💬 glozow commented on pull request "net_processing: rename RelayTransaction to better describe what it does":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33565#issuecomment-3406604420)
utACK 84b2ad0334

💬 vasild commented on pull request "net: make m_nodes_mutex non-recursive":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32394#issuecomment-3406607741)
`492be23a18...4aad3714d6`: split in two commits: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32394#discussion_r2417567225

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "mempool decreases to zero on nodes with a small maxmempool":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21558#issuecomment-3406608264)
@rebroad is this still an issue with the mempool in Bitcoin Core v30.0 or current master?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Construct g_verify_flag_names on first use":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33600#discussion_r2432705422)
> std::ranges:binary_search then lets you do lookups essentially the same way map does, though I suppose with only up to ~60 entries, that doesn't matter that much.

I think `binary_search` returns a bool, not an iterator, so it can not be used for lookup. I think you just meant to say "Binary search operations" (https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/ranges.html#Binary_search_operations_.28on_sorted_ranges.29)

I think I'll keep this as-is for now. I can push the array approach (keepin
...

💬 vasild commented on pull request "net: make m_nodes_mutex non-recursive":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32394#discussion_r2432708506)
This PR includes:
1. a change around `lNodesAnnouncingHeaderAndIDs` to remove the only recursive usage of the mutex
2. change of the type from `RecursiveMutex` to `Mutex`
3. a pile of annotations to keep the compiler happy after 2.

Extracted 1. into a separate commit and kept 2. and 3. together in a single commit: "it's quite natural to want to add all the annotations to silence the warnings within the same commit"

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "util::Result has confusing interface for std::*_ptr T":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26004#issuecomment-3406625584)
Would it be OK to close this and keep tracking any `non_null` implementation work in #24423?

💬 rustaceanrob commented on pull request "kernel: Introduce C header API":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30595#issuecomment-3406631283)
Speaking as a consumer of the Rust bindings, I want to emphasize the importance in my workflow of using this patch. As mentioned above, I developed a [SwiftSync](https://github.com/2140-dev/swiftsync) proof of concept that has informed my opinion on the feasibility of such a proposal for IBD. That sparked an interest in wire-representation of transactions, which I - again - reached for the kernel bindings [here](https://github.com/rustaceanrob/tx-encoding-stats) to analyze block data.

Genera
...

💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "CPack":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33455#discussion_r2432716796)
How about porting over these parts from #33422?

Should be added to the TODO list or some "Limitations" section in PR description, unless CPack has some way of magically finding renamed copies of the program and dealing with this.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Construct g_verify_flag_names on first use":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33600#discussion_r2432769262)
thx, may use `auto&` when I have to re-touch.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "CPack":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33455#discussion_r2432796152)
This would reintroduce the issue that #33158 worked around (#33126).

💬 purpleKarrot commented on pull request "CPack":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33455#discussion_r2432813653)
Yes, ideally we should not rename the generated file but control how the generated file will be named in the first place.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "guix: update time-machine to 5cb84f2013c5b1e48a7d0e617032266f1e6059e2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33185#issuecomment-3406873353)
Guix Build (aarch64)
```bash
3de417ac1dade848d8b1609adf72c0faefcaf5acf03199259aa3aeb83e6a863f guix-build-59c4898994bd/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
c6eda45fce2b34940ea53caa2acf0c1436122f89b85c0bc727834360f78a40f5 guix-build-59c4898994bd/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-59c4898994bd-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
41584667134bfc5c35851d5005692c447d3fc529a310c7868030d6383d8bd840 guix-build-59c4898994bd/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-59c4898994bd-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
5c6d784
...

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "ci: run s390x job"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33436)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci: run s390x job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33436#issuecomment-3406887518)
Agree that this specific job, isn't currently worth adding. Maybe we could add the cross-compile only, to match Guix.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "Intermittent issue in p2p_i2p_ports.py AssertionError: [node 0] Expected messages "['Error connecting to [...].b32.i2p:0: Cannot connect to 127.0.0.1:60000']" does not partially match log:":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30030#issuecomment-3406905683)
Ran into this locally (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/e14451ac87339ed61b8c872f027184a978dd96eb):
```bash
276/277 - p2p_i2p_ports.py failed, Duration: 81 s

stdout:
2025-10-15T14:58:36.321373Z TestFramework (INFO): PRNG seed is: 5343123104196887417
2025-10-15T14:58:36.321958Z TestFramework (INFO): Initializing test directory /ci_container_base/ci/scratch/test_runner/test_runner_₿_🏃_20251015_145347/p2p_i2p_ports_16
2025-10-15T14:58:37.956907Z TestFramework (INFO): Ensure we don't try t
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Update libmultiprocess subtree in 30.x branch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33519#issuecomment-3406955326)
> should we wait a bit longer?

For anything in particular? There are backports that are blocked on this, so it seems more useful to pull this now, and unblock them. It can always be pulled again later if there is a reason to do so.

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "rpc: add "ischange: true" to decoded tx outputs in wallet gettransaction response":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32517#discussion_r2432972842)
good catch thanks I'll update this arg with `const` here and in the lambda

👋 fanquake's pull request is ready for review: "ci: add Valgrind fuzz"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33461)

💬 furszy commented on pull request "rpc: add "ischange: true" to decoded tx outputs in wallet gettransaction response":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32517#discussion_r2432988211)
only const? why not passing the ref too

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "rpc: add "ischange: true" to decoded tx outputs in wallet gettransaction response":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32517#discussion_r2433006469)
oops thanks, updating...