💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "CI: Make failure message easier to spot":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31200#issuecomment-3427249269)
It looks like this issue has been resolved. If that’s not the case, please let us know by commenting here or opening a new issue.

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "qa: `PermissionError` in functional tests on Windows"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28529)

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "qa: `PermissionError` in functional tests on Windows":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28529#issuecomment-3427255585)
Since the problem isn’t easily reproducible, I’m closing this for now. If it occurs again, please feel free to open a new issue or comment here so we can reopen it.

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "Add libbitcoinkernel example files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33669#issuecomment-3427265866)
Concept ACK

I have something similar over at http://thecharlatan.ch/kernel-docs/examples.html . Purplelkarrot also suggested to have code examples in the style of https://purplekarrot.github.io/btck/design/naming_conventions.html (at the bottom). The tabbed views between the languages look particularly nice imo. I am not sure if we should host this in this repo though. We discussed having a separate repo (under the bitcoin-core org) to host language bindings, examples, and docs in a coherent
...

💬 BenWestgate commented on pull request "doc: update multisig tutorial to use multipath descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33286#issuecomment-3427270530)
> This isn't quite true for multipath descriptors:
>
> > The checksum for a descriptor without one...**
>
> We have to take the `checksum` field and append it to the multipath input descriptor, similar to private key descriptors.
>
> Do we need to document this?

Resolved my own concerns with: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33286/commits/de7c3587cd4586bbed94a4ea6eae4a252301daee

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "RFC: hosting utxo snapshot on bitcoincore.org and linking to it"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31972)

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "RFC: hosting utxo snapshot on bitcoincore.org and linking to it":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31972#issuecomment-3427285688)
This is being discussed on the website repo.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#issuecomment-3427287178)
I love the new structure, it's a lot easier to track the progress compared to previous versions. It's also measurably faster than previous versions, we seem to be nearing ~20% - sweeeet! It also pairs well with other `Siphash` related changes that are in the pipeline.

I have reimplemented most of it locally to make sure I can do a meaningful review, see https://github.com/l0rinc/bitcoin/pull/47 for my attempt. It's not finished, I'm still experimenting with different alternatives to make sure
...

💬 stickies-v commented on issue "RFC: hosting utxo snapshot on bitcoincore.org and linking to it":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31972#issuecomment-3427293529)
See https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/issues/1130 for the discussion.

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "assumeutxo: not syncing the snapshot chainstate"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30971)

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "assumeutxo: not syncing the snapshot chainstate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30971#issuecomment-3427299987)
Since the problem isn’t easily reproducible, I’m closing this for now. If it occurs again, please feel free to open a new issue or comment here so we can reopen it.

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "[RFC] What security expectations does/should the RPC server have from credentialed RPC clients?"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32274)

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "docs: clarify RPC credentials security boundary":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33196#issuecomment-3427324550)
ACK 433954b

💬 supertestnet commented on issue "Allow creating and injecting a custom coinbase into a block template":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28475#issuecomment-3427329409)
I think it's mostly superseded by this PR anyway: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32468

💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: initial sync speedup, parallelize process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#issuecomment-3427331772)
Small update, per discussion, will push the thread pool on an isolated PR in the coming week. Replacing the current http server `WorkQueue` and all its related code; it is an easy dedup that adds further test coverage to a never unit nor fuzz tested area. Plus a way to start using this class in the repo that allow others to use it.

Also, I'm investigating the tx index slow down with @andrewtoth. Trying to understand the differences between us. Worst-case scenario, we can disable parallel sync
...

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "TSAN/MSAN fails with vm.mmap_rnd_bits=32 even with llvm 18.1.3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30674#issuecomment-3427339037)
Please update the CI readme.md with the needed info, thanks.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "TSAN/MSAN fails with vm.mmap_rnd_bits=32 even with llvm 18.1.3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30674#issuecomment-3427342678)
for reference, the workaround isn't needed for the GHA runners, but it is needed locally and for the Cirrus runners, see also the workflow yaml: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/c862936d16a640690ef4c89456738fe4bb99be54/.github/workflows/ci.yml#L554-L557

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "v27.2 guix build fails with hash mismatch"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31266)

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "v27.2 guix build fails with hash mismatch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31266#issuecomment-3427345542)
This issue is being closed because it falls outside the scope of this repository.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "v27.2 guix build fails with hash mismatch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31266#issuecomment-3427350747)
> This issue is being closed because it falls outside the scope of this repository.

Not sure this is fully true, but this will be fixed by the next time-machine bump. C.f. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33185