💬 gdiscord commented on issue "Guix build script incorrectly reporting there is no Mac SDK":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29449#issuecomment-1952323962)
Should have used the appropriate screenshot.

The issue is indeed puzzling, and as said I've tried various kinds of combinations with the same result.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Guix build script incorrectly reporting there is no Mac SDK":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29449#issuecomment-1952331461)
"Please place the *extracted*, *untarred* SDK there"

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "wallet, gui: bugfix, getAvailableBalance skips selected coins":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26699#discussion_r1494464086)
It seems all these lines of code might be replaced with `ConfirmMessage(nullptr, 500ms);`.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "net: enable v2transport by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29347#issuecomment-1952335331)
Needs `bips.md` updated?

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "Silent payment index (for light wallets and consistency check)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28241#discussion_r1494466102)
Ok, I see. If the taproot activation height is removed we decide not to use that specific height at all but rather one that is around the time the BIP was proposed or even to some time around now? The specifics of the approach have been changed a lot and so even if someone already has experimented with it in the last few months the current iteration likely won't work for them to be able to spend their funds, no @josibake ? Had we discussed adding the start height as a parameter, that may be anot
...

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "refactor: bitcoin-config.h includes cleanup"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29404#pullrequestreview-1888286089)
ACK 9d1dbbd4ceb8c04340927f5127195dc306adf3fc

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "Add issuer-selected opt-in txn / pckg policy checks"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29448#pullrequestreview-1888289535)
It's not really clear to me what you're trying to achieve in this PR - some kind of way for transactions to specify what their ancestor/descendant limits are? There are no tests, the CI is failing, and a lot of the code comments are incorrect/irrelevant to the adjacent lines.

I also don't really understand the motivation from the PR description. There seems to be a large number of goals and issues that aren't clearly defined. Would you mind writing something a bit clearer and more concise?

💬 gdiscord commented on issue "Guix build script incorrectly reporting there is no Mac SDK":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29449#issuecomment-1952354717)
My apologies, but this are the steps I followed from the ReadMe page: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/contrib/macdeploy/README.md#sdk-extraction

1. apt install cpio
2. git clone https://github.com/bitcoin-core/apple-sdk-tools.git
3. python3 apple-sdk-tools/extract_xcode.py -f Xcode_15.xip | cpio -d -I
4. ./contrib/macdeploy/gen-sdk '/path/to/Xcode.app'

The resulting file from step 4 is what I've placed in the SDKs folder.

Is there another step after 4 to get untarred S
...

💬 furszy commented on pull request "rpc: Drop migratewallet experimental warning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28037#issuecomment-1952357099)
> I have also in the meantime tested a branch from @furszy which reduced migration time from 30 mins to 80 seconds 👀

That's great!
@maflcko could you also try it please?.

Branch: https://github.com/furszy/bitcoin-core/tree/2024_wallet_batch_migration_multi_insert.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Guix build script incorrectly reporting there is no Mac SDK":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29449#issuecomment-1952372719)
See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29449#issuecomment-1952277332

💬 gdiscord commented on issue "Guix build script incorrectly reporting there is no Mac SDK":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29449#issuecomment-1952383520)
Nice - working now.
thanks.

Perhaps worth updating the ReadMe to include the extra step?

5. tar xfz Xcode-15.0-15A240d-extracted-SDK-with-libcxx-headers.tar.gz

💬 paplorinc commented on issue "Proposal: Adopt simple SPDX-License-Identifier Across Bitcoin Codebase":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29445#issuecomment-1952396447)
The original repo still retains the git history and you're free to copy it to any other repo and modify whatever you want.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "net: make the list of known message types a compile time constant":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29421#discussion_r1494531483)
I meant just for the array, for now.

```cpp
inline constexpr std::array g_all_net_message_types{std::to_array<std::string_view>({

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Guix build script incorrectly reporting there is no Mac SDK":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29449#issuecomment-1952428742)
Sure, but I think this should be mentioned in the doc that describes how to use the `tar.gz`, not in the doc on how to generate the `tar.gz`, or maybe just put the command in the error message?

📝 paplorinc opened a pull request: "Replace Custom `MAC_OSX` Macro with Standard `__APPLE__` for Consistent macOS Detection"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29450)
This PR aims to standardize and simplify macOS-specific checks within our codebase by replacing the custom-defined `MAC_OSX` macro with the universally recognized `__APPLE__`macro.

Unlike `MAC_OSX`, which is not predefined and requires manual definition, `__APPLE__` is automatically defined by the compiler on all Apple platforms, streamlining our build process.

We already use `__APPLE__` in several parts of our own codebase, such as in [tinyformat.h](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Replace Custom `MAC_OSX` Macro with Standard `__APPLE__` for Consistent macOS Detection":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29450#issuecomment-1952449002)
Missing `build: ` prefix in title?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: add missing tests for Assumeutxo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29428#issuecomment-1952480346)
You'll have to remove the TODO on the top of the file as well, when the test was added?

💬 maflcko commented on issue "test: Write assumeutxo tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28648#issuecomment-1952482196)
@paplorinc You can refer to the issue description, which says:

> Refer to the TODO comments in ./test/functional/feature_assumeutxo.py, or to the uncovered lines in the AssumeUtxo code via a coverage report. For example, https://maflcko.github.io/b-c-cov/total.coverage/src/validation.cpp.gcov.html

💬 gdiscord commented on issue "Guix build script incorrectly reporting there is no Mac SDK":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29449#issuecomment-1952482519)
It can be in both the doc and error message if possible?

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Guix build script incorrectly reporting there is no Mac SDK":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29449#issuecomment-1952484352)
Sure, pull requests welcome :)