💬 hebasto commented on pull request "refactor: Readable widget naming for debug window":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/790#issuecomment-1903714850)
@s1Sharp

Thank you for your contribution!

However, I'm going to close this PR following our [CONTRIBUTING Guide](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#refactoring) and to avoid unnecessary conflicts with other PRs.

✅ hebasto closed a pull request: "refactor: Readable widget naming for debug window"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/790)

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "depends: Do not override `CFLAGS` when building SQLite with `DEBUG=1`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29287#issuecomment-1903721883)
Could this be the root cause for #27222?

📝 theStack converted_to_draft a pull request: "libconsensus: adapt API header to be compliant to ANSI C"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28661)
libconsensus currently can't be used in projects that still use the [ANSI C](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANSI_C) (=ISO C/C89/C90) standard, as the header uses single-line-comments which are only supported since C99:

```
$ echo '#include "./src/script/bitcoinconsensus.h"\nint main() {}' > consensus_test.c
$ gcc -ansi -c consensus_test.c
In file included from consensus_test.c:1:
./src/script/bitcoinconsensus.h:1:1: error: C++ style comments are not allowed in ISO C90
1 | // Copyright
...

💬 theStack commented on pull request "libconsensus: adapt API header to be compliant to ANSI C":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28661#issuecomment-1903733414)
> Could draft for now, dependant on the outcome of #29189?

Agree, done.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1461685021)
Ok, I'll clarify that a second child is rejected regardless of fee(rate).

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "Support self-hosted Cirrus workers on forks (and multi-user)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29274#issuecomment-1903768404)
> I'm somewhat puzzled why Knots (cc @luke-jr) and Inquisition (cc @ajtowns) are not running into the same issues. But I guess there's at least two differences:

Inquisition disabled all the automatic tests except the trivial linter when cirrus imposed limits earlier in the year, and tests are only run manually by reviewers. Haven't worked out what it should be doing, so don't have suggestions to offer, but interested to see what the resolution here is.

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "berkeley database failed to open database environment":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29286#issuecomment-1903822925)
Hello @freezoloto. Can you confirm that there is a wallet database directory at that path? This error is primarily thrown when that directory does not exist, but can be thrown for other reasons, so it would be good to confirm that it does exist before trying to investigate further.

On Linux (or WSL) this could be done by running something like this:

```bash
will in ~ :
$ cd .bitcoin

will in ~/.bitcoin:
$ ls -al
.rw------- 75 will 22 Jan 09:15 .cookie
.rw------- 0 will 12 Jan 1
...

💬 moemat12 commented on pull request "wallet: guard against dangling to-be-reverted db transactions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29253#discussion_r1461745349)
src/wallet/sqlite.h

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "p2p: adaptive connections services flags":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28170#discussion_r1461750521)
> CConMan cannot access the chain state, the sync progress, in-flight block requests

I don't see how the connection opening logic needs access to any of those things.

> number of compact block filters

Bitcoin Core doesn't download compact block filters.

> v2 encrypted connections, etc.

Connman is doing this right now using our service flags and the service flag of the potential new peer. It has all the data it needs.

> Essentially, in my view, the approach is resource-wasteful
...

✅ jerzybrzoska closed a pull request: "Update build-unix.md - add boost library"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29290)

💬 jerzybrzoska commented on pull request "Update build-unix.md - add boost library":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29290#issuecomment-1903861175)
> The docs suggest to install or build boost one line below already:
>
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/651fb034d85eb5db561bfd24b74f7271417defa5/doc/build-unix.md?plain=1#L49-L51
>
> Does that not work for you?

Yes it does.

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "init: handle empty settings file gracefully"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29144#pullrequestreview-1836318583)
ACK d664eab66ecfa1d318b11de5deafb04b1e3c4c06, tested on Ubuntu 23.10.

nano-nit: There are some complains from [`clang-format-diff.py`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/contrib/devtools#clang-format-diffpy).

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1461755517)
Specify the restrictions is only for unconfirmed v3 transaction here and other places.
```suggestion
// v3 only allows 1 unconfirmed parent and 1 unconfirmed child.
```

🤔 ismaelsadeeq reviewed a pull request: "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#pullrequestreview-1836296374)

> I've consolidated the rules in the BIP ([bitcoin/bips#1541](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1541)), agree it's easier to understand this way.

I've looked at the BIP and this implementation matches the specification in the BIP

> I'll delete or clean up the version3_transactions.md doc here now that the information has been moved to the BIP.

+1

Changes since my [last review](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1dd62c3df4856c36bfc610f700684852772dd9f7..f3d4916eacfbcef61b
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Make (Read/Write)BinaryFile work with char vector":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29229#issuecomment-1903992967)
> > I haven't looked in detail, but writing bytes to a file can be achieved with one line of code
>
> That would be a nice simplification. Almost (?) to the point of not needing these helper functions.

WriteBinaryFile is unused right now either way outside of tests, so I guess this could be removed regardless, as future code can just use the in-line one-liner?

💬 furszy commented on pull request "script/sign: avoid duplicated signature verification after signing (+introduce signing benchmarks)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28923#discussion_r1461879554)
Would suggest to use `FlatSigningProvider` instead (see #28307).
It will also save you one extra `GetScriptForDestination` call per created key.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "init: handle empty settings file gracefully":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29144#issuecomment-1904050547)
> nano-nit: There are some complaints from [clang-format-diff.py](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/contrib/devtools#clang-format-diffpy).

Done.

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "init: handle empty settings file gracefully"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29144#pullrequestreview-1836522437)
re-ACK e9014042a6bed8c16cc9a31fc35cb709d4b3c766.

📝 Christewart opened a pull request: "Add test for negative transaction version w/ CSV to tx_valid.json"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29291)
This PR adds a static test vector corresponding to the bug found in various implementations of the bitcoin protocol discovered by @dergoegge

For more information see:

https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/disclosure-btcd-consensus-bugs-due-to-usage-of-signed-transaction-version/455