32275#issuecomment-3362924508)
> Moved the release date forward a week, as we still need to do at least an rc3.

Move it to the next year

🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "RPC: add sendrawtransactiontopeer"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33507#pullrequestreview-3296600308)
`sendmsgtopeer` is a debug-only rpc originally meant only for tests. If we want it to be part of workflows from actual users, we should announce it in release notes (and maybe polish it up a bit).

📝 glozow opened a pull request: "wallet: don't consider unconfirmed TRUC coins with ancestors"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33528)
Addresses https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33368#issuecomment-3319935660

There is not an explicit check that the to-be-created wallet transaction would be within the {TRUC, normal} ancestor limits. This means that the wallet may create a transaction that violates these limits, but fail to broadcast it in `CommitTransaction`.

This appears to be expected behavior for the normal ancestor limits (and any other situation in which the wallet creates a tx that was rejected by mempool) an
...

💬 glozow commented on issue "v30.0 Testing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33368#issuecomment-3363386699)
> If I create a tx3 that is a child of tx2 (all as v3 txs) the send command fails silently.

Thanks @monlovesmango!

Do you see this in your debug.log?
```
CommitTransaction(): Transaction cannot be broadcast immediately, TRUC-violation, tx <tx3> would have too many ancestors
```

If so, please see #33528

👍 dergoegge approved a pull request: "[29.x] Backports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33474#pullrequestreview-3296841430)
ACK 2d7ebd2d913ea63c1a23fefa0a09ee06fb069161

💬 polespinasa commented on pull request "RPC: add sendrawtransactiontopeer":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33507#issuecomment-3363657228)
@mzumsande true.

Also I got some comments on X about it, proposing the new RPC call to recreate the whole `INV - GETDATA - TX` flow and not just send a `tx` message.

📝 uluba9 opened a pull request: "Update .gitattributes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33529)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...

✅ uluba9 closed a pull request: "Update .gitattributes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33529)

⚠️ uluba9 opened an issue: "mini issue"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33530)
code is too long

✅ uluba9 closed an issue: "mini issue"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33530)

💬 uluba9 commented on issue "mini issue":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33530#issuecomment-3363732430)
fixed for me

📝 w0xlt opened a pull request: "[rpc] `gettxout`: array argument for bulk queries"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33531)
`gettxout` supports only a single outpoint per call, requiring multiple RPC round trips to inspect all inputs of a transaction.

This PR changes gettxout to accept an array of {txid, vout} objects, processing them in a single pass and returning results aligned to the inputs.

This reduces latency, avoids redundant lookups, and improves throughput for batch use cases (e.g. wallets, indexers, transaction verification).

For simplicity, the changes are not backward compatible, but this can b
...

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "RFC: blocks: add `-reobfuscate-blocks` arg to xor existing blk/rev on startup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33324#issuecomment-3363772867)
Added kernel notifications (thanks @ryanofsky) and improved crash resistance at the very last step (final rename back to old names) - try it out with `./build/bin/bitcoin-qt -reobfuscate-blocks -stopatheight=1`.
<img width=500 src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/95b72e06-63fe-4057-989d-24ab9e93bfac" />