💬 sipa commented on pull request "cli: rework -addrinfo cli to use addresses which aren’t filtered for quality/recency":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26988#issuecomment-3477872095)
Concept ACK, but I think it's weird to use a long English phrase as field name. Maybe just "addresses_total" and "addresses_filtered" or so? If we care about backward compatibility, we could add a `-deprecatedrpc=addresses_known` option to enable the "addresses_known" field (which would be a copy of "addresses_filtered").
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26988#issuecomment-3477872095)
Concept ACK, but I think it's weird to use a long English phrase as field name. Maybe just "addresses_total" and "addresses_filtered" or so? If we care about backward compatibility, we could add a `-deprecatedrpc=addresses_known` option to enable the "addresses_known" field (which would be a copy of "addresses_filtered").
💬 sipa commented on pull request "refactor: make script Solver's often-unused solutions parameter optional":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33757#issuecomment-3477874632)
If we're going to touch this code, my preference would be to go with @purpleKarrot's approach of two separate functions, moving the `vSolutions` field into a return pair element.
If the allocation overhead of that is a concern, I think the proper solution is a follow-up to get rid of the `vSolutions` approach of encoding things, and instead introduce a proper type that encodes it more usefully (possibly an `std::variant`, like `CTxDestination`, but with more possibilities). For multisig-like
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33757#issuecomment-3477874632)
If we're going to touch this code, my preference would be to go with @purpleKarrot's approach of two separate functions, moving the `vSolutions` field into a return pair element.
If the allocation overhead of that is a concern, I think the proper solution is a follow-up to get rid of the `vSolutions` approach of encoding things, and instead introduce a proper type that encodes it more usefully (possibly an `std::variant`, like `CTxDestination`, but with more possibilities). For multisig-like
...
🤔 sipa reviewed a pull request: "refactor: inline constant return values from `dbwrapper` write methods"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33042#pullrequestreview-3408745524)
ACK 743abbcbde9e5a2db489bca461c98df461eff7d0
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33042#pullrequestreview-3408745524)
ACK 743abbcbde9e5a2db489bca461c98df461eff7d0
💬 stringintech commented on pull request "kernel: Introduce C header API":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30595#issuecomment-3477890834)
ACK e95efc00
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30595#issuecomment-3477890834)
ACK e95efc00
💬 achow101 commented on issue "Download links on bitcoincore.org not working":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3477997646)
> clicking the download buttons returns an error
What is the error?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3477997646)
> clicking the download buttons returns an error
What is the error?
✅ l0rinc closed a pull request: "refactor: make script Solver's often-unused solutions parameter optional"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33757)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33757)
💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "refactor: make script Solver's often-unused solutions parameter optional":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33757#issuecomment-3478002392)
Thank you for the comments, appreciate the high-level comments!
@purpleKarrot, I though of both solutions you have suggested (I also passionately hate output parameters) but since I meant this as a call-site-simplification while eliminating useless work (though the cases where the `vSolutions` was still needed *was* indeed slightly more awkward), populating the vector just to discard it immediately didn't seem like it would solve anything.
> and instead introduce a proper type that encodes
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33757#issuecomment-3478002392)
Thank you for the comments, appreciate the high-level comments!
@purpleKarrot, I though of both solutions you have suggested (I also passionately hate output parameters) but since I meant this as a call-site-simplification while eliminating useless work (though the cases where the `vSolutions` was still needed *was* indeed slightly more awkward), populating the vector just to discard it immediately didn't seem like it would solve anything.
> and instead introduce a proper type that encodes
...
💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "refactor: optimize: avoid allocations in script & policy verification":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33645#discussion_r2484842410)
I have removed my nack here, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33757#issuecomment-3478002392
I'm not sure about the focus for the other commits, they seem like problems that you *can* solve instead of problems that *need* solving.
The resulting code isn't obviously cleaner and the dependencies are often more complicated now (reusing vectors for example). I know that was already in place, but most of our work is untangling code, I'm more enthusiastic about changes that are both clea
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33645#discussion_r2484842410)
I have removed my nack here, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33757#issuecomment-3478002392
I'm not sure about the focus for the other commits, they seem like problems that you *can* solve instead of problems that *need* solving.
