💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet, sqlite: Encapsulate SQLite statements in a RAII class":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33033#discussion_r2535564673)
Changed to catch the exception.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet, sqlite: Encapsulate SQLite statements in a RAII class":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33033#discussion_r2535566375)
Done, returns an empty string now.

But the only time `sqlite3_column_text` should return NULL is if the column contains a NULL value. Empty strings are not NULL.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet, sqlite: Encapsulate SQLite statements in a RAII class":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33033#discussion_r2535566840)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet, sqlite: Encapsulate SQLite statements in a RAII class":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33033#discussion_r2535567070)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Added rescan option for import descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31668#discussion_r2535608194)
It's unnecessary to log this kind of information. This would be more appropriate as a comment, but it's really not necessary at all (yes this test does that elsewhere, but it shouldn't).

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Added rescan option for import descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31668#discussion_r2535612380)
This log is unnecessary.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Added rescan option for import descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31668#discussion_r2535612003)
It's not necessary to generate `COINBASE_MATURITY` blocks since we're not spending those coins. This also makes the previously existing comment incorrect as that states only 10 blocks are being mined.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Added rescan option for import descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31668#discussion_r2535613879)
I don't think this test case is necessary, it doesn't seem to me to be testing anything that isn't already being tested.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Feature: Use different datadirs for different signets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29838#issuecomment-3543990625)
Are you still working on this? This has needed rebase for a few months now.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "ArgsManager: support subcommand-specific options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28802#issuecomment-3543995583)
Are you still working on this? This has needed rebase for a few months now.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "psbt: clarify PSBT, PSBTInput, PSBTOutput unserialization flows":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32419#issuecomment-3544000265)
ACK d31158d3646f3c7e4832b9ca50f6ffe02800ff4c

📝 theStack opened a pull request: "test: add `-alertnotify` test for large work invalid chain warning"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33893)
This PR adds missing test coverage for the `LARGE_WORK_INVALID_CHAIN` fork warning, checked with the `-alertnotify` option:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/ead849c9f177a3a175a22b35fa864b4b37fb9934/src/validation.cpp#L2033-L2040
Found that this is missing during review of #32587. The test works by first creating a bunch of invalid blocks, that are first announced by headers and then submitted fully in reverse (invalid tip first), in order to set `m_best_invalid` to that value, finally l
...

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "rpc, doc: clarify the response of listtransactions RPC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32737#issuecomment-3544015605)
ACK c27629702285029add897b89247ab9493aede22d

📝 waketraindev opened a pull request: "net: Remove unused `local_socket_bytes` variable in `CConnman::GetAddresses()`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33894)
The local_socket_bytes variable was never used. Removed it to clean up dead code.

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "psbt: clarify PSBT, PSBTInput, PSBTOutput unserialization flows"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32419)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "rpc: Fix internal bug in descriptorprocesspsbt when encountering invalid signatures":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33014#issuecomment-3544078142)
A test is definitely necessary here to avoid future regressions. @rkrux's proposed test would be fine.

The commit message has a duplicate line that needs to be removed.

🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "net: Remove unused `local_socket_bytes` variable in `CConnman::GetAddresses()`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33894#pullrequestreview-3474798471)
ACK 4d893c0f46055218d6a2b3d24fbce9f0fb6ddc92

I forgot to remove this in 94db966a3bb52a3677eb5f762447202ed3889f0f (the variable was used before that).

👍 theStack approved a pull request: "net: Remove unused `local_socket_bytes` variable in `CConnman::GetAddresses()`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33894#pullrequestreview-3474865518)
ACK 4d893c0f46055218d6a2b3d24fbce9f0fb6ddc92

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "contrib: turn off compression of macOS SDK to fix determinism (across distros)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32009#issuecomment-3544229304)
> One comment i was about to give is "why use a .tar.gz instead of .tar, that's the only way to be sure to remove dependency on zlib", but that's a much more spread out code change.

I don't think that's true. Our guix build documentation states that the tarball needs to be extracted into `depends/SDK` (or some directory that `SDK_PATH` points to), and `depends/hosts/darwin.mk` uses the path to the extracted directory, not the tarball itself. Other than in the docs, I don't think the tarball i
...

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "kernel, validation: Refactor ProcessNewBlock(Headers) to return BlockValidationState":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33856#discussion_r2535875154)
in 1f589e1af162c2c2705f0404496c549785f2f545 could `!state.IsValud()` be `state.IsInvalid()`?