💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "refactor/p2p: Decouple CNode from PeerManagerImpl::MaybeDiscourageAndDisconnect":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33983#issuecomment-3597265384)
> Can you explain this a bit better?
>
> > An (ugly) initial POC can be seen here: https://github.com/theuni/bitcoin/tree/multiprocess_p2p. Note that it will likely not be rebased because it was not intended to be used as-is. Instead, chunks will be extracted and PR'd separately.
>
> Did you cherry-pick a commit from this branch? If not, why not? If yes, why did the author change?

I did not cherry-pick commits from this branch but now looking at it, I prefer the approach here instead. W
...

👍 willcl-ark approved a pull request: "[30.x] Backports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33609#pullrequestreview-3525704408)
ACK b2cb203af05743ea5c130913afa7549c02d1bae5

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "Cluster mempool followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33591#discussion_r2577658987)
Given the new implementation that doesn't even use `visited()`, I think can be removed anyway (in another followup)

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33591#discussion_r2577689691)
Done

💬 janb84 commented on pull request "depends, doc: Add `tcl` as build dependency for `sqlite` package":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33975#issuecomment-3597369323)
This doesn't work for me on ubuntu 24.04, if I only install what is specified and then execute:
```sh
gmake -C depends sqlite CC=gcc-14 CXX=g++-14
```
it will fail to find with the error state above, I needed to install g++:
```sh
apt install g++
```

But it will install g++13 so I needed to run :
```sh
gmake -C depends sqlite CC=gcc-13 CXX=g++-13
```

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33591#discussion_r2577692236)
Fixed!

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33591#discussion_r2577693180)
Fixed, and made a few other small style edits as well.

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster mempool followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33591#discussion_r2577693764)
Done.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >40% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#discussion_r2577730632)
> So it kinda' reproduces that it doesn't make sense to do more than 4

Looks like it doesn't make sense to do more than 2?

👍 instagibbs approved a pull request: "Cluster mempool followups"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33591#pullrequestreview-3525882615)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33591/commits/b8d279a81c16fe9f5b6d422e518c77344e217d4f

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >40% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#discussion_r2577771108)
maybe, but leveldb is basically empty, we shouldn't take it *too* seriously

📝 sipa opened a pull request: "doc: improvements to doc/descriptors.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33986)
This brings doc/descriptors.md up to date:
* Stop trying to exhaustively list all RPCs that involve descriptors. They're used everywhere.
* Stop trying to give the history of descriptor support, we have release notes for that.
* Mention that wallets are now built around descriptors (especially with legacy wallets gone).
* Mention `musig()` descriptors in the specification part.
* Reference the relevant output descriptor BIPs in the text.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "policy: Remove individual transaction <minrelay restriction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33892#discussion_r2577778753)
changed my mind; it's good to have v2 ephemeral dust coverage since we don't have much/any?

🤔 sipa reviewed a pull request: "Cluster mempool followups"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33591#pullrequestreview-3525911467)
ACK b8d279a81c16fe9f5b6d422e518c77344e217d4f

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "guix: use GCC 14.3.0 over 13.3.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33775#issuecomment-3597776607)
I tried comparing debug info from GCCs passes, the first one that seems to differ is `objsz1`:
```diff
--- bitcoin_wallet.dir.aarch64/db.cpp.cpp.108t.objsz1
+++ bitcoin_wallet.dir.x86_64/db.cpp.cpp.108t.objsz1
@@ -9967,15 +9967,15 @@

Computing maximum dynamic object size for _38:
Computing maximum object size for _38:
Computing maximum dynamic object size for _143:
Computing maximum object size for _143:
Computing maximum dynamic object size for _215:
_127: maximum dynamic obj
...

👍 marcofleon approved a pull request: "[30.x] Backports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33609#pullrequestreview-3526105740)
Lgtm, ACK b2cb203af05743ea5c130913afa7549c02d1bae5

💬 bialy39439 commented on issue "[flatpak] - I cannot choose or change datadir when running from flatpak":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/24612#issuecomment-3597848572)
I'm facing same issue.

Solution for me is to add --datadir argument afer org.bitcoincore.bitcoin-qt in .desktop file, eg:

`/usr/bin/flatpak run --branch=stable --arch=x86_64 --command=bitcoin-qt --file-forwarding org.bitcoincore.bitcoin-qt --datadir=/path/to/somewhere`

📝 0xB10C opened a pull request: "2025 11 self advertise in separate message"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33987)
wip; PR for CI

✅ 0xB10C closed a pull request: "2025 11 self advertise in separate message"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33987)

💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "2025 11 self advertise in separate message":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33987#issuecomment-3597864819)
should have been against my fork...