💬 wizkid057 commented on pull request "chainparams: remove dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr-list-of-p2p-nodes.us":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461632869)
> I'm not sure what is giving people the impression that we're not doing the same here
The pitchfork carrying mob seems to be out in force here, complete with some maintainers, on this nothingburger PR with 50+ comments in < 24 hrs... while there's other PRs (likely with actual merit) which don't even have a single comment from a maintainer... that's what's giving the impression.
> Luke has been pinged both on this PR and directly through other platforms.
> @luke-jr please update us here
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461632869)
> I'm not sure what is giving people the impression that we're not doing the same here
The pitchfork carrying mob seems to be out in force here, complete with some maintainers, on this nothingburger PR with 50+ comments in < 24 hrs... while there's other PRs (likely with actual merit) which don't even have a single comment from a maintainer... that's what's giving the impression.
> Luke has been pinged both on this PR and directly through other platforms.
> @luke-jr please update us here
...
⚠️ umrashrf opened an issue: "Can I compile on OSX Tahoe?"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33733)
### Is there an existing issue for this?
- [x] I have searched the existing issues
### Current behaviour
I recently upgraded my OS to Max OSX Tahoe 26.0.1 (25A362)
Step 1: Success
```
git clone ssh://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git
```
Step 2: Success
```
cmake -B build -DENABLE_IPC=OFF -DBUILD_GUI=OFF -DWITH_QRENCODE=OFF
```
Step 3: Fails
```
cmake --build build
```
The default clang was from homebrew which also failed but then I switched to XCode clang and still fails :joy:
### Expec
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33733)
### Is there an existing issue for this?
- [x] I have searched the existing issues
### Current behaviour
I recently upgraded my OS to Max OSX Tahoe 26.0.1 (25A362)
Step 1: Success
```
git clone ssh://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git
```
Step 2: Success
```
cmake -B build -DENABLE_IPC=OFF -DBUILD_GUI=OFF -DWITH_QRENCODE=OFF
```
Step 3: Fails
```
cmake --build build
```
The default clang was from homebrew which also failed but then I switched to XCode clang and still fails :joy:
### Expec
...
💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "wallet: Always rewrite tx records during migration":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32985#issuecomment-3461708059)
I'm assuming the PR description is referring to the changes `ReorderTransactions()` makes during `LoadWallet()`. If this is the case, these changes are persisted during `ReorderTransactions()`, so copying the records to the SQLite DB when we do `MigrateToSQLite` should already transfer the changes to the new DB. Why do we need to rewrite the TX records? What in-memory changes are we trying to persist to the new DB?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32985#issuecomment-3461708059)
I'm assuming the PR description is referring to the changes `ReorderTransactions()` makes during `LoadWallet()`. If this is the case, these changes are persisted during `ReorderTransactions()`, so copying the records to the SQLite DB when we do `MigrateToSQLite` should already transfer the changes to the new DB. Why do we need to rewrite the TX records? What in-memory changes are we trying to persist to the new DB?
✅ pinheadmz closed a pull request: "chainparams: remove *petertodd.net"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33730)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33730)
💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "chainparams: remove *petertodd.net":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33730#issuecomment-3461714689)
I'm closing this PR since it the author has not justified it with any technical explanation and as it is written it is just a personal attack, which violates moderation policy.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33730#issuecomment-3461714689)
I'm closing this PR since it the author has not justified it with any technical explanation and as it is written it is just a personal attack, which violates moderation policy.
💬 kanzure commented on pull request "chainparams: remove dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr-list-of-p2p-nodes.us":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461716939)
In the event that this DNS seed server is removed from the configuration, it's worth considering (or considering the effects of not) replacing it with another DNS seed node that implements a conservative strategy with regards to node versions. I also don't know if anyone has analyzed whether this heuristic has a protective or beneficial effect. Is there another seed that implements this behavior or is this the only one that publicly advertises that?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461716939)
In the event that this DNS seed server is removed from the configuration, it's worth considering (or considering the effects of not) replacing it with another DNS seed node that implements a conservative strategy with regards to node versions. I also don't know if anyone has analyzed whether this heuristic has a protective or beneficial effect. Is there another seed that implements this behavior or is this the only one that publicly advertises that?
⚠️ glozow opened an issue: "dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr-list-of-p2p-nodes.us appears to be violating DNS seed policy"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33734)
### Is there an existing issue for this?
- [x] I have searched the existing issues
### Current behaviour
Bitcoin Core has a [DNS seed policy](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/dnsseed-policy.md).
