💬 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.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "script: throw disabled err for op_ver and its variants":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28169#issuecomment-2074193707)
I think it is hard to follow this pull request. The motivation (pull request description) starts with "Edit:", and then has a list of reasons, where the second one is struck through. I don't think it makes it easy for reviewers, if they have to re-construct themselves why this pull request was created, and which parts of it were based on misunderstandings. The pull request description ends up in the merge commit, so it should be accurate and on point, not be used as a scratch-pad.

I personall
...