💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: batch erase procedures and improve 'EraseRecords' performance":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29403#discussion_r1482000338)
In 0dba0b6de03c0c79bb09296b913729ec8eb75aca "wallet: bdb batch 'ErasePrefix', do not create txn internally"

Instead of `assert`ing, I would prefer if this did `if (!Assume(activeTxn)) return false` so we didn't cause nodes to crash if a transaction were missing for whatever reason. `Assume` should still catch this for developers.

💬 hernanmarino commented on pull request "test, assumeutxo: Add test to ensure failure when mempool not empty":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29394#discussion_r1482025759)
Will do.

🤔 achow101 reviewed a pull request: "wallet: batch and simplify addressbook migration process"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26836#pullrequestreview-1868662211)
ACK 1f177ff9a6ab229bd6486941e46daa92ab22b622

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: batch and simplify addressbook migration process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26836#discussion_r1482012171)
In c154e0940b6518487e29de96eb24ecf1839bd3fe "refactor: SetAddrBookWithDB, signal only if write succeeded"

nit: `__func__` is not necessary

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: batch and simplify addressbook migration process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26836#discussion_r1482012269)
In c154e0940b6518487e29de96eb24ecf1839bd3fe "refactor: SetAddrBookWithDB, signal only if write succeeded"

nit: `__func__` is not necessary

⚠️ realsetvin opened an issue: "Bitcoin ubuntu ppa, outdated"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29406)
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.

https://launchpad.net/~bitcoin/+archive/ubuntu/bitcoin

Last update, 2018. Ubuntu 24 is coming soon. Any plans to update this?

### Is your feature related to a problem, if so please describe it.

_No response_

### Describe the solution you'd like

_No response_

### Describe any alternatives you've considered

_No response_

### Please leave any additional context

_No response_

💬 josibake commented on pull request "wallet: batch and simplify addressbook migration process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26836#issuecomment-1932797896)
reACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26836/commits/1f177ff9a6ab229bd6486941e46daa92ab22b622

📝 theuni opened a pull request: "RFC: build: remove confusing and inconsistent disable-asm option"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29407)
1. It didn't actually disable asm usage in our code. Regardless of the setting, asm is used in random.cpp and support/cleanse.cpp.
2. The value wasn't forwarded to libsecp as a user might have reasonably expected.
3. We now have the DISABLE_OPTIMIZED_SHA256 define which is what disable-asm actually did in practice.

If there is any desire, we can hook DISABLE_OPTIMIZED_SHA256 up to a new configure option that actually does what it says.

Additionally, this is one of the last (THE last?) re
...

💬 theuni commented on pull request "RFC: build: remove confusing and inconsistent disable-asm option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29407#issuecomment-1932804445)
Ping @hebasto @fanquake @TheCharlatan for buildsystem eyes.
Ping @sipa for crypto concept ACK/NACK.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: simplify and batch zap wallet txes process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28987#discussion_r1482044079)
In d26a28508d5322fe7c29b3642dcf3a17b0ea31f1 "wallet: batch ZapSelectTx db operations"

This should explicitly call `TxnAbort` before returning as otherwise we will get extraenous logs about the tx being aborted before batch is destroyed.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: simplify and batch zap wallet txes process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28987#discussion_r1482045052)
In d26a28508d5322fe7c29b3642dcf3a17b0ea31f1 "wallet: batch ZapSelectTx db operations"

I'm not sure if `NONCRITICAL_ERROR` is really the right return code. It seems like something has gone critically wrong if `TxnCommit` were to fail.

💬 theuni commented on pull request "RFC: build: remove confusing and inconsistent disable-asm option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29407#issuecomment-1932807361)
Also ping @dergoegge for fuzzer interactions ACK/NACK.

💬 ryanofsky commented on issue "assumeutxo: nTx and nChainTx violations in CheckBlockIndex":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29261#issuecomment-1932814360)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29261#issuecomment-1917639308

> So it seems like there is a larger bug here

Looking into this more, I think the bug where `pprev->HaveNumChainTxs` can return true on this line even when "all parents are BLOCK_VALID_TRANSACTIONS" would be pretty hard to trigger and the consequences would not be too bad.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/cad2df24b396be403f13f372ec48ea14a90d7f06/src/validation.cpp#L3604-L3605

The main consequence would
...

💬 hebasto commented on issue "Bitcoin ubuntu ppa, outdated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29406#issuecomment-1932817501)
From PPA description:
> NOT MAINTAINED.

💬 realsetvin commented on issue "Bitcoin ubuntu ppa, outdated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29406#issuecomment-1932827360)
Can it at least be updated every few years?

💬 realsetvin commented on issue "Bitcoin ubuntu ppa, outdated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29406#issuecomment-1932828277)

💬 realsetvin commented on issue "Bitcoin ubuntu ppa, outdated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29406#issuecomment-1932830802)
Linux and bitcoin are both open source systems, having substantial overlap. It makes it difficult to educate new people when nothing works. Our peer to peer digital cash should seek to be usable, otherwise people will continue to prefer exchanges over self custody and education.

💬 epiccurious commented on pull request "test: Fix SegwitV0SignatureMsg nLockTime signedness":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29400#issuecomment-1932874890)
Tested ACK fab15723b0518acbb1015e64df47dcac0187e92f.

💬 realsetvin commented on issue "Bitcoin ubuntu ppa, outdated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29406#issuecomment-1932884048)
> From PPA description:
>
> > NOT MAINTAINED.

I wanted to say something else, you knew this comment would not be helpful. Obviously im opening this issue because it has not been maintained for a long time. Does this mean bitcoin is a dead project? Whats the deal?

💬 achow101 commented on issue "Proposed Timeline for Legacy Wallet and BDB removal":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20160#issuecomment-1932891713)
Seems unlikely that the bdb parser stuff will make it into 27.0, so pushed those back another release.