🤔 theStack reviewed a pull request: "wallet: Migrate legacy wallets to descriptor wallets without requiring BDB"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26596#pullrequestreview-2104427047)
Concept ACK

💬 theStack commented on pull request "wallet: Migrate legacy wallets to descriptor wallets without requiring BDB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26596#discussion_r1631133040)
in commit f732495191d346b877ffe8402ec68761713eaaf7: now that the legacy-wallet-check is done without loading the wallet, is the check for the descriptor flag below still needed? (can a BDB wallet ever have this flag set?)

```
// Before anything else, check if there is something to migrate.
if (local_wallet->IsWalletFlagSet(WALLET_FLAG_DESCRIPTORS)) {
if (was_loaded) {
reload_wallet(local_wallet);
}
return util::Error{_("Error: This wallet is
...

📝 m3dwards opened a pull request: "net: Allow -proxy=[::1] on nodes with IPV6 lo only"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30245)
This is similar to (but does not fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13155 which I believe is the same issue but in libevent.

The issue is on a host that has IPV6 enabled but only a loopback IP address `-proxy=[::1]` will fail as `[::1]` is not considered valid by `getaddrinfo` with `AI_ADDRCONFIG` flag. I think the loopback interface should be considered valid and we have a functional test that will try to test this: `feature_proxy.py`.

To replicate the issue, run `feature_prox
...

💬 m3dwards commented on pull request "ci: move ASAN job to GitHub Actions from Cirrus CI":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30193#discussion_r1631165232)
I was under the impression that these things were not relevant for the test but if they are I will add them back in.

📝 virtu opened a pull request: "contrib: asmap-tool - Compare ASMaps with respect to specific addresses"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30246)
Right now, we have no way to quantify the "degradation" of an ASMap over time in the context of Bitcoin's P2P network in a meaningful way. However, such data would be useful for:
1. Making sure the minimum shelf life of ASMaps is compatible with the release cycle (we wouldn't want to start shipping ASMaps with releases before making sure ASMaps typically do not become obsolete before the time of the next release)
2. Node operators eager to keep their ASMaps up-to-date between releases.

Whil
...

👍 maflcko approved a pull request: "ci: parse TEST_RUNNER_EXTRA into an array"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30244#pullrequestreview-2104485950)
I can't review this, because it is written in bash, but testing seems to indicate that this works as intended for some reason.

ACK b9c0b79ab7a0d4dafd5386a78f4fd747236c8f88

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: parse TEST_RUNNER_EXTRA into an array":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30244#discussion_r1631166504)
Is this still needed?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: move ASAN job to GitHub Actions from Cirrus CI":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30193#discussion_r1631169842)
The gui tests and benchmarks should also be running under the sanitizer, otherwise bugs may be missed in them.

💬 m3dwards commented on pull request "ci: move ASAN job to GitHub Actions from Cirrus CI":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30193#discussion_r1631171633)
Oh you are right. This was a late change after I had already had the USDT tests running and didn't check that they were still running 🤦

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: parse TEST_RUNNER_EXTRA into an array":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30244#issuecomment-2154804383)
> This change allows proper parsing of quotes and complex values such as:
>
> ```shell
> TEST_RUNNER_EXTRA='--exclude "rpc_bind.py --ipv6, feature_proxy.py"'
> ```

Does such an example work on Windows in Command Prompt and PowerShell?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: parse TEST_RUNNER_EXTRA into an array":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30244#issuecomment-2154809254)
> Does such an example work on Windows in Command Prompt and PowerShell?

PowerShell and Command Prompt are not supported by `./ci/`. Only `bash`, according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/ci#running-a-stage-locally

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: parse TEST_RUNNER_EXTRA into an array":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30244#issuecomment-2154812052)
> > Does such an example work on Windows in Command Prompt and PowerShell?
>
> PowerShell and Command Prompt are not supported by `./ci/`. Only `bash`, according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/ci#running-a-stage-locally

I'm aware of that. I'm asking about `TEST_RUNNER_EXTRA` variable content given in the example.

💬 m3dwards commented on pull request "ci: parse TEST_RUNNER_EXTRA into an array":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30244#issuecomment-2154819308)
> Does such an example work on Windows in Command Prompt and PowerShell?

I will test it.

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "util: add VecDeque"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30161#pullrequestreview-2104539101)
ACK 7b8eea067f

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Add Compact Block Encoding test `ReceiveWithExtraTransactions` covering non-empty `extra_txn`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30237#issuecomment-2154833376)
Would it be difficult to make the test deterministic?

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "json-rpc 2.0 followups: docs, tests, cli":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30238#discussion_r1631204799)
Yeah good idea here thanks, updating

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "json-rpc 2.0 followups: docs, tests, cli":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30238#discussion_r1631206987)
hmmm I think I'm going to pass on this, there's a few other files with the `;` and if it doesn't break anything I'll just leave them all the same... but if @fanquake agrees I'll add a commit to this PR.

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "json-rpc 2.0 followups: docs, tests, cli":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30238#discussion_r1631209745)
Great work thanks! I monitored with Wireshark as well. The other local test I did is to build bitcoin with legacy support removed. Only one test should fail, the `interface_rpc` test from #27101 which explicitly makes a legacy request.

```diff
diff --git a/src/rpc/request.cpp b/src/rpc/request.cpp
index 87b9f18b33..e72e349bf6 100644
--- a/src/rpc/request.cpp
+++ b/src/rpc/request.cpp
@@ -200,9 +200,7 @@ void JSONRPCRequest::parse(const UniValue& valRequest)
// The "jsonrpc" key
...

🚀 glozow merged a pull request: "util: add VecDeque"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30161)

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "json-rpc 2.0 followups: docs, tests, cli":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30238#discussion_r1631214784)
There also would be no `error` or `result` fields in the 204 case! I think it's self explanatory that the authproxy call function expects a very specific type of response.