✅ fanquake closed an issue: "v30.0 Testing"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33368)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33368)
💬 fanquake commented on issue "v30.0 Testing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33368#issuecomment-3388538932)
v30.0 has been tagged.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33368#issuecomment-3388538932)
v30.0 has been tagged.
🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "Update libmultiprocess subtree to support reduced logging"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33518)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33518)
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "guix: Use UCRT runtime for Windows release binaries":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33593#discussion_r2418735989)
1. https://codeberg.org/guix/guix/src/commit/8daae75de3670594dfcb63b6ae6f1603ca6f7971/gnu/packages/mingw.scm#L88-L90:
```scheme
;; XXX: A new target to use UCRT can be introduced as
;; the MSYS2 project does, e.g: x86_64-w64-ucrt-mingw32.
"--with-default-msvcrt=msvcrt")
```
2. https://issues.guix.gnu.org/71630:
> I've added a new configure flag to set the default MSVCRT to MSVCRT as
the default now is UCRT. This default is a
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33593#discussion_r2418735989)
1. https://codeberg.org/guix/guix/src/commit/8daae75de3670594dfcb63b6ae6f1603ca6f7971/gnu/packages/mingw.scm#L88-L90:
```scheme
;; XXX: A new target to use UCRT can be introduced as
;; the MSYS2 project does, e.g: x86_64-w64-ucrt-mingw32.
"--with-default-msvcrt=msvcrt")
```
2. https://issues.guix.gnu.org/71630:
> I've added a new configure flag to set the default MSVCRT to MSVCRT as
the default now is UCRT. This default is a
...
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Contrib: Updated macdeployqtplus to remove deprecated --deep signing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33592#issuecomment-3388630562)
Concept ACK.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33592#issuecomment-3388630562)
Concept ACK.
🤔 hebasto reviewed a pull request: "cmake: Use builtin support for .manifest files"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33585#pullrequestreview-3321807006)
I agree on the refactoring first and last commits.
The mentioned upstream [issue](https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/23244) was exactly the reason why I implemented manifest handling this way in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32396.
Is there any CMake's docs regarding handling `.manifest` files?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33585#pullrequestreview-3321807006)
I agree on the refactoring first and last commits.
The mentioned upstream [issue](https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/23244) was exactly the reason why I implemented manifest handling this way in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32396.
Is there any CMake's docs regarding handling `.manifest` files?
💬 purpleKarrot commented on pull request "cmake: Use builtin support for .manifest files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33585#issuecomment-3388772024)
> The mentioned upstream [issue](https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/23244) was exactly the reason why I implemented manifest handling this way in #32396.
Got it. I think the advantage of using the workaround conditionally with a comment to the upstream issue is that it is self-documenting and simplifies future refactoring once the issue is solved upstream.
If the workaround is used unconditionally for all platforms, it is not obvious to future contributors that this is in fact a
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33585#issuecomment-3388772024)
> The mentioned upstream [issue](https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/23244) was exactly the reason why I implemented manifest handling this way in #32396.
Got it. I think the advantage of using the workaround conditionally with a comment to the upstream issue is that it is self-documenting and simplifies future refactoring once the issue is solved upstream.
If the workaround is used unconditionally for all platforms, it is not obvious to future contributors that this is in fact a
...
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "build: Drop support for EOL macOS 13":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33489#issuecomment-3388872966)
I just retired my 27" iMac from 2017, which happens to only support macOS 13. I was only using it for its great 5K monitor though, connecting my IDE to a faster computer for compilation.
That means it would be more work for me to test things on that machine, since even booting it takes several minutes. If I was still using that machine I would have preferred to maintain support for it a bit longer, until something actually breaks or blocks progress.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33489#issuecomment-3388872966)
I just retired my 27" iMac from 2017, which happens to only support macOS 13. I was only using it for its great 5K monitor though, connecting my IDE to a faster computer for compilation.
That means it would be more work for me to test things on that machine, since even booting it takes several minutes. If I was still using that machine I would have preferred to maintain support for it a bit longer, until something actually breaks or blocks progress.
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build: Drop support for EOL macOS 13":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33489#issuecomment-3388922270)
> I just retired my 27" iMac from 2017, which happens to only support macOS 13. I was only using it for its great 5K monitor though, connecting my IDE to a faster computer for compilation.
>
> That means it will be more work for me to test things on that machine, since even booting it takes several minutes. If I was still using that machine I would have preferred to maintain support for it a bit longer, until something actually breaks or blocks progress.
I don't think this pull request cha
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33489#issuecomment-3388922270)
> I just retired my 27" iMac from 2017, which happens to only support macOS 13. I was only using it for its great 5K monitor though, connecting my IDE to a faster computer for compilation.
>
> That means it will be more work for me to test things on that machine, since even booting it takes several minutes. If I was still using that machine I would have preferred to maintain support for it a bit longer, until something actually breaks or blocks progress.
