💬 paplorinc commented on pull request "test: use assert_greater_than util":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30019#discussion_r1590014213)
```suggestion
assert_greater_than(202, tx['locktime'])
```

💬 paplorinc commented on pull request "test: use assert_greater_than util":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30019#discussion_r1590015182)
```suggestion
assert_greater_than(size, 6400)
```

💬 paplorinc commented on pull request "test: use assert_greater_than util":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30019#discussion_r1590015754)
```suggestion
assert_equal(len(txTo.vin), len(spent_utxos))
```

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "dbwrapper: Bump LevelDB max file size to 128 MiB to avoid system slowdown from high disk cache flush rate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30039#issuecomment-2094295273)
Are there any drawbacks to this?

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "dbwrapper: Bump LevelDB max file size to 128 MiB to avoid system slowdown from high disk cache flush rate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30039#issuecomment-2094299677)
Might partially address https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29662

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "Testnet4 including PoW difficulty adjustment fix":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29775#issuecomment-2094300149)
I will try to summarize a bit where I think we stand on the issues and ideas being discussed. Note, I am biased to keep things out that didn't get strong support, if we don't fix all the holes and things go wrong again, there is always Testnet5 and we will have more practice with it after we are done with Testnet4.

- On preventing block storms while allowing developers to get their non standard txs into blocks
- Fixing the difficulty adjustment bug: Both solutions (disallowing min-difficul
...

💬 maciejsszmigiero commented on pull request "dbwrapper: Bump LevelDB max file size to 128 MiB to avoid system slowdown from high disk cache flush rate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30039#issuecomment-2094301313)
> Are there any drawbacks to this?

I didn't notice any.

It's worth mentioning that the total amount of data stored in this database is at least two orders of magnitude higher than even 128 MiB file size.

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "dbwrapper: Bump LevelDB max file size to 128 MiB to avoid system slowdown from high disk cache flush rate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30039#issuecomment-2094304507)
> It's worth mentioning that the total amount of data stored in this database is at least two orders of magnitude higher than even 128 MiB file size.

Oh yes, i asked because i like this even from a "leveldb creates less files" point of view, eg anecdotally on one of my nodes the counter exceeds 6 digits bitcoin-core/bitcoin-maintainer-tools#161 . Of course, this includes deleted files, the active number is "only" about 6000.

💬 emc99 commented on pull request "msvc: Compile `test\fuzz\miniscript.cpp`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30031#issuecomment-2094335773)
Are you looking for someone to compile this file on msvc?

💬 emsit commented on pull request "Testnet4 including PoW difficulty adjustment fix":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29775#issuecomment-2094340609)
> * Genesis Block
>
> * @jlopp suggested block received rejections on the content of the message and "self-advertisement" though it wasn't very clear to me what this was referring to. I think at least we need another variation with the latest block hash in the message.
>

I came across the fact that Lopp was conducting a 'Griefing Attack' on testnet3 and wants to embed his message into the genesis block, which refers to this article:

https://www.ccn.com/news/crypto/bitcoin-testnet
...

💬 katesalazar commented on pull request "build: add `-Wundef`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29876#issuecomment-2094347361)
Concept ACK

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "net: additional disconnect logging":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28521#issuecomment-2094351348)
I may be mistaken in understanding you to be saying something else, but it seems to me that any time `pnode->fDisconnect` is set to `true`, this will result in a call to `CloseSocketDisconnect()` and a disconnect log will happen.

Maybe this doesn't affect the purpose of this PR, as the connection close may come some time later than `pnode->fDisconnect` and using 'disconnect' consistently makes it easier to connect the message from `CloseSocketDisconnect()` with the reason that is logged above
...

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "net: don't lock cs_main while reading blocks in net processing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26326#issuecomment-2094360527)
Rebased and updated
- Initial whitespace only commit has been removed
- Added `static_assert(MAX_BLOCKTXN_DEPTH <= MIN_BLOCKS_TO_KEEP, "MAX_BLOCKTXN_DEPTH too high");` in first commit
- In the second commit, if reading the block fails, we retake `cs_main` and check if the block has been pruned. If so, we conditionally log to `NET` category, otherwise we unconditionally log an error. In either case, we also disconnect the peer before returning.

Thank you for your reviews @furszy @sr-gi @mzu
...

💬 itornaza commented on pull request "test: Handle functional test disk-full error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29335#issuecomment-2094362719)
re-ACK 357ad110548d726021547d85b5b2bfcf3191d7e3

Ran again all the tests as in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29335#issuecomment-2050304085 and I get the same results as expected on disk space in the cases it is being insufficient.

📝 hebasto opened a pull request: "util, refactor: Switch to value-initialization"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30040)
This PR allows to avoid false positive `-Wmaybe-uninitialized` warnings when cross-compiling for Windows.

⚠️ tuttheking81 opened an issue: "[](https://renovatebot.com)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30041)
[](https://renovatebot.com)

This PR contains the following updates:

| Package | Change | Age | Adoption | Passing | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [@privy-io/react-auth](https://togithub.com/orgs/privy-io/discussions) ([source](https://togithub.com/orgs/privy-io)) | [`^1.60.5` -> `^1.63.0`](https://renovatebot.com/diffs/npm/@privy-io%2freact-auth/1.60.5/1.63.0) | [![age](https://developer.mend.io/api/mc/badges/age/npm/@pr
...

✅ tuttheking81 closed an issue: "[](https://renovatebot.com)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30041)

💬 vostrnad commented on pull request "Remove redundant `-datacarrier` option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29942#issuecomment-2094406830)
What is there to work on? CI passes and there are no merge conflicts. I know you suggested alternative approaches, but those can be implemented in different PRs if this one gets closed.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "util, refactor: Switch to value-initialization":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30040#issuecomment-2094542083)
CI still failing:
'''bash
In member function ‘bool prevector<N, T, Size, Diff>::is_direct() const [with unsigned int N = 28; T = unsigned char; Size = unsigned int; Diff = int]’,
inlined from ‘prevector<N, T, Size, Diff>::~prevector() [with unsigned int N = 28; T = unsigned char; Size = unsigned int; Diff = int]’ at ./prevector.h:474:23,
inlined from ‘CScript::~CScript()’ at ./script/script.h:413:7,
inlined from ‘CNoDestination::~CNoDestination()’ at ./addresstype.h:18:7,
inlined
...

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "chainparams: Add achow101 DNS seeder":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30007#issuecomment-2094556322)
I've implemented DNSSEC