💬 cbergqvist commented on pull request "Support JSON-RPC 2.0 when requested by client":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27101#discussion_r1643503903)
(Came across this block again while working on something else. It struck me that the exception handling looked redundant as we catch the same exact exception types inside `JSONRPCExec(jreq, /*catch_errors=*/true`). *But* the `jreq.parse()` call will throw on missing methods etc.

One could move out `response = JSONRPCExec(jreq, /*catch_errors=*/true);` to after the block, but then one would need to guard against using a `jreq` that failed to parse. So the current version of the block is probab
...

💬 mzumsande commented on issue "RFC: Assumeutxo and large forks and reorgs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30288#issuecomment-2174570099)
The problem I see with allowing the background sync to target the most-work chain is that it doesn't seem to fit well into the design philosophy that has been merged so far. The background sync is treated as a low-priority task that is mostly done as an extra precaution after having synced the snapshot to the tip. At some point in the future (I know this would be contentious) we might even want to give users the opt-in option to skip it completely to save bandwidth.
But as it is, the background
...

📝 CharlesCNorton opened a pull request: "fix: typo in benchmark documentation"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30296)
Corrected "coins selection" to "coin selection" for consistency with the other items listed.

Justification:

Consistency: Aligns with other singular nouns in the list.

<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation f
...

💬 theStack commented on pull request "contrib: add tool to convert compact-serialized UTXO set to SQLite database":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27432#issuecomment-2174686278)
Rebased on master (resolving a trivial merging conflict in the test runner list after the merge of #28984).

💬 theStack commented on pull request "test: fix MiniWallet script-path spend (missing parity bit in leaf version)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30076#discussion_r1643600316)
> Is the sole reason for creating 10 tagged wallets to be thorough? Or is there any other reason as well?

Yes it's thoroughness, no other reason. Since the fixed bugs only occur with a certain probability, creating several random tagged wallets in a row increase the likelihood of catching the bugs in a single test run (nothing special about the number 10 though).

⚠️ techy2 opened an issue: "unrecognized command line option '-std=c++20' "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30297)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

building depends qt
Project ERROR: Cannot run target compiler 'g++ -m64'. Output:
===================
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none:hsa
OFFLOAD_TARGET_DEFAULT=1
g++: error: unrecognized command line option '-std=c++20'; did you mean '-std=c++2a'?
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu 9.4.0-1u
...

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "upnp: fix build with miniupnpc 2.2.8":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30283#issuecomment-2174738368)
looks like this is the diff between verison 2.2.7 and 2.2.8 in case anyone is looking
https://github.com/miniupnp/miniupnp/compare/miniupnpc_2_2_7...miniupnpc_2_2_8

💬 sipa commented on issue "unrecognized command line option '-std=c++20' ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30297#issuecomment-2174741292)
You need a C++20 compiler to build Bitcoin Core 27.x. In particular, GCC 10.1 or Clang 14 are supported (see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/v27.1/doc/dependencies.md).

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "build: Bump clang minimum supported version to 16":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30263#issuecomment-2174757007)
Concept ACK [fa58c75](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30263/commits/fa58c75880334cc58ccc8e5d491df8f0e587bf42)

I'm on fedora and was able to build properly
```
uname -a
Linux fedora 6.2.15-300.fc38.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Thu May 11 17:37:39 UTC 2023 x86_64 GNU/Linux

clang --version
clang version 16.0.6 (Fedora 16.0.6-4.fc38)
Target: x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /usr/bin

clang++ --version
clang version 16.0.6 (Fedora 16.0.6-4.fc38)
Targ
...

✅ techy2 closed an issue: "unrecognized command line option '-std=c++20' "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30297)

💬 techy2 commented on issue "unrecognized command line option '-std=c++20' ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30297#issuecomment-2174814665)
Ok

💬 techy2 commented on issue "unrecognized command line option '-std=c++20' ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30297#issuecomment-2174879320)
upgraded to gcc 10.3, all works now

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "test: fix MiniWallet script-path spend (missing parity bit in leaf version)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30076#issuecomment-2175051513)
Got it, nice.

On Tue, Jun 18, 2024, 06:43 Sebastian Falbesoner ***@***.***>
wrote:

> ***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
> ------------------------------
>
> In test/functional/feature_framework_miniwallet.py
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30076#discussion_r1643600316>:
>
> > @@ -31,6 +34,20 @@ def test_tx_padding(self):
> assert_greater_than_or_equal(tx.get_weight(), target_weight)
> assert_greater_than_or_equal(target_weight
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build: Bump clang minimum supported version to 16":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30263#issuecomment-2175075429)
> Looks like the Apple Clang shipping with Xcode 15, is based on Clang 15. Xcode 16 (still in beta) will ship with a Apple Clang based on Clang 16.

Well, for some reason it can compile ranges fine, without further changes, so at least to some extend it seems to be based on llvm 16 (maybe an intermediate random commit from the `main` dev branch)?

In any case, I am not changing the Xcode/macOS/Apple requirements here. Someone else can do it, if there is need for it and it is acceptable to do
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "[PoC] ci: Add FreeBSD GitHub Actions job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30164#issuecomment-2175196978)
Looks good to merge to allow devs to enable this for testing in their fork. However, it should not be enabled in this repo, because:

* CI resources are limited, so only tasks that find meaningful errors regularly should be enabled.
* Albeit this seems fine (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30164#issuecomment-2130109577), I think adding third-party actions should be limited as well.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: move ASan job to GitHub Actions from Cirrus CI":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30193#discussion_r1636810573)
nit: could you link to a failing run? Just to double check that `CI_FAILFAST_TEST_LEAVE_DANGLING` works?

🤔 maflcko reviewed a pull request: "ci: move ASan job to GitHub Actions from Cirrus CI"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30193#pullrequestreview-2113589885)
found a nit

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: move ASan job to GitHub Actions from Cirrus CI":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30193#discussion_r1636804002)
nit: Can remove this.

⚠️ rob-scheepens opened an issue: "Porting bcc tools to libbpf"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30298)
@B10C: reviving this old discussion from some two years ago:

@rob-scheepens agree that BPF CO-RE and libbpf is the way to go for future tracing programs. I've looked into this a while ago, but it seems libbpf doesn't support USDT tracepoints yet (see https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/issues/3007). However, there was a mention of a soon to be open sourced libusdt library developed and used in production at Meta by @anakryiko [here](https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzYRLxzVHw00DUphqq
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "contrib: add tool to convert compact-serialized UTXO set to SQLite database":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27432#issuecomment-2175491752)
Just tried with the mainnet snapshot from #28553:

```
sha256sum ../utxo-snapshots/utxo-840000.dat
9db649785fcddd8b1fe83a5009fe5c9be1901e8c322298cacc8a2d96ace4807e ../utxo-snapshots/utxo-840000.dat

contrib/utxo-tools/utxo_to_sqlite.py ../utxo-snapshots/utxo-840000.dat ../utxo-snapshots/utxo-840000.sqlite
UTXO Snapshot for Mainnet at block height 840000 [0000000000000000...], contains 176948713 coins
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/sjors/dev/bitcoin/contrib/utxo-tools/
...