💬 BrandonOdiwuor commented on pull request "doc: explain what the wallet password does":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28974#discussion_r1574452537)
fixed

💬 BrandonOdiwuor commented on pull request "doc: explain what the wallet password does":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28974#issuecomment-2068957042)
@fjahr I have integrated `wallet-passphrase` doc into `managing-wallets` doc. Regarding https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28974#pullrequestreview-1887288612, I had created a follow up PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29245 (which was closed)

@maflcko is https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29245 close to your suggestion on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28974#issuecomment-1855661692

💬 setavenger commented on pull request "Silent payment index (for light wallets and consistency check)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28241#issuecomment-2068972677)
Is there an easy way to run this pull-request version without compromising my existing full-node data and needing to resync everything? Then I could probably get to a comparison in the next days.

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "depends: Remove Qt build-time dependencies":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29923#issuecomment-2068994077)
Example: failure on Ubuntu 22.04:
```
$ ./bitcoin-qt
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libxcb-xfixes.so.0: undefined symbol: xcb_xfixes_set_client_disconnect_mode_checked
qt.qpa.xcb: Unable to load required libraries, skipping initialization of XCB backend.
qt.qpa.plugin: Could not load the Qt platform plugin "xcb" in "" even though it was found.
This application failed to start because no Qt platform plugin could be initialized. Reinstalling the application may fix this problem.

Available platform
...

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Signed Integer Overflow in GetBlockSubsidy at block height 2,147,483,647 (During Epoch 10,227, halving 10,226) could increase the block subsidy, total supply, or potentially halt the network":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29928#issuecomment-2069002528)
> Addressing bugs only when they become operationally critical may not be the most prudent approach.

I did not say or imply this. I said that fixing an issue in a code base that is expected to stop working in 2106, for an issue that is expected to happen in thousands of years is useless at best. In practice, a fix now would most likely result in a increased runtime load or increased memory load, along with the risk of a consensus and chain split. Also, the C++ language is evolving rapidly ri
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Silent payment index (for light wallets and consistency check)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28241#issuecomment-2069017109)
@setavenger this PR should not break your node. It just creates an `indexes/silent_payments` directory in your data dir, which you can safely delete later.

💬 Kino1994 commented on issue "Signed Integer Overflow in GetBlockSubsidy at block height 2,147,483,647 (During Epoch 10,227, halving 10,226) could increase the block subsidy, total supply, or potentially halt the network":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29928#issuecomment-2069021051)
So Bitcoin will cease to function in 2106 if the other issue is not fixed beforehand, making it senseless to consider this one first. Oh! Got it.

Thank you.

💬 Sjors commented on issue "CMake-based build system tracking issue":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28607#issuecomment-2069038272)
What's next?

It would be useful to have a link to build instructions too, not just the cheat cheat.

In noticed that in your `hebasto/cmake-staging` branch the macOS instructions still assume autotools.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "test: Fix multiprocess CI timeout in p2p_tx_download":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29926#discussion_r1574527033)
I haven't been able to reproduce this issue and am mostly guessing here, but if it's a `setmocktime` problem, perhaps just do a `node.setmocktime(0)` to reset it a few lines up (shouldn't impact the test except maybe make it take 2sec longer)?

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "test: Fix multiprocess CI timeout in p2p_tx_download"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29926#pullrequestreview-2014393208)
(cc @theStack, indeed looks like it's from #29827)

💬 glozow commented on pull request "test: Fix multiprocess CI timeout in p2p_tx_download":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29926#discussion_r1574531190)
I'm not convinced that the +300 would make a difference since the timing for getdata isn't variable like announcements are (which was the case in #28321)

💬 glozow commented on pull request "test: Don't fetch orphan parent when parent is in orphanage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29915#discussion_r1574537327)
`wait_for_parent_requests` already checks this, since it requires that the list of getdatas match exactly (nothing additional allowed)?

💬 Sjors commented on issue "Apple Clang 14.0 lacks support for `std::is_eq`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29918#issuecomment-2069067883)
I was going to suggest changing `doc/dependencies.md` to clarify the minimum clang version is 14.0.3 rather than 14.0, but #29165 bumps it to 15.0 anyway.

💬 hebasto commented on issue "CMake-based build system tracking issue":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28607#issuecomment-2069074476)
@Sjors

> What's next?
>
> It would be useful to have a link to build instructions too, not just the cheat cheat (or just add the standard `mkdir build`, `cmake ..` incantations to the cheat cheat).
>
> In noticed that in your `hebasto/cmake-staging` branch the macOS instructions still assume autotools.

WIP :)

Your testing and reviewing https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/pull/163 will be much appreciated!

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Apple Clang 14.0 lacks support for `std::is_eq`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29918#issuecomment-2069098524)
> I was going to suggest changing `doc/dependencies.md` to clarify the minimum clang version is 14.0.3 rather than 14.0, but #29165 bumps it to 15.0 anyway.

That would not be accurate. Clang 14 is indeed supported, see also https://godbolt.org/z/61seKv74b

The problem here is that Apple Clang 14.0.0 is apparently not based on llvm 14.0.0. I don't have further insights into Apples versioning nonsense, so I can't help here.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "build: Bump clang minimum supported version to 15":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29165#issuecomment-2069100533)
Can you add a note to `doc/build-osx.md` that users of macOS < 13 need to install `clang` via homebrew?

My Intel iMac from 2017 runs macOS 13.6.6 and has clang 15.0.0. It's installed at `/usr/bin/clang` so not Homebrew.

Xcode 14.3.1 and newer ship with clang 15.0:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcode#Xcode_11.0_-_14.x_(since_SwiftUI_framework)

The system requirements for that is macOS Ventura 13.0 or later: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode-release-notes/xcode-14_3_1-relea
...

💬 Sjors commented on issue "Apple Clang 14.0 lacks support for `std::is_eq`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29918#issuecomment-2069107675)
I see, so Apple clang needs to be >=14.0.3, but for other operating systems 14.0 is fine.

💬 setavenger commented on pull request "Silent payment index (for light wallets and consistency check)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28241#issuecomment-2069108058)
Ok, I see. Then I'll be able to get to this a bit faster.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build: Bump clang minimum supported version to 15":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29165#issuecomment-2069109399)
> Can you add a note to `doc/build-osx.md` that users of macOS < 13 need to install `clang` via homebrew?

#https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29918 is an unrelated issue existing on current master, so I think a separate pull request would be more appropriate. Also, I don't have or use macOS/Apple, so someone else creating that pull request would be beneficial.

💬 cbergqvist commented on pull request "test: adds outbound eviction functional tests, updates comment in ConsiderEviction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29122#discussion_r1574574102)
nit: Noticed you renamed `test_node` -> `peer` above (based off https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29122#discussion_r1531465214) but not inside `test_outbound_eviction_blocks_relay_only()`.

(Was diffing against older head (59affd0bf9042d746a6b32739edb0cd45d28d569)).

Might be worth changing once you rebase on top of #29736.