💬 sr-gi commented on pull request "Fix tiebreak when loading blocks from disk (and add tests for comparing chain ties)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29640#issuecomment-3368003655)
Would you mind giving this another look @mzumsande @furszy ?

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "init: Fix Ctrl-C shutdown hangs during wait calls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33511#issuecomment-3368056941)
tACK c25a5e670b27d3b6eb958ce437dbe89678bd1511

It's also a nice simplification.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "[30.x] Backports & rc3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33473#issuecomment-3368060495)
ACK on the #33446 changes.

Can you add #33229?

⚠️ hebasto opened an issue: "Compilation failure with Clang SNAPSHOT"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33539)
```
$ clang++ --version
Ubuntu clang version 22.0.0 (++20251003081846+36dc2a941f53-1~exp1~20251003202013.1205)
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /usr/lib/llvm-22/bin
$ cmake --build build -j 1
[4/447] Building CXX object src/CMakeFiles/bitcoin_node.dir/mapport.cpp.o
FAILED: src/CMakeFiles/bitcoin_node.dir/mapport.cpp.o
/usr/bin/ccache /usr/bin/clang++-22 -DBOOST_MULTI_INDEX_DISABLE_SERIALIZATION -DBOOST_NO_CXX98_FUNCTION_BASE -I/home/hebasto/dev/bitcoin/build/src -I/
...

💬 hebasto commented on issue "Compilation failure with Clang SNAPSHOT":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33539#issuecomment-3368081518)
cc @sipa as the code author.

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "depends: Update URL for `qrencode` package source tarball"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33494#pullrequestreview-3301766544)
ACK 93a70a42d30fa2f9404b76d5bbdb5ea316fc1032

PR Updates URL where the package can be downloaded for `qrencode` for depends. Because the package slightly differs from the original a new Hash has been added plus some changes to make sure the CI builds do not use the cache version.

- Code review on the "added" shell scripts in the package to make sure that there has not been added some obvious malicious stuff. (yes package is from gh is from 2020 but still). ✅
- code review ✅

<details><s
...

💬 sipa commented on issue "Compilation failure with Clang SNAPSHOT":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33539#issuecomment-3368219857)
I can't reproduce this on godbolt. Does the code there work for you? https://godbolt.org/z/f7E4Y7rrb

💬 hebasto commented on issue "Compilation failure with Clang SNAPSHOT":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33539#issuecomment-3368222853)
> I can't reproduce this on godbolt. Does the code there work for you? https://godbolt.org/z/f7E4Y7rrb

It does. No issues.

💬 sipa commented on issue "Compilation failure with Clang SNAPSHOT":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33539#issuecomment-3368225704)
That makes no sense!

The warning above complains:
```
../src/random.h:345:15: note: because 'std::chrono::milliseconds' (aka 'duration<long, ratio<1, 1000>>') does not satisfy 'StdChronoDuration'
345 | template <StdChronoDuration Dur>
| ^
```

And yet, the godbolt snippet invokes `rand`, which is templated as `template <StdChronoDuration Dur>` just the same, with `std::chrono::milliseconds` as argument.

Compiler bug, which is hopefully resolved before they release?

💬 MarcusMWilliams commented on issue "Compilation failure with Clang SNAPSHOT":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33539#issuecomment-3368226652)
💯🙂



On Sat, Oct 4, 2025, 8:25 AM Hennadii Stepanov ***@***.***>
wrote:

> *hebasto* left a comment (bitcoin/bitcoin#33539)
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33539#issuecomment-3368222853>
>
> I can't reproduce this on godbolt. Does the code there work for you?
> https://godbolt.org/z/f7E4Y7rrb
>
> It does. No issues.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33539#issuecomment-3368222853>,
> or unsubscrib
...

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "Compilation failure with Clang SNAPSHOT"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33539)

💬 Christewart commented on issue "v30.0 Testing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33368#issuecomment-3368275934)
It seems like the RPC interface is working as expected with bitcoin-s: https://github.com/bitcoin-s/bitcoin-s/pull/6095

The only other nit I would have is technically the `watchonly` json fields are deprecated this release, not removed. They will be removed in a future release.

👍 andrewtoth approved a pull request: "net: support overriding the proxy selection in ConnectNode()"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33454#pullrequestreview-3301899692)
ACK c76de2eea18076f91dd80b52f66ba790f071a2b1

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#issuecomment-3368298124)
tACK ac599c4a9cb3b2d424932d3fd91f9eed17426827

I might just address some of the left-over comments in a follow-up together with my additional tests, if this PR doesn't get retouched anymore.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "coins: use number of dirty cache entries in flush warnings/logs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33512#discussion_r2404014654)
I see, so if this gets merged the test here can be modified in #31132 to test for insertion if already exists?

I don't see where we verify the accounting though. You are referring to the `cachedCoinsUsage` accounting? This test doesn't seem to check that. Maybe that can be added?

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "coins: use number of dirty cache entries in flush warnings/logs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33512#discussion_r2404015081)
Could we add a unit test to trigger this accounting error?

👍 maflcko approved a pull request: "Clear out space on centos job"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33514#pullrequestreview-3301923979)
lgtm. left a comment to avoid churn in the future and one of the merge conflicts.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Clear out space on centos job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33514#discussion_r2404015061)
```suggestion
if: ${{ needs.runners.outputs.provider == 'gha' }}
```

nit: Could run it for all tasks, to avoid having to select them individually?

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#discussion_r2404065695)
> Can we add a single-threaded input fetcher first and add multithreading only as the very last step?

Done.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#discussion_r2404066620)
Done.