The resulting code isn't obviously cleaner and the dependencies are often more complicated now (reusing vectors for example). I know that was already in place, but most of our work is untangling code, I'm more enthusiastic about changes that are both clea
...
💬 bronsii commented on issue "Download links on bitcoincore.org not working":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3478023268)
It works now.
Ava Chow ***@***.***> schrieb am So. 2. Nov. 2025 um 15:15:
> *achow101* left a comment (bitcoin/bitcoin#33762)
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3477997646>
>
> clicking the download buttons returns an error
>
> What is the error?
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3477997646>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BZS5
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3478023268)
It works now.
Ava Chow ***@***.***> schrieb am So. 2. Nov. 2025 um 15:15:
> *achow101* left a comment (bitcoin/bitcoin#33762)
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3477997646>
>
> clicking the download buttons returns an error
>
> What is the error?
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3477997646>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BZS5
...
💬 TheBlueMatt commented on pull request "Embed default ASMap as binary dump header file":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478028040)
I couldn't really find a better place to leave this comment, even though its clearly not really quite targeted at this PR itself (which is awesome!), so I'll leave it here and y'all can yell at me for not finding the right place later.
I saw in the core-dev writeups that there appears to be some intent to build asmap files based on only RPKI data (if that's wrong, please skip the rest of this comment). I fear that that is a particularly bad idea.
While RPKI deployment has been quite succes
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478028040)
I couldn't really find a better place to leave this comment, even though its clearly not really quite targeted at this PR itself (which is awesome!), so I'll leave it here and y'all can yell at me for not finding the right place later.
I saw in the core-dev writeups that there appears to be some intent to build asmap files based on only RPKI data (if that's wrong, please skip the rest of this comment). I fear that that is a particularly bad idea.
While RPKI deployment has been quite succes
...
📝 hebasto opened a pull request: "ci: Add Windows + UCRT jobs for cross-compiling and native testing"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33764)
This PR is part of the ongoing effort to migrate to the modern UCRT runtime for cross-compiled Windows binaries, including release builds.
For more details about this migration, see:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30210
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33593
A few items are outside the scope of this PR and are left for follow-up work:
1. The version of Debian's [cross-compiler](https://packages.debian.org/trixie/g++-mingw-w64-ucrt64) is 14.2.0, which differs from v
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33764)
This PR is part of the ongoing effort to migrate to the modern UCRT runtime for cross-compiled Windows binaries, including release builds.
For more details about this migration, see:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30210
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33593
A few items are outside the scope of this PR and are left for follow-up work:
1. The version of Debian's [cross-compiler](https://packages.debian.org/trixie/g++-mingw-w64-ucrt64) is 14.2.0, which differs from v
...
💬 sipa commented on pull request "Embed default ASMap as binary dump header file":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478053233)
@TheBlueMatt FYI, the repository with asmap construction scripts is https://github.com/asmap/kartograf. My understanding (which may be incomplete) is that RPKI is used where available, but supplemented with other sources.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478053233)
@TheBlueMatt FYI, the repository with asmap construction scripts is https://github.com/asmap/kartograf. My understanding (which may be incomplete) is that RPKI is used where available, but supplemented with other sources.
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "guix: Build for macOS using Clang only":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32764#issuecomment-3478058068)
```
# uname --machine && find guix-build-$(git rev-parse --short=12 HEAD)/output/ -type f -print0 | env LC_ALL=C sort -z | xargs -r0 sha256sum
riscv64
a8613aaa30cc598f8f193932478e57381299399fb1a6a3e8cd27d41ed58e1a2c guix-build-7c97bae595b0/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
6b32bd6a25e2c8b2823efc9deb8d9dc1fd4da7713dc00992ee721171500ebbf0 guix-build-7c97bae595b0/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-7c97bae595b0-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
fbda951a67c0b02a9c4ed8014b3371ecacf7c41f2f0338
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32764#issuecomment-3478058068)
```
# uname --machine && find guix-build-$(git rev-parse --short=12 HEAD)/output/ -type f -print0 | env LC_ALL=C sort -z | xargs -r0 sha256sum
riscv64
a8613aaa30cc598f8f193932478e57381299399fb1a6a3e8cd27d41ed58e1a2c guix-build-7c97bae595b0/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
6b32bd6a25e2c8b2823efc9deb8d9dc1fd4da7713dc00992ee721171500ebbf0 guix-build-7c97bae595b0/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-7c97bae595b0-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
fbda951a67c0b02a9c4ed8014b3371ecacf7c41f2f0338
...
