🤔 marcofleon reviewed a pull request: "fuzz: wallet, add target for `Crypter`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28074#pullrequestreview-2061842202)
My fuzzer is crashing when I run this. I'm going to look more into it tomorrow.

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "depends: Remove Qt build-time dependencies":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29923#issuecomment-2116159858)
> I'm not sure how to help test. Using arm64 macOS 14.4.1, this branch builds cleanly, the unit tests pass, and the GUI runs fine. Don't see any issues on first read of the code.

Thanks for testing! To be clear, this shouldn't affect MacOS at all, Qt on MacOS (and Windows) doesn't have any of the huge bag of dependencies that Qt Linux/UNIX has.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "refactor: interfaces, make 'createTransaction' less error-prone ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/807#discussion_r1604036526)
> Would suggest maybe moving this struct to wallet/types.h instead of introducing a new header. That file is meant to hold wallet types that are used outside of the wallet library. (For context see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1543379055 which talks about wallet/types.h, node/types.h, and common/types.h files).

Nice, sure. I'm on the same boat, I just wrote this without thinking on a general convention.

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "refactor: interfaces, make 'createTransaction' less error-prone "
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/807#pullrequestreview-2061884739)
updated per feedback. Thanks @ryanofsky!

💬 naiyoma commented on pull request "test: Assumeutxo: import snapshot in a node with a divergent chain":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29996#issuecomment-2116200874)



> I splitted the original commit into two commits (one for each test). The second test ([af0f401](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/af0f401258e0c189799a36f4487eaa751d779e7b)) may be redundant with this one: #29428. The only difference is that my test is executed on a node that has a divergent chain after block 199. I did that to cover this scenario described in the comments
>
> `[...] Loading a snapshot when the current chain tip is: [...] Not an ancestor or a descendant of the
...

🤔 jonatack reviewed a pull request: "include verbose "debug-message" field in testmempoolaccept response"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28121#pullrequestreview-2062037268)
Concept ACK d2917e7e0b342509d50325cf7f00da15d81b3c65

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "include verbose "debug-message" field in testmempoolaccept response":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28121#discussion_r1604141501)
c1be9d4

- it might be more user-friendly to call the field `reject-details`?

- maybe just me, but `a message is provided` might sound like user input

```suggestion
{RPCResult::Type::STR, "reject-details", /*optional=*/true, "Rejection details (only present when 'allowed' is false and rejection details exist)"},
```

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "include verbose "debug-message" field in testmempoolaccept response":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28121#discussion_r1604146476)
d2917e7e0b342509d50325cf7f00da15d81b3c65
```suggestion
The RPC `testmempoolaccept` response now includes a "reject-details" field in some cases
```

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "include verbose "debug-message" field in testmempoolaccept response":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28121#discussion_r1604141675)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/c1be9d40f8c3044587d1d3480ccbedfc427951fe while touching the next line, `string` here might be a relic from when the field type wasn't auto-generated in the help, ISTM `reason` would be clearer

```suggestion
{RPCResult::Type::STR, "reject-reason", /*optional=*/true, "Rejection reason (only present when 'allowed' is false)"},
```

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "include verbose "debug-message" field in testmempoolaccept response":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28121#discussion_r1604145031)
d2917e7e0b342509d50325cf7f00da15d81b3c65 Not sure if `Updated RPCs` would be better here

🤔 pablomartin4btc reviewed a pull request: "refactor: interfaces, make 'createTransaction' less error-prone "
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/807#pullrequestreview-2062071072)
re-ACK 4d941b5ff43e6e7efa83913ded8cd5806ef92dbe

- Changes from my last review: `CreatedTransactionResult` struct moved as [suggested](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/807#discussion_r1598730244) by @ryanofsky [explaining](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#discussion_r1543379055) reasoning behind the convention. I like the idea of keeping the namespace, not only for [consistency](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29015#discussion_r1424337693) but for clarity and makin
...

⚠️ ygcool opened an issue: "dumpprivkey error"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30129)
bitcoin-core version:27.0

execute:

`bitcoin-cli createwallet "wallet1" false false pass`

`bitcoin-cli getnewaddress`

`bitcoin-cli walletpassphrase pass 100`

`bitcoin-cli dumpprivkey "address"`

dumpprivkey Return error:

```
error code: -4
error message:
Only legacy wallets are supported by this command
```

Is there any solution to export the private key of the address?
If I must use dumpprivkey which version of bitcoin core should I use?

thanks

💬 furszy commented on pull request "refactor: interfaces, make 'createTransaction' less error-prone ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/807#issuecomment-2116475460)
> nit: on 2nd. commit (https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/commit/95aaaa4f023c6a6b629c36cfb9d8abd4bab1cb66), you forgot to remove the change from the makefile as it's not longer needed.

Removed. Thanks.

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "kernel: Streamline util library":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29015#issuecomment-2116484602)
> There seems to be a conflict with #30098. Maybe rebase?

Thanks! Rebased now.

> If other reviewers or maintainers are not happy with introducing a bash script, I could volunteer some time to translate it.

Yes this could be a good idea. The script started out just being a few lines of bash listing symbols exported by one library and imported by another one. But then it grew as it was extended to support multiple libraries and suppress known errors. So now it's no longer a small script,
...

💬 edilmedeiros commented on issue "dumpprivkey error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30129#issuecomment-2116495430)
Newer version of bitcoin core use [descriptor wallets](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/descriptors.md).

You can see them using:
```
bitcoin-cli listdescriptors true
```

The `true` argument mean to export the private descriptors, the equivalent of private keys.

I usually use the tool `jq` to extract them to an environment variable like so:
```
DESCRIPTORS=$(bitcoin-cli listdescriptors true | jq -r .descriptors)
```

I import the descriptors to my wallet with:
```
bitcoin-cl
...

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "assumeutxo, rpc: Improve EOF error when reading snapshot metadata in loadtxoutset":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28670#discussion_r1604259198)
done!

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "assumeutxo, rpc: Improve EOF error when reading snapshot metadata in loadtxoutset":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28670#discussion_r1604259301)
done!

💬 ygcool commented on issue "dumpprivkey error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30129#issuecomment-2116520822)
@edilmedeiros Hi, I tried and it still doesn't work, which version of bitcoin core still works with dumpprivkey?

💬 edilmedeiros commented on issue "dumpprivkey error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30129#issuecomment-2116524820)
V27 works with `dumpprivkey`.

The problem is that you are creating a newer descriptor wallet and are trying to use an rpc which is compatible with legacy wallets only.

Can you be more specific about what you tried?

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "assumeutxo, rpc: Improve EOF error when reading snapshot metadata in loadtxoutset":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28670#issuecomment-2116530496)
Updates:
- Addressed [feedback](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28670#discussion_r1566860922) from @fjahr by amending the logging info description.
- Addressed [feedback](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28670#discussion_r1597147718) from @furszy by using a better RPC error code (`RPC_DESERIALIZATION_ERROR` instead of `RPC_INTERNAL_ERROR`).