I don't think this pull request cha
...
💬 delta1 commented on issue "Decouple datacarrier size and count limits (Draft PR)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3388963633)
Concept NACK, issue looks like LLM slop
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33595#issuecomment-3388963633)
Concept NACK, issue looks like LLM slop
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "build: Drop support for EOL macOS 13":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33489#issuecomment-3388973256)
> I don't think this pull request changes anything about your workflow, if you connect to a different computer to compile and run.
I'm not worried about my own workflow for running a node, I was talking about us supporting it as a project. For that I need to compile it to occasionally test things, which is more work since I no longer have that machine on all day.
> The goal here is to drop support for an insecure base operating system
> (macOS Ventura 13.7.8 received its final security
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33489#issuecomment-3388973256)
> I don't think this pull request changes anything about your workflow, if you connect to a different computer to compile and run.
I'm not worried about my own workflow for running a node, I was talking about us supporting it as a project. For that I need to compile it to occasionally test things, which is more work since I no longer have that machine on all day.
> The goal here is to drop support for an insecure base operating system
> (macOS Ventura 13.7.8 received its final security
...
💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28676#discussion_r2419042265)
Done in #33591
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28676#discussion_r2419042265)
Done in #33591
💬 fanquake commented on issue "Intermittent CI network issue downloading assets.json from GitHub":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33599#issuecomment-3389085662)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/18386412219/job/52385904491?pr=28676
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33599#issuecomment-3389085662)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/18386412219/job/52385904491?pr=28676
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build: Drop support for EOL macOS 13":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33489#issuecomment-3389106075)
> I'm not worried about my own workflow for running a node, I was talking about us supporting it as a project.
I think dropping support for an OS that hasn't received security updates for 6 months is fine. Also, you can still run a 30.x node until the release of 33.0 (https://bitcoincore.org/en/lifecycle/), which is 1.5 years. Also, you can compile and run any version yourself at your own risk (not using xcode).
Though, I am happy to review a pull request with the improvements you have in
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33489#issuecomment-3389106075)
> I'm not worried about my own workflow for running a node, I was talking about us supporting it as a project.
I think dropping support for an OS that hasn't received security updates for 6 months is fine. Also, you can still run a 30.x node until the release of 33.0 (https://bitcoincore.org/en/lifecycle/), which is 1.5 years. Also, you can compile and run any version yourself at your own risk (not using xcode).
Though, I am happy to review a pull request with the improvements you have in
...
💬 fanquake commented on pull request "multiprocess: Fix high overhead from message logging":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33517#issuecomment-3389122885)
#33518 has gone in, so this could be rebased / undrafted.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33517#issuecomment-3389122885)
#33518 has gone in, so this could be rebased / undrafted.
👋 fanquake's pull request is ready for review: "[29.x] Finalise 29.2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33551)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33551)
💬 fanquake commented on issue "Release Schedule for 30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32275#issuecomment-3389351214)
Release post for the website: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/1182.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32275#issuecomment-3389351214)
Release post for the website: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/1182.
💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33551#issuecomment-3389387280)
ACK 46d9b9091baa096da30da5e14329a32f1264229a
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33551#issuecomment-3389387280)
ACK 46d9b9091baa096da30da5e14329a32f1264229a
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "cmake: Use builtin support for .manifest files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33585#issuecomment-3389448715)
> > Is there any CMake's docs regarding handling `.manifest` files?
>
> https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/release/3.4.html#other
Thank you for the link!
The release notes mentioned above state:
> Manifest files ... will be merged with linker-generated manifests and embedded in the binary.
This PR enables linker-generated manifests by removing the `/MANIFEST:NO` linker flag. However, I still have a couple of questions:
1. What is the content of the linker-generated manifest? Wha
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33585#issuecomment-3389448715)
> > Is there any CMake's docs regarding handling `.manifest` files?
>
> https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/release/3.4.html#other
Thank you for the link!
The release notes mentioned above state:
> Manifest files ... will be merged with linker-generated manifests and embedded in the binary.
This PR enables linker-generated manifests by removing the `/MANIFEST:NO` linker flag. However, I still have a couple of questions:
1. What is the content of the linker-generated manifest? Wha
...
💬 hebasto commented on issue "ci: remove third-party javascript usage from Windows CI":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32508#issuecomment-3389691137)
Maybe keep this issue open for visibility until the `ilammy/msvc-dev-cmd` action is actually removed from the repository whitelist?
This may, in turn, require backporting some commits from bitcoin/bitcoin#32513 and waiting until for contributors to rebase their PRs.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32508#issuecomment-3389691137)
Maybe keep this issue open for visibility until the `ilammy/msvc-dev-cmd` action is actually removed from the repository whitelist?
This may, in turn, require backporting some commits from bitcoin/bitcoin#32513 and waiting until for contributors to rebase their PRs.