🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "doc: i2p documentation updates"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27937)

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "contrib: add macOS test for fixup_chains usage"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27999#pullrequestreview-1506825726)
ACK 7f96638723a08edf4341a2f4c06b2aa41378fcf7, I have reviewed the code and the patch, and they look OK.

✅ hebasto closed a pull request: "refactor: Move sock from util to common"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27989)

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "wallet: Implement independent BDB parser":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26606#discussion_r1247687691)
After testing with a valid database in the fuzzing corpus, I noticed that I messed up the `m_args`, `m_node.args`, `gArgs` division again ([see here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25055)) - sorry about that. I have a basic patch here, but feel free to commit a more elegant fix:

```diff
diff --git a/src/wallet/test/fuzz/wallet_bdb_parser.cpp b/src/wallet/test/fuzz/wallet_bdb_parser.cpp
index aabde093b6..a1acb95178 100644
--- a/src/wallet/test/fuzz/wallet_bdb_parser.cpp
+++ b/sr
...

📝 MarcoFalke opened a pull request: "util: Allow FastRandomContext::randbytes for std::byte, Allow std::byte serialization "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28012)
I need this for some stuff, but it should also be useful by itself for other developers that need it.

📝 TheCharlatan opened a pull request: "doc: Fix verify-binaries link in contrib README"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28013)

🤔 Zero-1729 reviewed a pull request: "doc: Fix verify-binaries link in contrib README"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28013#pullrequestreview-1506947168)
crACK ab8f6733577555d98668e7708638367a1bfeb023

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "ci: re-enable gui tests for s390x"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28014)
These work for me now. If they still don't work in other setups, maybe we can better document the issues.

```bash
time FILE_ENV="./ci/test/00_setup_env_s390x.sh" ./ci/test_run_all.sh
...
Running tests: coins_tests from test/coins_tests.cpp
PASS: qt/test/test_bitcoin-qt
Running tests: coinstatsindex_tests from test/coinstatsindex_tests.cpp
...
Stop and remove CI container by ID
+ docker container kill 617bef8accb87530e5fbb03ff07b3b9f0aa9e3030d4da424c9612d153ab98dbf
617bef8accb87530e5f
...

👍 theStack approved a pull request: "doc: Fix verify-binaries link in contrib README"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28013#pullrequestreview-1506960567)
ACK ab8f6733577555d98668e7708638367a1bfeb023
(also verified that the other links in the same file are still working)

👍 theStack approved a pull request: "test: Rename EncodeDecimal to serialization_fallback"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28011#pullrequestreview-1506967526)
ACK fabd34873c80ed26311809110fef463227d87fee

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "ci: re-enable gui tests for s390x":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28014#issuecomment-1614488108)
lgtm ACK 9be4565c2db6d7a420d032d5c41843d473ed32d1 , didn't test

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "doc: Fix verify-binaries link in contrib README"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28013)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: Rename EncodeDecimal to serialization_fallback":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28011#issuecomment-1614494737)
Follow up to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27884#discussion_r1238316325

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: Use TestNode datadir_path or chain_path where possible":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27884#discussion_r1247740433)
See #28011.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: Rename EncodeDecimal to serialization_fallback"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28011)

💬 ErikDeSmedt commented on issue "Improving fee estimation accuracy":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27995#issuecomment-1614527967)
The highest paying transactions that are 'stuck' in the mempool are useful for fee estimation. For reasonably small transactions the fee is just below what you need to pay to get included.

This method isn't affected by users who are over-paying and is robust against miners being paid out-of-band.

However, it does respond slowly to changes in mempool conditions

💬 darosior commented on pull request "Miniscript: always treat unsatisfiable scripts as insane":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27997#issuecomment-1614549683)
Sure, i'll just move the check for satifiability to the descriptor parsing logic.

Just one comment on the definition of "sane".
> I think the definition for "sane" that we want is "does the apparent policy of this miniscript match its actual semantics" - if you drop all wrappers and naively replace all fragments with their corresponding policy, is that guaranteed to match the policy of the actual script.

It's not what we have at the moment though? For instance `older(4)` meets this criterion b
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "guix: use GCC 12.2.0 to build releases":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27897#issuecomment-1614573568)
> macOS builds are failing because libtapi fails to configure against the newer GCC.

FWIW, libtapi configuration step succeeds for the Guix master branch (94ac93042f09b4ba68b7b64ed1feeebd3dab1ea4). However, the further build step fails.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: make startup more efficient":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27607#discussion_r1247821121)
> Noticed this while I was rebasing https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24230, but one side effect of this commit is now CustomInit will be called unnecessarily when the index can't start up because there is a pruning violation. This doesn't seem ideal, but it probably not worth worrying about. It would be good to mention the change in the commit description, though.

Hmm, I hold the opposite view on this matter. I believe it is beneficial to call `CustomInit` within the base class's `Init
...

📝 MarcoFalke opened a pull request: "fuzz: Generate rpc fuzz targets individually"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28015)
The `rpc` fuzz target was added more than two years ago in e45863166f5e44cc2c380f4667812fcd3cddc73b. However, the bug https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27913 was only found recently. Thus, it is pretty clear that fuzz engines can't deal with a search space that is too broad and can be extended in too many directions.

Fix that by limiting the search space to each RPC method name and then iterate over all names, instead of letting the fuzz engine do the iteration.

With this, the bug
...