💬 instagibbs commented on issue "compact blocks in IBD resets m_stalling_since":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31962#issuecomment-3365361040)
> Lastly, the CanDirectFetch check is interesting. It will fail if our tip time is not within 3h20m of our local clock.

Yeah this is a known weirdness @dergoegge . I don't think there's any real motivation to do it, defectors can "reset" the MTP forward IIUC. Extremely rare blocks or a big drop in hashing could cause it, but in the latter case lower block rate also makes races less likely.

I'll spend some time next week hopefully trying to mentally tackle this.

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet/rpc: fix listdescriptors RPC fails to return descriptors with private key information when wallet contains descriptors missing any key":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32471#discussion_r2401609688)
`s/HavePrivateKeys/HasAllPrivateKeys` because the current implementation of `HavePrivateKeys` returns `false` immediately if a corresponding private key is not found for a public key; the function doc suggests this too.
> Whether the given provider has all private keys required by this descriptor.

Whereas `ToPrivateString` returns `true` if any private key is found, the usage of `any_success` also suggests this.

💬 naiyoma commented on pull request "p2p: Mitigate GETADDR fingerprinting by setting address timestamps to a fixed value":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33498#discussion_r2401632810)
Yes, this is more precise, ive updated

⚠️ DevRatnu opened an issue: "version 30.0 as tested 2.9.1.0"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33532)
### Motivation

Bitcoin OP_return function already tested into 2.9.1.0 Version and 30.0 is ready

### Possible solution

Bitcoin OP_return function already tested into 2.9.1.0 Version and 30.0 is ready check this - https://github.com/virtacoin/VirtaCoinProject

### Useful Skills

* Compiling Bitcoin Core from source
* Running the C++ unit tests and the Python functional tests
* ...


### Guidance for new contributors

Want to work on this issue?

For guidance on contributing, please read [CONTR
...

✅ pinheadmz closed an issue: "version 30.0 as tested 2.9.1.0"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33532)

👋 fanquake's pull request is ready for review: "[29.x] Backports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33474)

💬 yuvicc commented on pull request "test: Fix reorg patterns in tests to use proper fork-based approach":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32587#issuecomment-3365615151)
Rebased to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/1ed00a0d39d5190d8ad88a0dd705a09b56d987aa.

🤔 hebasto reviewed a pull request: "guix: use LIEF 0.17.0"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33522#pullrequestreview-3298906597)
If no bugs are fixed and no new features are needed, perhaps we should do the opposite and wait until the Guix commit used for release builds is updated to include 0.16.6 as a [package](https://codeberg.org/guix/guix/commit/b99a2f21d1335834e893109d10b55c43bb9f5562)?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "Mempool: Do not enforce TRUC checks on reorg":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33504#issuecomment-3365641140)
I'll open a follow-up soon thanks for the in depth review here

🤔 naiyoma reviewed a pull request: "p2p: Use network-dependent timers for inbound inv scheduling"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33464#pullrequestreview-3298922703)
Tested Ack 0f7d4ee4e8281ed141a6ebb7e0edee7b864e4dcf

I’ve started testing and observing the difference before and after this change using my own dual-homed-node.
Before, same schedule_time for inbound connections (regardless of network):
```
2025-10-03T09:44:44Z id=3 ……..schedule_time=1759484710518878usus
2025-10-03T09:44:47Z id=11……..schedule_time=1759484710518878usus`
```

After, different networks, different schedule times
```
2025-10-03T09:22:45Z INBOUND: id=20…….m_network_key=
...

🤔 marcofleon reviewed a pull request: "[29.x] Backports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33474#pullrequestreview-3298927301)
ACK 2d7ebd2d913ea63c1a23fefa0a09ee06fb069161

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "[29.x] Backports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33474)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "v30.0 Testing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33368#issuecomment-3365678329)
> One thing I noticed was the getwalletinfo RPC removed the fields balance, immature_balance, and unconfirmed_balance from the RPC result in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/0ec255139be3745a135386e9db957fe81bc3d833. Is this worth a release note?

@Christewart it was mentioned in the PR: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32721#issuecomment-3006074516. @achow101 do you want to add one?

📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "test: addrman: check isTerrible when time is more than 10min in the future"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33533)
This PR adds test coverage to kill the following mutant (https://corecheck.dev/mutation/src/addrman.cpp#L76):
```diff
diff --git a/src/addrman.cpp b/src/addrman.cpp
index 9c3a24db90..0ffd349315 100644
--- a/src/addrman.cpp
+++ b/src/addrman.cpp
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ bool AddrInfo::IsTerrible(NodeSeconds now) const
}

if (nTime > now + 10min) { // came in a flying DeLorean
- return true;
+ return false;
}
```

When the `nTime` is set 10 minutes in the futur
...

💬 winterrdog commented on pull request "Avoid file overwriting in fallback `AllocateFileRange` implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33164#discussion_r2401930441)
thanks for this context, it will be invaluable as I work on developing a solution for this issue. (#33164)

i will reach out to the relevant authors of the 3 PRs that try to resolve this issue and collaborate with them, rather than submitting an additional PR for review at this stage.

then i will return with a more actionable and concrete proposal rather than a simple suggestion.

thanks!

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534)
It's been 2 weeks since rc1: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v29.2rc1.
We've backported more changes:
* #33403
* #33474

Lets do `rc2`.

💬 yuvicc commented on pull request "test: Fix reorg patterns in tests to use proper fork-based approach":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32587#issuecomment-3365732933)
Fixed some linter errors. No change in tests.

✅ w0xlt closed a pull request: "[rpc] `gettxout`: array argument for bulk queries"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33531)

💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "[rpc] `gettxout`: array argument for bulk queries":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33531#issuecomment-3365778481)
Thanks for the review and the suggestions @stickies-v . I'll improve the motivation and reopen the PR if needed.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: Fix reorg patterns in tests to use proper fork-based approach":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32587#issuecomment-3365870278)
@instagibbs @mzumsande want to circle back here for a look?