✅ glozow closed a pull request: "rpc: permit any ancestor package through submitpackage"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28813)

💬 Ayush170-Future commented on pull request "fuzz: wallet, add target for `Crypter`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28074#discussion_r1389464021)
This is out of the blue, but the reason I struggle to compile after each change is that I'm currently using a Windows 10 OS. And I can't run Wallet Fuzz tests on my machine for some unknown reason. I've attempted Fuzz tests outside of Wallet code, and they run fine. I've also experimented with other Windows machines, and this issue seems to persists across all of them.

So, I've been using an Ubuntu VM for code testing. I've gone through [Makefile.test.include](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitco
...

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "script: utxo_snapshot.sh error handling":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27845#issuecomment-1805827248)
> Sorry for the delayed response @pablomartin4btc. Thanks for looking at this. Unfortunately, I don't have a time to work on this further at the moment, so feel free to take baton.

Thanks @hazeycode, no worries, please close this PR, I'll create a new one and will add you as a co-author in the commit. Cheers!

✅ glozow closed a pull request: "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711)

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "script: utxo_snapshot.sh error handling"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27845)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Avoid intermittent failures in feature_init":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28831#issuecomment-1805828533)
> If someone is working on a follow-up introducing the random perturbation, feel free to ping me as reviewer.

Same here, happy to review

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "fuzz: wallet, add target for `Crypter`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28074#discussion_r1389467446)
Seems fine to report an issue about this, with exact steps to reproduce.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Simplify CTxMempool/BlockAssembler fields, remove some external mapTx access":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28391#issuecomment-1805841682)
re-ACK 3b73acb3ec678f5099aa0d77178a0b0d50670c2b 🏎

<details><summary>Show signature</summary>

Signature:

```
untrusted comment: signature from minisign secret key on empty file; verify via: minisign -Vm "${path_to_any_empty_file}" -P RWTRmVTMeKV5noAMqVlsMugDDCyyTSbA3Re5AkUrhvLVln0tSaFWglOw -x "${path_to_this_whole_four_line_signature_blob}"
RUTRmVTMeKV5npGrKx1nqXCw5zeVHdtdYURB/KlyA/LMFgpNCs+SkW9a8N95d+U4AP1RJMi+krxU1A3Yux4bpwZNLvVBKy0wLgM=
trusted comment: re-ACK 3b73acb3ec678f5099aa
...

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "depends: remove `PYTHONPATH` from config.site"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28845)
We no-longer need this, as we no-longer build python packages.

Guix Build (aarch64):
```bash
92c922498b9d7e68742355653cc84317d0f0947e8fdd012488c9875e8b54e03c guix-build-95aab1f02784/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
634a6a7a82efcb86eb7e875aa4534bd5646e80ee21e951d9624ca7ff78fc82f5 guix-build-95aab1f02784/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-95aab1f02784-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
2dd4305e325723cac4b0b8e1803d48f3d7eb6fa2fd49c0a980ff907bb3e5da2b guix-build-95aab1f02784/output/aarch
...

💬 vasild commented on pull request "p2p: make block download logic aware of limited peers threshold":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28120#discussion_r1389521297)
Ok, lets use an example (from the newly added test):

`vToFetch = [2 ... 129]`
`state->pindexBestKnownBlock->nHeight = 301`
So the peer's height is `301`. We can assume they can provide blocks `[13 ... 301]`.
At the first iteration of the loop `pindex->nHeight` is 2 (`vToFetch[0]`).
The code ends up with `return;` because `301 - 2 > 286` and we never request any blocks from that peer.

Shouldn't we request blocks `[13 ... 301]` instead?

💬 vasild commented on pull request "p2p: make block download logic aware of limited peers threshold":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28120#discussion_r1389526651)
The test would fail if run standalone without the preceding tests. The failure is on line 78: `self.sync_blocks([miner, pruned_node])`. That is because the test relies on the pruned node being connected to the miner which is indeed the case - some leftover from previous tests. This diff makes it succeed when run standalone:

```diff
--- i/test/functional/p2p_node_network_limited.py
+++ w/test/functional/p2p_node_network_limited.py
@@ -54,25 +54,24 @@ class NodeNetworkLimitedTest(BitcoinTest
...

💬 L0laL33tz commented on pull request "test: Avoid intermittent failures in feature_init":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28831#issuecomment-1805920351)
Cool, Im working on a new follow-up excluding the leveldb from randomization @maflcko @theStack

👍 stickies-v approved a pull request: "refactor: Simplify CTxMempool/BlockAssembler fields, remove some external mapTx access"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28391#pullrequestreview-1724824472)
ACK 3b73acb3ec678f5099aa0d77178a0b0d50670c2b

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "refactor: Simplify CTxMempool/BlockAssembler fields, remove some external mapTx access":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28391#discussion_r1389421589)
nit: can use `CTxMemPoolEntryRef`

<details>
<summary>git diff on 3b73acb3ec</summary>

```diff
diff --git a/src/kernel/mempool_entry.h b/src/kernel/mempool_entry.h
index 85c2195b13..7c905ca4f4 100644
--- a/src/kernel/mempool_entry.h
+++ b/src/kernel/mempool_entry.h
@@ -176,4 +176,6 @@ public:
mutable Epoch::Marker m_epoch_marker; //!< epoch when last touched, useful for graph algorithms
};

+using CTxMemPoolEntryRef = CTxMemPoolEntry::CTxMemPoolEntryRef;
+
#endif // BITC
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "depends: remove `PYTHONPATH` from config.site":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28845#issuecomment-1806001689)
When was this last used?

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: remove `PYTHONPATH` from config.site":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28845#issuecomment-1806003917)
> When was this last used?

When we were building DMGs for macOS.

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "refactor: Simplify CTxMempool/BlockAssembler fields, remove some external mapTx access":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28391#discussion_r1389594932)
Will push this, seems easy enough to re-ACK.

💬 kashifs commented on pull request "BIP324 integration":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28331#discussion_r1389597811)
@sipa, am I missing something or should this line read:

`node_1_info = self.nodes[1].getpeerinfo()`

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "refactor: Simplify CTxMempool/BlockAssembler fields, remove some external mapTx access":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28391#issuecomment-1806011505)
Updated 3b73acb3ec678f5099aa0d77178a0b0d50670c2b -> 4dd94ca18f6fc843137ffca3e6d3e97e4f19377b ([simplifyMemPoolInteractions_15](https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/tree/simplifyMemPoolInteractions_15) -> [simplifyMemPoolInteractions_16](https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/tree/simplifyMemPoolInteractions_16), [compare](https://github.com/TheCharlatan/bitcoin/compare/simplifyMemPoolInteractions_15..simplifyMemPoolInteractions_16))

* Applied @stickies-v's [patch](https://github.com/bitc
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Simplify CTxMempool/BlockAssembler fields, remove some external mapTx access":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28391#discussion_r1389606616)
If you put this in the global namespace, might as well remove the duplicate from the inner scope?