There are concerns about @luke-jr's security practices and control over the server: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3457730865
@luke-jr was hacked and posted on his [website](https://luke.dashjr.org/) that his server has been compromised. As of this morni
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33734)
### Is there an existing issue for this?
- [x] I have searched the existing issues
### Current behaviour
Bitcoin Core has a [DNS seed policy](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/dnsseed-policy.md).
There are concerns about @luke-jr's security practices and control over the server: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3457730865
@luke-jr was hacked and posted on his [website](https://luke.dashjr.org/) that his server has been compromised. As of this morni
...
💬 00w1 commented on pull request "chainparams: remove *petertodd.net":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33730#issuecomment-3461781167)
> This PR description is unacceptable, please expand it with technical details or references to specific, documented project policy.
I have added the details.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33730#issuecomment-3461781167)
> This PR description is unacceptable, please expand it with technical details or references to specific, documented project policy.
I have added the details.
💬 laisial commented on pull request "chainparams: remove dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr-list-of-p2p-nodes.us":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461809037)
>personal attack with zero technical merit
>zero violation of any policy
>continuing witch hunt of some vs Luke.
>minimum courtesy
>change backed solely by dogpiled personal attacks is just crazy.
>The pitchfork carrying mob seems to be out in force
>this nothingburger PR
>the dogpile will continue
>no non-political reasoning
>lock this thread
@wizkid057 you're spamming off-topic with zero counterarguments on why the seed policy has not been violated. you're only policing the tone an
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461809037)
>personal attack with zero technical merit
>zero violation of any policy
>continuing witch hunt of some vs Luke.
>minimum courtesy
>change backed solely by dogpiled personal attacks is just crazy.
>The pitchfork carrying mob seems to be out in force
>this nothingburger PR
>the dogpile will continue
>no non-political reasoning
>lock this thread
@wizkid057 you're spamming off-topic with zero counterarguments on why the seed policy has not been violated. you're only policing the tone an
...
💬 glozow commented on pull request "chainparams: remove dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr-list-of-p2p-nodes.us":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461822880)
Calm down.
Historically, when a DNS seed was not operating properly, an issue was opened and we waited for the operator to respond.
Potential actions we can take: (0) address the problems with the DNS seed, (1) decide there is no problem (though I think it's clear that there are technical issues here and this is not just a "witch hunt"), or (2) remove the DNS seed. I agree that opening a PR to remove the seed straight out of the gate was not the best way to bring up the issue.
I've open
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461822880)
Calm down.
Historically, when a DNS seed was not operating properly, an issue was opened and we waited for the operator to respond.
Potential actions we can take: (0) address the problems with the DNS seed, (1) decide there is no problem (though I think it's clear that there are technical issues here and this is not just a "witch hunt"), or (2) remove the DNS seed. I agree that opening a PR to remove the seed straight out of the gate was not the best way to bring up the issue.
I've open
...
💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "test: Replace legacy wallet with MiniWallet in rpc_getblockstats.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33184#discussion_r2473420055)
> I've restored the `gen_test_data` / `load_test_data` logic so it's a proper regression test again. I've generated the new `rpc_getblockstats.json` file and added it to the PR.
This brings back the untested path problem.
> This is a no-op. You assign the value and the expected value from the same function, and then assert that it is equal. This changes what the test is checking.
This is similar to what I was pointing out in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33184#discussion_r239
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33184#discussion_r2473420055)
> I've restored the `gen_test_data` / `load_test_data` logic so it's a proper regression test again. I've generated the new `rpc_getblockstats.json` file and added it to the PR.
This brings back the untested path problem.
> This is a no-op. You assign the value and the expected value from the same function, and then assert that it is equal. This changes what the test is checking.
This is similar to what I was pointing out in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33184#discussion_r239
...
💬 glozow commented on pull request "chainparams: remove *petertodd.net":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33730#issuecomment-3461843402)
Historically, when a DNS seed was not operating properly, an issue was opened and we waited for the operator to respond. Potential actions we can take: (0) address the problems with the DNS seed, (1) decide there is no problem, or (2) remove the DNS seed. I don't think it's appropriate to just jump to removal straight away.
I suggest you open an issue (see #29911 or #33734 for examples) and wait for a response from the operator.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33730#issuecomment-3461843402)
Historically, when a DNS seed was not operating properly, an issue was opened and we waited for the operator to respond. Potential actions we can take: (0) address the problems with the DNS seed, (1) decide there is no problem, or (2) remove the DNS seed. I don't think it's appropriate to just jump to removal straight away.
