✅ achow101 closed an issue: "bitcoin-tx replaceable value should be optional, but isn't"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28638)

💬 theuni commented on pull request "refactor: Remove gmtime*":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29081#issuecomment-1856412027)
> util/time.cpp:60:24: error: ‘year_month_day’ in namespace ‘std::chrono’ does not name a type

It would have been too easy if it had just worked in the real world :p

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Remove gmtime*":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29081#issuecomment-1856419623)
Jup, a bump to g++-11 should be fine, but currently not possible because the guix build is still on g++-10 🫠

💬 furszy commented on pull request "fuzz: coinselection, improve `min_viable_change`/`change_output_size`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28372#issuecomment-1856422920)
> So, instead of passing coin_params.m_cost_of_change and 0, we should be passing coin_params.min_viable_change and coin_params.m_change_fee. Just fixing one or the other was insufficient, but when I replace both all my fuzz crashes pass.

Yeah, thats good.
It is because `cost_of_change`, the BnB upper bound, includes `change_fee` while `min_viable_change` does not.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "guix: use GCC 12.3.0 to build releases":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27897#issuecomment-1856423621)
Yes, iirc. I'll get back to this now that it's becoming more of a blocker. I've bed sick of continually dealing with/having to track dow problems in gui and similar non-critical code, when it comes to these kinds changes.

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "p2p: attempt to fill full outbound connection slots with peers that support tx relay":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28538#discussion_r1427157449)
done

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "p2p: attempt to fill full outbound connection slots with peers that support tx relay":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28538#issuecomment-1856427821)
[d636e38 ](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/d636e38d79a4c3950da91090b1f787163f11e24d)to 2a17ac3:
Renamed `GetExtraFullOutboundCount` to `GetFullOutboundDelta` since it can now return negative values, plust small doc change in the test.

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "p2p: attempt to fill full outbound connection slots with peers that support tx relay":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28538#discussion_r1427158995)
done now!

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "test: add TestNode wait_until helper":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29070#issuecomment-1856431717)
ACK bf0f7dbec6590a54ec890e7a2ca5d85427995334

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "test: add TestNode wait_until helper"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29070)

✅ achow101 closed an issue: "test: Add TestNode wait_until helper"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29029)

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "fuzz: coinselection, improve `min_viable_change`/`change_output_size`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28372#pullrequestreview-1782561357)
Left a comment

💬 furszy commented on pull request "fuzz: coinselection, improve `min_viable_change`/`change_output_size`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28372#discussion_r1427177813)
> This will narrow down the range of output sizes being fuzzed.

Agree.
You don't need to create valid known destinations, we only care about the change output size. All yours:
```diff
diff --git a/src/wallet/test/fuzz/coinselection.cpp b/src/wallet/test/fuzz/coinselection.cpp
--- a/src/wallet/test/fuzz/coinselection.cpp (revision ccb25a1ddc1f79f432a6718604f01ed97dced15f)
+++ b/src/wallet/test/fuzz/coinselection.cpp (date 1702581796902)
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
#include <test/util/setup_commo
...

💬 theuni commented on pull request "[WIP, DO NOT MERGE!!11111!!!!!] build: Require libc++-16 or later":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29077#discussion_r1427188598)
More missing in v10: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29081#issuecomment-1856419623

⚠️ LeoSpyke opened an issue: "test: feature_index_prune.py timeout failure"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29082)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

The `test/functional/test_runner.py --extended --jobs=8` command raises an `AssertionError: Block sync timed out after 60s` when running the `feature_index_prune.py` suite.

Also tried with `--jobs=4`.

Very similar to #27091.

### Expected behaviour

I expected the test to complete successfully.

### Steps to reproduce

```bash
git clone https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

# instal
...

💬 maflcko commented on issue "test: `feature_index_prune.py` timeout failure":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29082#issuecomment-1856485017)
Does it pass if you increase the timeout factor? See `./test/functional/test_runner.py --help | grep factor`?

💬 RandyMcMillan commented on pull request "Make provably unsignable standard P2PK and P2MS outpoints unspendable.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28400#issuecomment-1856492483)
Concept ACK

⚠️ sarthak13gupta opened an issue: "Not able to build and compile on macos"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29083)
Hey there , I'm facing these issues.
I ran these commands

`./autogen.sh`
`./configure --disable-bench --disable-fuzz-binary --enable-debug --without-gui --enable-suppress-external-warnings`
` make`




<img width="1440" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-15 at 1 02 35 AM" src="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/assets/74540123/8d96fcda-36c0-4a06-934f-a83e9a96b543">
<img width="1434" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-15 at 1 02 48 AM" src="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/assets/74540123/0656acd4
...

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Not able to build and compile on macos":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29083#issuecomment-1856500865)
Did you run `make clean`?

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Get rid of shutdown.cpp/shutdown.h, use SignalInterrupt directly":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28051#issuecomment-1856505048)
ACK 6db04be102807ee0120981a9b8de62a55439dabb

Code seems fine, but I'm not familiar enough with this area to say whether this is the right approach or if there are any side effects that haven't been thought of.