💬 sipa commented on pull request "cluster mempool: cluster linearization algorithm":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#issuecomment-2168024936)
I have split off the optimizations for candidate search to PR #30286, and the merging & postprocessing algorithms to PR #30285, and renamed the PR. It is now focused on just adding the `Linearize()` function, with its eventual interface (including passing in an old linearization, and a randomization seed), but without optimizations beyond that.

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "Multiprocess bitcoin":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10102#issuecomment-2168028486)
Wow, sounds sounds like exactly the bug I hit @ryanofsky, great debugging; sorry I couldn't provide any followup for you sooner.

I'll rebase my `ipc + -ipcconnect` branch on this one, update my `libmultiprocess` installation, and see how it goes from there.

Thanks!

⚠️ sipa opened an issue: "Cluster mempool tracking issue"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30289)
What to review next:

* #30126

Plan:
* Generic utilities:
* [x] bitset: #30160
* [x] vecdeque: #30161
* Linearization algorithms:
* [ ] cluster linearization: #30126
* [ ] optimized candidate search (follow-up to 30126): #30286
* [ ] merging and postprocessing of linearizations (depends on 30126): #30285
* Cluster mempool implementation:
* [ ] #28676

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "Cluster size 2 package rbf"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28984#pullrequestreview-2118444350)
reACK 94ed4fbf8e via range-diff

🤔 murchandamus reviewed a pull request: "bumpfee: ignore WALLET_INCREMENTAL_RELAY_FEE when user specifies fee_rate"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27969#pullrequestreview-2118458522)
ACK f58beabe754363cb7d5b24032fd392654b9514ac

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "netbase: extend CreateSock() to support creating arbitrary sockets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30202#issuecomment-2168123034)
re ACK 1245d1388b003c46092937def7041917aecec8de

👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "netbase: extend CreateSock() to support creating arbitrary sockets"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30202#pullrequestreview-2118480160)
re ACK 1245d1388b003c46092937def7041917aecec8de

💬 AngusP commented on pull request "test: Added test coverage to listsinceblock rpc":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30195#discussion_r1639929977)
Ah, d'oh. Full path is fine then, sorry I should've checked with a `Path` not in my current working dir

👍 ismaelsadeeq approved a pull request: "Cluster size 2 package rbf"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28984#pullrequestreview-2118667559)
re-ACK 94ed4fbf8e1a396c650b5134d396d6c0be35ce10

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "p2p: For assumeutxo, download snapshot chain before background chain":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29519#discussion_r1640012446)
I have now added a first commit that avoids downloading blocks not on the snapshot chain completely.
Local testing revealed that not only are we unable to reorg to a more-work chain, we also won't fail gracefully: On master, we would still download the blocks and attempt to reorg, but then the node would just crash.

👍 ismaelsadeeq approved a pull request: "rename TransactionErrors: MISSING_INPUTS and ALREADY_IN_CHAIN"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30212#pullrequestreview-2118694519)
re-ACK b2b4b932572c5bb1ffa3fc4f34e17130348fbc24

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "p2p: For assumeutxo, download snapshot chain before background chain":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29519#issuecomment-2168303545)
[ac547ea ](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ac547ea43beb1d66d2c11e7e8abb76dd1bfc2883)to [e977c69](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/e977c698f97ac9bba30e4e3837f41721841c28c4):
Added a commit that avoids downloading blocks not on the snapshot chain (see discussion above).
Also made small changes to the (now) second commit using `snap_base` instead of `GetSnapshotBaseHeight()`, and reworked the documentation.

👍 theStack approved a pull request: "Cluster size 2 package rbf"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28984#pullrequestreview-2118754168)
Code-review ACK 94ed4fbf8e1a396c650b5134d396d6c0be35ce10

💬 vasild commented on pull request "fuzz: FuzzedSock::Recv() don't lose bytes from MSG_PEEK read":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30273#discussion_r1640065200)
> Did you run it with the I2P dictionary?

No. How do I do that? Do you have a Base64 of the crash unit?

💬 m3dwards commented on pull request "net: Allow -proxy=[::1] on nodes with IPV6 lo only":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30245#issuecomment-2168391558)
> Now, can we have the `AI_ADDRCONFIG` behavior but get it to consider loopback addresses as valid? For example, after running `getaddrinfo()` with `AI_ADDRCONFIG` run it again without `AI_ADDRCONFIG` and append any loopback addresses from the second run to the results?

I like this idea, I'll have a go at implementing it.

💬 mzumsande commented on issue "RFC: Assumeutxo and large forks and reorgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30288#issuecomment-2168444052)
> This is not what currently happens, but simplest approach might be for the original chainstate to be unaffected by the snapshot chainstate, and to continue to download and attach the same blocks it otherwise would have if no snapshot were loaded. It would just do it more slowly due to a reduced cache size and lower priority for block requests compared to the snapshot chainstate.

I think that the concept of the Active Chainstate / Active Tip is important for this this discussion. Currently,
...

💬 edilmedeiros commented on pull request "upnp: fix build with miniupnpc 2.2.8":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30283#issuecomment-2168446665)
ACK bf1a6eec805b81819654dff4554bda8c95069aca.

I inspected the [upstream change](https://github.com/miniupnp/miniupnp/commit/c0a50ce33e3b99ce8a96fd43049bb5b53ffac62f#diff-5a0d7cff00628c2c64a617edb347c0f283e3a75e7df910e7e8438fc6db23f610R122) and it looks this will be sufficient to fix the issue.

I complied successfully against my updated macports package, but I have no use case for it to check functionality.

@fanquake I see that you have been updating the `bitcoin` port in macports. Updat
...

💬 edilmedeiros commented on pull request "upnp: fix build with miniupnpc 2.2.8":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30283#issuecomment-2168454719)
Not ACKing a6df34dfa65560e4d4137c5d8d95f111af5df028, though.

I have inspected the upstream changes and it doesn't seem to do anything shady, but I'm not familiar with the full functionality of that package. Since this can potentially open a backdoor, I prefer to let more experienced people check it.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "log: use error level for critical log messages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30255#issuecomment-2168546288)
ACK fae3a1f0065064d80ab4c0375a9eaeb666c5dd55

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "log: use error level for critical log messages"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30255)