Bitcoin Core Github
44 subscribers
121K links
Download Telegram
💬 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: "[![Mend Renovate](https://app.renovatebot.com/images/banner.svg)](https://renovatebot.com)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30041)
[![Mend Renovate](https://app.renovatebot.com/images/banner.svg)](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: "[![Mend Renovate](https://app.renovatebot.com/images/banner.svg)](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
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "Testnet4 including PoW difficulty adjustment fix":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29775#issuecomment-2094566343)
Thank you for giving more detail @emsit !

> I admit that I am also biased towards testnet3, as I have been operating https://coinfaucet.eu/ for 10 years and have distributed a total of 328,065.41 tBTC. So testnet is close to me, but I accept its successor.

Thank you!

> I'm just sorry that testnet4 probably won't address the biggest problem that bothers you, trading.

I think the act of resetting is addressing it. If it's sufficiently addressing it or if we need to do something more (l
...
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "Prevent file descriptor exhaustion from too many RPC calls":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27731#issuecomment-2094569003)
Pushed a rebase though currently I am working on removing libevent as a dependency which should be a quicker solution than waiting for 2.2.1 :)
💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "Testnet4 including PoW difficulty adjustment fix":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29775#issuecomment-2094582107)
> What prevents someone malicious from writing an absurd number into the Version field?

Same thing that prevents you from changing the nBits randomly -- your block is invalid if you do. See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/970c0c31e99bebe2b60ade930c96600d1d82f7ca#diff-4667f00c3a075be2753aa6ebdeea4bdbb66ef6e0b3d6df313a430f2eb8669ffdR47

> I guess to verify the number is actually correct worst case we would need to look further than our current difficulty adjustment period if it's a
...
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "rpc: Optimize serialization and enhance metadata of dumptxoutset output":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29612#discussion_r1590208842)
Me too :) Yes, that makes sense. I opted for the function to return the `ChainType` and then I use `ChainTypeToString` on the result.
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "rpc: Optimize serialization and enhance metadata of dumptxoutset output":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29612#discussion_r1590208850)
done
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "rpc: Optimize serialization and enhance metadata of dumptxoutset output":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29612#discussion_r1590208854)
done
💬 fjahr commented on pull request "rpc: Optimize serialization and enhance metadata of dumptxoutset output":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29612#issuecomment-2094633415)
Rebased, resolved conflicts (the functional tests have changed a bit now), and addressed the open feedback. Thanks everyone for reviewing!
💬 emsit commented on pull request "Testnet4 including PoW difficulty adjustment fix":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29775#issuecomment-2094635043)
> @jlopp has suggested a full Genesis block and mined it too, if he addresses the concern and adds a recent block hash to the message I will use it unless there is someone else here who also provides a full Genesis block that is mined with a different message that reviewers prefer over @jlopp s one. I simply don't want to mine the Genesis block myself over and over again as the message gets bikeshedded.

Does the genesis block need a message? It seems like a neutral stance to me.
💬 laanwj commented on pull request "guix: build with glibc 2.31":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29987#issuecomment-2094666355)
Same output as @fanquake (just stock ubuntu 24.04 amd64)
```
d5b65771bb9c1d2e4e49fbb78305e97a99ca43e608ced495f8c437855701d6af guix-build-f5a949b90881/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
113d77f864bac9382aa7598cb038a822aff2c961348ed9ca747a168ec87199bb guix-build-f5a949b90881/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-f5a949b90881-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
4a25c348e2921d27542f39cd5ccb6c7cf3aba72c89fecf69f4f66d63c4d5b623 guix-build-f5a949b90881/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-f5a949b90881-a
...
💬 laanwj commented on pull request "chainparams: Add achow101 DNS seeder":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30007#issuecomment-2094679960)
> I've implemented DNSSEC

That's neat!

i think it's still missing some part, resolving through Google's DNS (which has more verbose error messages than my ISP) gives:
```sh
$ dig x9.dnsseed.signet.bitcoin.achow101.com. @1.1.1.1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 1232
; EDE: 10 (RRSIGs Missing): (failed to verify signatures for x9.dnsseed.signet.bitcoin.achow101.com. opt-out proof)

```