✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "wallet: Allow users to create a wallet that encrypts all database records"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28142)

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "wallet: Have the wallet store the key for automatically generated descriptors"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Have the wallet store the key for automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728#issuecomment-1879428075)
Superseded by #29130

I don't think there's a reason to come back to this design, but the branch won't be deleted so we can reopen if desired.

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "wallet: rpc to add automatically generated descriptors"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25907)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: rpc to add automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25907#issuecomment-1879428850)
Superseded by #29130

I don't think there's a reason to come back to this design, but the branch won't be deleted so we can reopen if desired.

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "wallet: reenable sethdseed for descriptor wallets"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29054)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: reenable sethdseed for descriptor wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29054#issuecomment-1879430043)
Superseded by #29136

💬 sanket1729 commented on pull request "RFC: Deprecate libconsensus":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29189#issuecomment-1879451346)
concept ACK. cc @danielabrozzoni @notmandatory (BDK group)

This is the list of [dependencies](https://crates.io/crates/bitcoinconsensus/reverse_dependencies) that rely on libbitcoinconsensus.

I believe most of them use libbitcoinconsensus for testing script execution, with the only exception of `floresta`? While I found it beneficial for cross-testing complex scripts, the absence of core policy rule checking became a notable drawback.

We've transitioned our projects to utilize the [bitc
...

💬 desi-bitcoiner commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#issuecomment-1879545603)
Concept ACK

🤔 ismaelsadeeq reviewed a pull request: "rpc: validate fee estimation mode case insensitive"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29175#pullrequestreview-1807294664)
CI failure is unrelated?

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "rpc: validate fee estimation mode case insensitive":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29175#discussion_r1443655175)
This should test for a failed send RPC call because `estimatemode` is unset.

It is passing because `arg_conf_target` was not given, currently `estimatemode` is only validated when a confirmation target is passed.
I omit `fee_rate` because you should not pass both confirmation target and fee rate.

```suggestion
self.test_send(from_wallet=w0, to_wallet=w1, amount=1,
arg_estimate_mode=mode, arg_conf_target=1, add_to_wallet=False, expect_error = (-8, 'Specify e
...

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "rpc: validate fee estimation mode case insensitive":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29175#discussion_r1443657365)
`estimatemode` is validated when passed with confirmation target
```suggestion
res = self.test_send(from_wallet=w0, to_wallet=w1, amount=1,
arg_conf_target=1, arg_estimate_mode=mode, add_to_wallet=False
)
assert_equal(res["complete"], True)

```

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "rpc: validate fee estimation mode case insensitive":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29175#discussion_r1443655347)
nit
```suggestion
assert_equal(res["complete"], True)
```

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "rpc: validate fee estimation mode case insensitive":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29175#discussion_r1443657718)
I think we should also return error when `estimatemode` is passed without confirmation target and a a test for the test case ?
Maybe in its own commit or a follow-up PR.
```suggestion
}
if (options["conf_target"].isNull() && !options["estimate_mode"].isNull()) {
throw JSONRPCError(RPC_INVALID_PARAMETER, "estimate_mode should be passed with conf_target");
}
```

💬 1440000bytes commented on issue "Witness scripts being abused to bypass datacarriersize limit (CVE-2023-50428)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187#issuecomment-1879598180)
Since CVE ID is used to validate this as a [vulnerability](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408#issuecomment-1848850110), I wanted to share that [cve.org](https://cve.org) has added "disputed" tag for CVE-2023-50428. This tag is used when there are differences of opinion about whether its a vulnerability based on the CVE program's definition.


A note has also been added to CVE by MITR
...

⚠️ dev7ba opened an issue: "Failed load mempool when restarting bitcoind"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29193)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

After a clean shutdown, bitcoind failed to load the majority of mempool transactions from mempool.dat. I keep a node up for months for webpage mempoolexplorer.com with options:
maxmempool=2000
mempoolfullrbf=1
mempoolexpiry=999999
to maximize the number of txs in my mempool.
The node is currently loading and saving mempool txs when shutdown ok (but with only a small number of them ins
...

💬 glozow commented on issue "Failed loading mempool when restarting bitcoind":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29193#issuecomment-1879631591)
Hard to guess without logs (which would tell us why transactions failed). How much time elapsed between saving the mempool.dat and loading it? Mempool transactions that had confirmed during that time would be marked as "failed."

And to clarify, are you restarting with the same config? What are mempoolexpiry and maxmempool now? (Is it possible you have less space or expired old transactions?)

> Not sure if the problem was writing the txs into mempool.dat or reading them.

Must be loading
...

💬 dev7ba commented on issue "Failed loading mempool when restarting bitcoind":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29193#issuecomment-1879634958)
> How much time elapsed between saving the mempool.dat and loading it?
Only a few minutes.

> And to clarify, are you restarting with the same config? What are mempoolexpiry and maxmempool now?

I restarted with the same config. Checked I have enough disk space.

> Must be loading given the "X failed" log line.
Yes, I see.
> Maybe try upgrading to a newer version?
I can't test it anyway, I'm trying to contact people with a "full mempool", And asking them to restart the node and see wha
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Weaken serfloat tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29192#discussion_r1443727513)
(Just a nit, no need to change anything, because `is_iec559` is already asserted globally, so the two other asserts can also happen globally. In any case, this will "fix itself" with C++23 at some far point in the future :sweat_smile: )

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Fix LTO functionality":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28876#issuecomment-1879659386)
FWIW, the https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29185 makes this PR outdated.