⚠️ Wwwwwwuuuuu opened an issue: "Please help me figure out why this transaction is not confirmed?"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29351)
### Issues, reports or feature requests related to the GUI should be opened directly on the GUI repo

- [X] I still think this issue should be opened here

### Report

Please help me figure out why this transaction is not confirmed?8f62acf0f0ddc3e38db2e8ec2755f4e54aa5bf616d685e2f3361155fc9d44125

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "test: fixes flaky wallet_import_rescan functional test"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29350#pullrequestreview-1852354792)
See #29343.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "test: fixes flaky wallet_import_rescan functional test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29350#discussion_r1471953382)
you are overwriting the random number.

💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "wallet: Add CoinGrinder coin selection algorithm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27877#issuecomment-1917887536)
The `p2p_v2_earlykeyresponse.py` test is unrelated.

✅ willcl-ark closed an issue: "Please help me figure out why this transaction is not confirmed?"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29351)

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "Please help me figure out why this transaction is not confirmed?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29351#issuecomment-1917891085)
(It looks like the fee is a bit low for current mempool conditions.)

This issue tracker is used to track technical issues related to the Bitcoin Core code base.

General bitcoin questions and/or support requests are best directed to the [Bitcoin StackExchange](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/) or the #bitcoin IRC channel on the [Libera Chat](https://libera.chat/) network.

For proposed protocol changes you can post to the bitcoin-dev [mailing list](https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail
...

💬 sr-gi commented on pull request "test: fixes flaky wallet_import_rescan functional test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29350#discussion_r1471957427)
Oh wait, that was me debugging, my bad

✅ sr-gi closed a pull request: "test: fixes flaky wallet_import_rescan functional test"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29350)

💬 sr-gi commented on pull request "test: fixes flaky wallet_import_rescan functional test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29350#issuecomment-1917894121)
> See #29343.

Ups, I missed that. Closing

🤔 sr-gi reviewed a pull request: "test: fix wallet_import_rescan unrounded minimum amount"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29343#pullrequestreview-1852388419)
ACK [26ad2ae](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29343/commits/26ad2aeb29dd0875e8509917ddaa586997e977d2)

I found this and got to a similar patch independently

💬 sr-gi commented on pull request "test/BIP324: functional tests for v2 P2P encryption":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24748#issuecomment-1917933292)
> WIP branch

Is this consistently failing for you (or can you at least reproduce it)? I can see it also failing on some of the current open PRs but I can not get my head around why. This should only happen if `PeerEarlyKey` receives any data from the node before sending anything at all, or after sending the network magic but before sending the remaining initial bytes + garbage.

To my understanding, the node should not have been able to parse enough data to be replying (with either v1 or v2
...

🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "p2p: adaptive connections services flags"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28170#pullrequestreview-1852266688)
Light Code Review ACK 27f260aa6e04f82dad78e9a06d58927546143a27

I don't have a strong opinion on the interface issue (I read the discussion and can see both points of view), but I do think that having a global variable `g_initial_block_download_completed` that lives in `protocol.h` and is updated dynamically from `net_processing` is an ugly layer violation too, so removing that is an important improvement from the architectural point of view.

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "p2p: adaptive connections services flags":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28170#discussion_r1471891912)
could also have a check for `HasAllDesirableServiceFlags` each time `GetDesirableServiceFlags` is checked.

💬 mzumsande commented on issue "assumeutxo: nTx and nChainTx violations in CheckBlockIndex":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29261#issuecomment-1917980494)
> So it seems like there is a larger bug here

Yes, that could be the case. Since I don't see how this can correct without restarting after the blocks are connecte to the chain and no longer assumed valid, I wonder if that could make the existing check https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/cad2df24b396be403f13f372ec48ea14a90d7f06/src/validation.cpp#L4949 fail.
Since it is very slow to sync with `-checkblockindex=1` even on signet (though commit https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28339/
...

💬 furszy commented on pull request "p2p: adaptive connections services flags":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28170#discussion_r1472063375)
Sure, noted. As it is a nit and would love to move forward, will leave it for a small follow-up. Thanks!

📝 mzumsande opened a pull request: "test: fix intermittent failure in p2p_v2_earlykeyresponse"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29352)
The test fails intermittently, see https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6403578080788480?logs=ci#L3521 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24748#issuecomment-1916996716.
I think it's because of a race between the python NetworkThread and the actual
test, which will both call `initiate_v2_handshake`. I could reproduce it by adding a sleep into `initiate_v2_handshake` after the line `self.sent_garbage = random.randbytes(garbage_len)`.

Fix this by waiting for the first `initiate_v2_handshake` to
...

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "test/BIP324: functional tests for v2 P2P encryption":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24748#issuecomment-1918064080)
see #29352 for a test (and a way to reproduce it).

💬 theuni commented on pull request "RFC: Deprecate libconsensus":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29189#issuecomment-1918078386)
> Yeah, that's exactly what I was expecting fwiw.

Done.

📝 theStack opened a pull request: "test: p2p: adhere to typical VERSION message protocol flow"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29353)
This PR addresses a quirk in the test framework's p2p implementation regarding the version handshake protocol:

Currently, the VERSION message immediately after an inbound connection (i.e. TestNode outbound connection) is made. This doesn't follow the usual protocol flow where the initiator sends a version first, the responder processes that and only then responds with its own version message. Change that accordingly by only sending immediate VERSION message for outbound connections (or after
...

👍 andrewtoth approved a pull request: "p2p: adaptive connections services flags"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28170#pullrequestreview-1852723966)
ACK 27f260aa6e04f82dad78e9a06d58927546143a27