💬 fanquake commented on pull request "util: Work around ParseHex gcc cross compiler bug":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27218#issuecomment-1458200190)
Does anyone have a link to an upstream issue? Is this a regression in GCC 11, that has been fixed in 12/13?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "util: Work around ParseHex gcc cross compiler bug":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27218#issuecomment-1458210175)
It is not fixed in gcc-12, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25227#issuecomment-1456215491. gcc-13 exists, so it may be possible to test. I have not attempted to reduce the test case, nor did I dig deeper to find out if this is a compiler bug or bug in our code, because I don't think we have a choice here: If there are two equivalent versions of the same code, but one doesn't compile, we should pick the one that compiles.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "util: Work around ParseHex gcc cross compiler bug":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27218#issuecomment-1458213858)
To clarify, even if the workaround is not needed in gcc-13 or gcc-14, I think we shouldn't revert it. I see it as a permanent workaround.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "util: Work around ParseHex gcc cross compiler bug":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27218#issuecomment-1458234945)
> gcc-13 exists, so it may be possible to test.

Still broken in GCC 13.0.1. `riscv64-linux-gnu-g++-13 13.0.1 20230215`

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "util: Work around ParseHex gcc cross compiler bug"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27218)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Add wallet method to detect if a key is "fresh"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27216#discussion_r1127978416)
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6502838134636544:
```bash
wallet/test/scriptpubkeyman_tests.cpp:142:48: error: argument name 'index' in comment does not match parameter name 'pos' [bugprone-argument-comment,-warnings-as-errors]
descriptor.descriptor->ExpandFromCache(/*index=*/10, descriptor.cache, scripts3, provider);
^
./script/descriptor.h:137:38: note: 'pos' declared here
virtual bool ExpandFromCache(int pos, const DescriptorCache& r
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Add wallet method to detect if a key is "fresh"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27216#issuecomment-1458300719)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27216/checks?check_run_id=11804958852
```bash
Assertion failed: lock cs_wallet not held in ./wallet/wallet.h:444; locks held:
'cs_KeyStore' in wallet/scriptpubkeyman.cpp:1185 (in thread 'test')
```

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "wallet: 26032 followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27180#issuecomment-1458303075)
> Followups for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26032. So far nothing major.

Are you expecting there to be more? I really only see the one followup comment in #26032.

📝 pablomartin4btc opened a pull request: "doc: update broken links on developer-notes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27220)
References to `utilstrencodings` and `lint-locale-dependence.sh` where incorrect, updating them accordingly.

Also, adding another reference to util function [`LocaleIndependentAtoi`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/util/strencodings.h#L108-L118), which is related with the updated section of the guide.

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "Add wallet method to detect if a key is "fresh"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27216#discussion_r1128006272)
oooh thanks, didn't realize those comments were parsed by anything!

👍 willcl-ark approved a pull request: "util: Use steady clock in SeedStrengthen, FindBestImplementation, FlushStateToDisk"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27189)
ACK fa1b4e5c3

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "refactor: Split util/system into exception, shell, and fs-specific files":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25152#issuecomment-1458326647)
I redid this work (fixing more of the includes and splitting out a few more functions) and have a branch over here: https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/pull/10

@Empact I'm still keen on moving this work forward. If you don't have the time right now, I'll attribute the commits to you and try to get my branch merged instead.

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "bumpfee RPC not working as expected since 0.19.0.1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18240#issuecomment-1458349062)
@yurayakimenko is this still a problem for you?

💬 sipa commented on pull request "util: Use steady clock in SeedStrengthen, FindBestImplementation, FlushStateToDisk":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27189#issuecomment-1458356777)
Concept ACK

👍 christ79ma approved a pull request: "refactor: Split util/system into exception, shell, and fs-specific files"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25152)

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "Assertion failed! rpcwallet.cpp Line 3838":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18944#issuecomment-1458360103)
I think this issue can be closed. In addition to #18974 the assertion has been replaced with a much safer check:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/d4ebdceaef130e4b68e5d5db67eecfefd24b4239/src/wallet/rpc/addresses.cpp#L668-L674

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "Assertion failed! rpcwallet.cpp Line 3838":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18944#issuecomment-1458386274)
yeah, `CHECK_NONFATAL` doesn't crash the program, but it also aborts the current RPC

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "Assertion failed! rpcwallet.cpp Line 3838":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18944#issuecomment-1458387054)
It would be good to know if this is still an issue with a recent version of Bitcoin Core?

💬 yurayakimenko commented on issue "bumpfee RPC not working as expected since 0.19.0.1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18240#issuecomment-1458387690)
@pinheadmz No, this problem was resolved. Thanks a lot!

✅ MarcoFalke closed an issue: "bumpfee RPC not working as expected since 0.19.0.1"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18240)