Bitcoin Core Github
42 subscribers
126K links
Download Telegram
💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "net: Continuous ASMap health check":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27581#discussion_r1223468703)
To avoid calling `GetMappedAS` again
```suggestion
clearnet_asns.insert(asn);
```
💬 furszy commented on pull request "Return EXIT_FAILURE on post-init fatal errors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27708#issuecomment-1583255041)
Thanks ryanofsky, updated per feedback with a tiny diff:

Didn't move `InitShutdownState` from `AppInitBasicSetup` to `AppInit` and instead provided the `NodeContext` ref to `AppInitBasicSetup`.
Not sure if you have an strong opinion about this (shoot if you have it) but the rationale was to keep the same workflow as we have now so the bitcoin-qt related changes b0267f2 doesn't introduce another `InitShutdownState` call.

> I think AppInit should keep returning bool not int to keep the chan
...
📝 fanquake locked a pull request: "BLSCT SubAddress Pool"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27839)
This PR adds support for the use of a SubAddress pool and the generation of different receiving addresses.

`getnewaddress` RPC method pulls addresses from the pool and shows to the requester receiving addresses.

By default it generates addresses under account `0`.

It also introduces changes in `blast::PublicKey` to store the underlying point as a `MclG1Point` object, instead of a byte vector, since deserialisation of the vector is a expensive operation.
💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "[POLICY] Ephemeral anchors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26403#issuecomment-1583272346)
note to self: after rebased onto BIP331, need to make sure rejected ephemeral anchor tx is put in `m_recent_rejects_reconsiderable` filter instead of `m_recent_rejects`
💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "contrib: verify torrents with verify-binary.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27762#issuecomment-1583277887)
OK I implemented as you suggested @Sjors. It does seem like a win to get more signatures on balance.

If people feel the approach is OK, and that it belongs in this PR (and not it's own), I can probably tidy it up further as theres still some duplicated code which can probably be factored out.
💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "[POLICY] Ephemeral anchors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26403#discussion_r1223507389)
needs to return a code like `TX_LOW_FEE` from bip331 post-rebase
💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "[POLICY] Ephemeral anchors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26403#discussion_r1223508972)
should return code like `TX_LOW_FEE` re:BIP331 to avoid blinding relay of an otherwise valid parent
📝 bufo24 opened a pull request: "contrib: docs fix --import-keys flag on verify.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27840)
When trying to run `./contrib/verify-binaries/verify.py` with the --import-keys flag, I figured that there was a little mistake in the docs. It stated that the `--import-keys` flag has to be provided after the arguments, instead of before. It was stated correctly in the rest of the README, but not in this particular case.

I tested this on macOS 13.4 as well as on Debian 10.
💬 furszy commented on pull request "Return EXIT_FAILURE on post-init fatal errors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27708#issuecomment-1583329813)
Reworked the diff a bit more [check](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b0267f23b1cb732693c485e9b242ff3b004804bd..500d3e901c146e3a2f6ef04456c53fe3a5302c11).

It's because `AppInit` can return true without initializing the shutdown pipe. e.g. when the user starts bitcoind with a `-h` or `-version`. Which leads to an assertion error at the `WaitForShutdown` call.

Probably we should refactor `AppInit` in the future, I liked where you were going.
💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "Fee estimation: avoid serving stale fee estimate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27622#discussion_r1223602575)
I agree, fixed it.
⚠️ hazeycode opened an issue: "Stuck chainstate when utxo_snapshot.sh fails"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27841)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

IBD/chainstate gets stuck if utxo_snapshot.sh fails. No new blocks are downloaded. Restarting bitcoind does not help. Reindex is required to repair.

utxo_snapshot.sh output:
```
Rewinding chain back to height 788440 (by invalidating 000000000000000000052ac0ce9b8f1a2e7691771e6386f770432c9443dc2af7); this may take a while
Generating UTXO snapshot...
error code: -8
error message:
/ho
...
💬 hazeycode commented on issue "Stuck chainstate when utxo_snapshot.sh fails":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27841#issuecomment-1583653267)
Another way to repair is to run another snapshot at an earlier height.
👍 willcl-ark approved a pull request: "Fee estimation: avoid serving stale fee estimate"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27622#pullrequestreview-1471390869)
re-ACK efe5f373e1

Changes look good. Left a nit not to be addressed unless you re-touch :)

I also checked how much time the new tests were adding to feature_fee_estimation.py, as this is often one of the longest-running tests on my machine. It looks like it's <=1second, so that seems fine.
💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "Fee estimation: avoid serving stale fee estimate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27622#discussion_r1223942269)
clarity nit:

```suggestion
/** fee_estimates.dat that are more than 60 hours (2.5 days) will not be read,
```
💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "contrib: docs fix --import-keys flag on verify.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27840#issuecomment-1584128546)
ACK ceb0168
💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "doc: Clarify -datacarriersize, add -datacarriersize=2 tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27832#issuecomment-1584130903)
Rebased for green CI
💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "p2p: Stop relaying non-mempool txs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27625#issuecomment-1584131245)
Rebased for green CI
⚠️ Dadudidas opened an issue: "Yeah, good point. I'll do a follow-up on this since it's out of scope for the already large change."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27842)
Yeah, good point. I'll do a follow-up on this since it's out of scope for the already large change.

_Originally posted by @jamesob in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24232#discussion_r923829116_
💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "Yeah, good point. I'll do a follow-up on this since it's out of scope for the already large change.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27842#issuecomment-1584164568)
Please try and open clear and descriptive issues, not like this.

If you want to open an issue that `PopulateAndValidateSnapshot()` should be better documented, then please feel free.