I suggest you open an issue (see #29911 or #33734 for examples) and wait for a response from the operator.
🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "rpc: add "ischange: true" to decoded tx outputs in wallet gettransaction response"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32517#pullrequestreview-3393853741)
ACK ab06c3f16063701cfa25504a0d3cd4d5a5eb3a97
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32517#pullrequestreview-3393853741)
ACK ab06c3f16063701cfa25504a0d3cd4d5a5eb3a97
💬 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_r2473437500)
nit:
Missing ref here `const CTxOut& txout`
```suggestion
/*is_change_func=*/[&pwallet](const CTxOut& txout) NO_THREAD_SAFETY_ANALYSIS {
```
Also, why not `EXCLUSIVE_LOCKS_REQUIRED(pwallet->cs_wallet)` instead of `NO_THREAD_SAFETY_ANALYSIS`?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32517#discussion_r2473437500)
nit:
Missing ref here `const CTxOut& txout`
```suggestion
/*is_change_func=*/[&pwallet](const CTxOut& txout) NO_THREAD_SAFETY_ANALYSIS {
```
Also, why not `EXCLUSIVE_LOCKS_REQUIRED(pwallet->cs_wallet)` instead of `NO_THREAD_SAFETY_ANALYSIS`?
💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr-list-of-p2p-nodes.us appears to be violating DNS seed policy":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33734#issuecomment-3461865877)
> [!CAUTION]
> Personal attacks are not allowed and will result in a ban
- Be extremely clear and concise when posting on this thread.
- Every comment must relate directly to the topic described in the issue description
- Be mature, respectful and sensible.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33734#issuecomment-3461865877)
> [!CAUTION]
> Personal attacks are not allowed and will result in a ban
- Be extremely clear and concise when posting on this thread.
- Every comment must relate directly to the topic described in the issue description
- Be mature, respectful and sensible.
💬 Rob1Ham commented on issue "dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr-list-of-p2p-nodes.us appears to be violating DNS seed policy":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33734#issuecomment-3461875545)
Calling out @kanzure's comment in [#33723 ](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461716939) to ask the question on if there are advantages to having DNS seeds that are more conservative with their versioning.
> In the event that this DNS seed server is removed from the configuration, it's worth considering (or considering the effects of not) replacing it with another DNS seed node that [implements a conservative strategy with regards to node versions](https://delvingbitco
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33734#issuecomment-3461875545)
Calling out @kanzure's comment in [#33723 ](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33723#issuecomment-3461716939) to ask the question on if there are advantages to having DNS seeds that are more conservative with their versioning.
> In the event that this DNS seed server is removed from the configuration, it's worth considering (or considering the effects of not) replacing it with another DNS seed node that [implements a conservative strategy with regards to node versions](https://delvingbitco
...
👋 maflcko's pull request is ready for review: "ci: Call docker exec from Python script to fix word splitting"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33732)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33732)
💬 Crypt-iQ commented on issue "RFC: Do we want to support fuzzing on MacOS?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33731#issuecomment-3461908503)
> The only downside of it would be not attracting macOS people to fuzzing development (?)
I was also thinking about this, and it could turn away some people from writing fuzz tests. Maybe if the docs mentioned a specific working version as suggested by @maflcko above, but then somebody would need to test these versions. I've had issues where even updating to a new macOS version isn't possible without some hacks.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33731#issuecomment-3461908503)
> The only downside of it would be not attracting macOS people to fuzzing development (?)
I was also thinking about this, and it could turn away some people from writing fuzz tests. Maybe if the docs mentioned a specific working version as suggested by @maflcko above, but then somebody would need to test these versions. I've had issues where even updating to a new macOS version isn't possible without some hacks.
💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci: run native fuzz with MSAN job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33626#issuecomment-3461989252)
`-md` runtime was 43 minutes with no caches (libccxx/depends/cacche).
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33626#issuecomment-3461989252)
`-md` runtime was 43 minutes with no caches (libccxx/depends/cacche).
💬 furszy commented on issue "RFC: Do we want to support fuzzing on MacOS?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33731#issuecomment-3461995390)
It’s definitely painful to run it on Mac. I'm not against officially deprecating it if that is the general consensus but it’s quite useful to be able to troubleshoot individual crashes/timeouts locally. It would be handy to have pinned versions with specific docs on how to make it work.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33731#issuecomment-3461995390)
It’s definitely painful to run it on Mac. I'm not against officially deprecating it if that is the general consensus but it’s quite useful to be able to troubleshoot individual crashes/timeouts locally. It would be handy to have pinned versions with specific docs on how to make it work.