👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "msvc: Define the same `QT_...` macros as in Autotools builds"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29044#pullrequestreview-1774842750)
ACK 1a5dae630df1eef9eac51557b2f1c5dba0924953

Thank you @hebasto, this fixes the build failure of #28960.

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "The logo icon doesn't show properly under Wayland":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/781#issuecomment-1849838605)
I think Wayland is much stricter about loading the icon from the `.desktop` file (which must have an exactly matching name). I didn't test this any further, but running Wayland on my system with an appropriate `.desktop` file installed I do get the correct icon:


That said, I added my .desktop file manually a while ago, and I notice now that on my machine the code
...

⚠️ kallerosenbaum opened an issue: "bumpfee doc about incrementalfee is incorrect"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29053)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

The documentation for the `bumpfee` command states

"At a minimum, the new fee rate must be high enough to pay an additional new relay fee (incrementalfee
returned by getnetworkinfo) to enter the node's mempool."

While not strictly incorrect (the "At a minimum" part), it is very misleadi
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "msvc: Define the same `QT_...` macros as in Autotools builds"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29044)

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "kernel: Remove dependency on CScheduler"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28960)

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "kernel: Remove dependency on CScheduler"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28960)

💬 darosior commented on pull request "kernel: Remove dependency on CScheduler":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28960#issuecomment-1849887372)
This shouldn't have been closed i think @fanquake.

📝 fanquake reopened a pull request: "kernel: Remove dependency on CScheduler"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28960)
By defining a virtual interface class for the scheduler client, users of the kernel can now define their own event consuming infrastructure, without having to spawn threads or rely on the scheduler design.

Removing `CScheduler` also allows removing the thread and exception modules from the kernel library.

To make the `CMainSignals` class easier to use from a kernel library perspective, remove its global instantiation and adopt RAII practices.

---

This PR is part of the [libbitcoinke
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Silent payment index (for light wallets and consistency check)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28241#issuecomment-1849912410)
Rebased and added a simple functional test, which includes a (hopefully) deterministic tweak.

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "fuzz: make FuzzedDataProvider usage deterministic":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29043#issuecomment-1849934451)
Nice find!

I am wondering if this is worth it at this point, since we only fuzz with llvm based compilers. If we had infrastructure that was fuzzing with gcc (e.g. compiling with afl++'s `afl-g++-fast`) then this would clearly make sense. I think if we are going to care about this, we should also add a gcc fuzz CI job and have a linter (maybe a custom clang-tidy plugin?) that checks for dependence on evaluation order (which would probably be a good idea in any case).

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1422369475)
I think just direct parents should be fine - presumably any further generations should have the same version anyway.
I'll continue using `m_ancestors` here since it's what we have access to, but will leave a comment about this.

👍 brunoerg approved a pull request: "fuzz: p2p: Detect peer deadlocks"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29009#pullrequestreview-1775003092)
ACK 9f265d88253ed464413dea5614fa13dea0d8cfd5

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "fuzz: Improve fuzzing stability for txorphan harness"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29031)

💬 kallewoof commented on pull request "signet: fixing mining for OP_TRUE challenge":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29032#issuecomment-1849995402)
This looks reasonable to me, although I'm not super familiar with all the code being changed.

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "wip: Split fuzz binary":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29010#issuecomment-1849996651)
> Hmm, if I switch to this PR and try compiling, I get bunches of linker errors about multiple definitions, eg

Yea weird, it compiles for me with `afl-clang-lto` but not with regular clang.

> Dropping from 14GB to 3.6GB seems worthwhile for oss-fuzz (and similar), but not worthwhile otherwise to me

I listed more benefits in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28971. It is not gonna have a noticeable effect for contributors that aren't regularly fuzzing.

> to get a list of fuzz
...

👍 stickies-v approved a pull request: "mempool: Don't sort in entryAll"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29019#pullrequestreview-1775071503)
re-ACK f761f0306b092c06cecd239060b36cd0ba45fa2c, very nice

💬 josibake commented on pull request "Silent Payments: Implement BIP352":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28122#issuecomment-1850053280)
> @josibake can you add the following helper functions?
>
> * [ ] `CouldBeSilentPayment(CTransactionRef tx)`: checks that it's not a coinbase and that at least one of the outputs is taproot
> See [Silent payment index (for light wallets and consistency check) #28241 (comment)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28241#discussion_r1331881346)
>
> * [ ] `bool GetSilentPaymentsTweakedPubKeySum(std::vector<CTxIn>, std::map<COutPoint, Coin>, CPubKey& tweaked_key) nodiscard`
...

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "fuzz: Improve fuzzing stability for txorphan harness"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29031#pullrequestreview-1775144033)
concept ACK 15f5a0d0c8ce6b306cdeba6a4777334b848a76aa

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1422485145)
the other variant you're referring to here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1421614259 should cover that case.

💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "wallet: skip BnB when SFFO is enabled":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28994#issuecomment-1850133512)
The BnB search test was passing before as well, because it was expecting that BnB prefer the two input solution over the one input solution at low feerates, and deducting the fee from the target instead of adding the fee to the inputs caused the two input solution to have a better waste score than the one input solution: because the target was reduced the one input solution had a waste that was higher by one input fee than that of the two input solution.