💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "Add used balance to overview page":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/775#issuecomment-2073729945)
What is the use case here? (And the avoid_reuse flag in general...)

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "doc: Suggest only necessary Qt packages for installation on OpenBSD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29947#issuecomment-2073755514)
Concept ACK. It's nice that OpenBSD provides separate modules for Qt nowadays.

💬 HaSan1y commented on issue "help i think my core is hacked":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29944#issuecomment-2073763151)
> This is your change output. Look for more information on https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com
i dont understand? what do you mean with 'change output'?? what do you mean with look for more information?
elaborate please?
anyway who are you? did you even read my problem?
i know what is inside that link https://explorer.btc.com/btc/transaction/c5069dd52612dd07cfff6a2c587356497a2f8e7489923376a92420850fe27d09
im saying something is wrong with the transaction. did you perheps programm to steal
...

💬 IAmAdamRest commented on issue "Crashes in v27 on Windows 10 and 11":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29916#issuecomment-2073776190)
Having this same issue. Where do I find my logs?

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "cli: Detect port errors in rpcconnect and rpcport":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29521#discussion_r1577085955)
Yes, that sounds reasonable. Removed the "18443" test and pushed.

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "test: Run framework unit tests in parallel":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29771#issuecomment-2073796442)
Rebased and pushed.

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "Bugfix: JSON-RPC request Content-Type is application/json":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29946#issuecomment-2073812562)
IIRC we do *return* `application/json` content type, so this at least makes it symmetric. id be against enforcing this (because so many clients already specify it wrong), but the example would be better this way.

💬 Umiiii commented on pull request "test: add missing comparison of node1's mempool in MempoolPackagesTest":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29941#issuecomment-2073825129)
@glozow could you review again and see if it meets the requirements now ..?

💬 Umiiii commented on pull request "test: add missing comparison of node1's mempool in MempoolPackagesTest":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29941#discussion_r1577099806)
Could you please clarify what you meant by "indented wrong"? I believe these lines are intended to follow the same indentation pattern as the rest of the file. If there's a specific indentation style that should be applied here, I'd appreciate your guidance.

🤔 tdb3 reviewed a pull request: "contrib: rpcauth.py - Add new option (-json) to output text in json format"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29433#pullrequestreview-2018620939)
Concept ACK.

Looks like these commits (4f746716c008216ff01da48ccfda559308b4232e, 1606590bbffa46f88fa6e4333960e82b919efd8a, and f2fb13bb1ac392abc4ccd656b025aa017b12060e) should be squashed to clean up and tell a concise story of update.

Seems to work well:
```
$ ./rpcauth.py
usage: rpcauth.py [-h] [-j] username [password]
rpcauth.py: error: the following arguments are required: username

$ ./rpcauth.py -h
usage: rpcauth.py [-h] [-j] username [password]

Create login credentials for
...

💬 Umiiii commented on pull request "test: add missing comparison of node1's mempool in MempoolPackagesTest":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29941#discussion_r1577104003)
But I agreed with you. Those lines are self explanatory. I removed the comments.

✅ Umiiii closed a pull request: "test: add missing comparison of node1's mempool in MempoolPackagesTest"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29941)

📝 Umiiii opened a pull request: "test: add missing comparison of node1's mempool in MempoolPackagesTest"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29948)
#29941 Recreated a pull request because there was a conflict. Trying to resolve the conflict but the old one automatically closed.

Add missing comparison for TODO comments in `mempool_packages.py`

Also, notice that the ancestor size limits and descendant size limits actually implemented in #21800 , so I removed the todo for those two size limits.

@glozow @instagibbs

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "help i think my core is hacked"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29944)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "JSON-RPC request Content-Type is application/json":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29946#issuecomment-2073990266)
Removed bugfix given this is a doc/test only change.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "contrib: rpcauth.py - Add new option (-json) to output text in json format":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29433#issuecomment-2074059554)
Please squash your commits according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#squashing-commits

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Crashes in v27 on Windows 10 and 11":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29916#issuecomment-2074064411)
It could make sense to run this in a debugger (such as gdb) to get a stacktrace, but I am not sure what debuggers exist on Windows.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "~/.bitcoin (which is a softlink to a separate vmware virtual drive) dir is now almost 1tb":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29909#issuecomment-2074070581)
> Now i've set it up without that "txindex" parameter = enabled... still the same issue...

Unsetting txindex does not delete the txindex from storage.

Can you please share the sizes of the largest folders in the datadir?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Remove redundant `-datacarrier` option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29942#issuecomment-2074103437)
> Another difference from `-chain` is that it is possible to set both `-datacarrier=0` and a positive `-datacarriersize` without so much as a warning (`-chain` immediately crashes when in conflict with another option).

Right. However, after this pull request, the same is true if `-datacarrier=0` is set in a config file. (See #15021). That is, it is possible that this is silently ignored for a user that has it intentionally set.

> Here are also a few examples of users confused about the two
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "doc: Suggest only necessary Qt packages for installation on OpenBSD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29947#issuecomment-2074119271)
> Verified on a fresh install of OpenBSD 7.5 that these two packages are the minimum requirement to build the GUI:

Please update the version number in line 3 of the doc as well. I don't know if there is a difference between 7.4 and 7.5, but it can't hurt to be accurate here.