💬 fanquake commented on pull request "wallet: don't consider unconfirmed TRUC coins with ancestors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33528#issuecomment-3366268611)
Is this going to be backported to `30.x`?

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#issuecomment-3366274330)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534/commits/ca86f3645e1c49d9a2b95c70e475e27f2fc87d4b

I compared this to other PR's (#32766) of the "finalize format", and this has the two finalizing chagnes:
- this bumps the build version in the 29.x branch
- updates the versions in the manpages.

I compared the backport commit https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534/commits/6b3c1dbc5c0df4357ee7f57ac238bcdff55526af to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33482/commits/7b5261f7ef3d
...

📝 frankomosh opened a pull request: "doc: add coverage instrumentation hint to libFuzzer quickstart"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33536)
This patch shows how to enable clang source-based coverage instrumentation in the libFuzzer quickstart section. No defaults are changed, and the addition is intended to be optional.

Fixes silent "no .profraw file" confusion/error when trying to generate coverage data.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#discussion_r2402470414)
Done.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#discussion_r2402470769)
Done.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#discussion_r2402472467)
Added some explanation in the commit message. Please let me know if it makes it more clear.

👋 frankomosh's pull request is ready for review: "doc: add coverage instrumentation hint to libFuzzer quickstart"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33536)

📝 fanquake converted_to_draft a pull request: "Update libmultiprocess subtree in 30.x branch"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33519)
Includes:

- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/207
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/208
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/211
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/201
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/213
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/214
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/221
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/220

Corre
...

📝 fanquake converted_to_draft a pull request: "Update libmultiprocess subtree to support reduced logging"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33518)
Includes:

- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/213
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/214
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/221
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/220

The last change is needed to support #33517 and fix poor performance in some cases caused by slow logging.

The changes can be verified by running `test/lint/git-subtree-check.sh src/ipc/libmultiprocess` as described in [developer notes](https
...

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#pullrequestreview-3299962725)
lgtm 513cef75ee06bc5d310a22d366a5f3c815aa1499. Got the same manpages, no changes to examples/bitcoin.conf or bips.md.

I think the release notes need to be updated

💬 glozow commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#discussion_r2402655206)
Need to update release notes for #33482, no?

💬 glozow commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#discussion_r2402669380)
I also don't see #32989

💬 glozow commented on pull request "wallet: don't consider unconfirmed TRUC coins with ancestors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33528#issuecomment-3366489897)
> Is this going to be backported to 30.x?

I think that'd be best so that the behavior is consistent from v30 onwards.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#discussion_r2402679207)
Added a commit.

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#pullrequestreview-3300018391)
ACK d82fc69829cd8cabbaf2c3a969597b40c32edc86

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#issuecomment-3366521126)
reACK d82fc69

👍 darosior approved a pull request: "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#pullrequestreview-3300035989)
utACK 513cef75ee06bc5d310a22d366a5f3c815aa1499. Changes look good to me, but i have not been through the process of regenerating the doc myself.

👍 darosior approved a pull request: "[28.x] More backports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33535#pullrequestreview-3300089164)
utACK 06fe49dc88638e2ad21f1b7d0dd87661de384517.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#issuecomment-3366595565)
Removed `m_batch_size`. Each thread now increments the atomic counter by 1.

🤔 danielabrozzoni reviewed a pull request: "test: addrman: check isTerrible when time is more than 10min in the future"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33533#pullrequestreview-3300148395)
tACK 8e47ed6906d5e381498681e2cab9f2e318597705

I verified that mutating the isTerrible condition did not cause any tests to fail on master, while this PR correctly triggers a test failure.