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "Embed default ASMap as binary dump header file":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478061805)
> I saw in the core-dev writeups that there appears to be some intent to build asmap files based on only RPKI data (if that's wrong, please skip the rest of this comment). I fear that that is a particularly bad idea.
You mean the asmap session probably and I think that's a misunderstand of the notes. I don't think they are released yet but maybe you can point me to the line you are referring to and we can amend that to be better understandable. I thought there might a btc transcripts PR alrea
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478061805)
> I saw in the core-dev writeups that there appears to be some intent to build asmap files based on only RPKI data (if that's wrong, please skip the rest of this comment). I fear that that is a particularly bad idea.
You mean the asmap session probably and I think that's a misunderstand of the notes. I don't think they are released yet but maybe you can point me to the line you are referring to and we can amend that to be better understandable. I thought there might a btc transcripts PR alrea
...
💬 TheBlueMatt commented on pull request "Embed default ASMap as binary dump header file":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478062912)
I was misled by https://github.com/bitcointranscripts/bitcointranscripts/pull/593/files#diff-e25cced7d45bde5a991f8ac638162335638ea1ba39b21a5cb76d5e5e31b31345R9-R10
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478062912)
I was misled by https://github.com/bitcointranscripts/bitcointranscripts/pull/593/files#diff-e25cced7d45bde5a991f8ac638162335638ea1ba39b21a5cb76d5e5e31b31345R9-R10
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "Embed default ASMap as binary dump header file":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478064586)
> I was misled by https://github.com/bitcointranscripts/bitcointranscripts/pull/593/files#diff-e25cced7d45bde5a991f8ac638162335638ea1ba39b21a5cb76d5e5e31b31345R9-R10
Ok, I see, that could have been more clear as either "depends on `rpki-client`" (the only dependency outside of python) or "depends on RPKI, IRR and Routeviews downloads" or something. I will clarify in the PR.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478064586)
> I was misled by https://github.com/bitcointranscripts/bitcointranscripts/pull/593/files#diff-e25cced7d45bde5a991f8ac638162335638ea1ba39b21a5cb76d5e5e31b31345R9-R10
Ok, I see, that could have been more clear as either "depends on `rpki-client`" (the only dependency outside of python) or "depends on RPKI, IRR and Routeviews downloads" or something. I will clarify in the PR.
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "Embed default ASMap as binary dump header file":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478069622)
This should clarify it: https://github.com/bitcointranscripts/bitcointranscripts/pull/594 Sorry for triggering a false alarm with the notes :D
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28792#issuecomment-3478069622)
This should clarify it: https://github.com/bitcointranscripts/bitcointranscripts/pull/594 Sorry for triggering a false alarm with the notes :D
✅ glozow closed an issue: "Download links on bitcoincore.org not working"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762)
💬 glozow commented on issue "Download links on bitcoincore.org not working":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3478083113)
Thanks for reporting, it's very helpful. I'm going to close this since it's not a reproducible problem. If you run into a website problem again, please open another issue on https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/issues with more details.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33762#issuecomment-3478083113)
Thanks for reporting, it's very helpful. I'm going to close this since it's not a reproducible problem. If you run into a website problem again, please open another issue on https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/issues with more details.
💬 romanz commented on pull request "rest: allow reading partial block data from storage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33657#discussion_r2484934207)
Not sure if splitting this PR into two commits will make it clearer...
Maybe I should add a comment at `rest_block()` definition?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33657#discussion_r2484934207)
Not sure if splitting this PR into two commits will make it clearer...
Maybe I should add a comment at `rest_block()` definition?