💬 Sjors commented on pull request "refactor: add coinbase constraints to BlockAssembler::Options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30356#issuecomment-2208349301)
cc @glozow who added this as part of #26695.

⚠️ Sjors opened an issue: "ci: failure in p2p_node_network_limited.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30389)
The PR seems unrelated, so assuming the failure is spurious.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/9789643429/job/27029722411?pr=30356

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "validation: Check if mempool exists before size check in ActivateSnapshot":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30388#issuecomment-2208359932)
Changed description to drop the bugfix label.

Re https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30388#issuecomment-2208305841

>I wouldn't call this a "bug" because I think we can assume that the active chainstate (which is checked here, not any chainstate) must have a mempool attached - this is not optional.

We do the same check on the active chainstate here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/validation.cpp#L4587. So as @maflcko points out, it would be good for consistency's s
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432#discussion_r1665307304)
It's not polling over RPC.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: add coinbase constraints to BlockAssembler::Options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30356#issuecomment-2208382368)
> Is there a reason why
>
> ```
> BlockAssembler::Options options;
> ApplyArgsManOptions(gArgs, options);
> ```
>
> has to be inside the block assembler class?

It doesn't need to be inside `BlockAssembler`. Prior to #26695, the ctor was using the global `gArgs` to decide on parameters (yuck!). We didn't have the node/*args kernel/*opts conventions at the time and I was pretty happy adding an `ApplyArgsMan` that didn't do that.

> Why not construct them externally and pass a referen
...

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "ci: failure in p2p_node_network_limited.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30389)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "ci: failure in p2p_node_network_limited.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30389#issuecomment-2208412707)
It's the same issue as #29090.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: wallet_listtransactions.py --legacy-wallet failure":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28411#issuecomment-2208414978)
Duplicate of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090?

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "ci: wallet_listtransactions.py --legacy-wallet failure"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28411)

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432#discussion_r1665352969)
> How is this not polling?

I was reading it as "check every 50ms" but I just noticed that it is also using a condvar, so it'll get notified when `g_best_block` changes.

⚠️ maflcko opened an issue: "ci: ConnectionRefusedError: [WinError 10061] No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30390)
Usually they come with a follow-up error of `Unable to connect to bitcoind after 2400s` (or similar).

This is a tracking issue, because all tests are affected.

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-2208428249)
Not a feature_proxy issue, so closing as duplicate of the tracking issue https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30390 for now

💬 maflcko commented on issue "test: failure in rpc_getdescriptorinfo.py (OSError: [WinError 10048] Only one usage of each socket address (protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25765#issuecomment-2208431158)
Is this still an issue? Haven't seen this in a while, I think.

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "test: failure in rpc_getdescriptorinfo.py (OSError: [WinError 10048] Only one usage of each socket address (protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25765)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "test: failure in rpc_getdescriptorinfo.py (OSError: [WinError 10048] Only one usage of each socket address (protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25765#issuecomment-2208432085)
Closing for now.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-2208441849)
Why didn't you just rename this, rather than opening a new issue with none of the relevant information?

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "build: configure using depends by default if config.site exists "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16692)

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432#issuecomment-2208466255)
> * We add a new zmq publisher, e.g. `-zmqpubtemplate`, which publishes block templates as soon as they become available.
> * We add a new rpc `updatetemplatepub` to configure the template publisher, e.g. for setting the coinbase output data size.

This approach would mostly work. Two downsides that come to mind:

1. it limits the number of connected stratum clients to 1, since there's only one ZMQ template feed.
2. it also precludes the ability to make the template provider public facing
...

💬 fanquake commented on issue "Bitcoin Core on mainnet shows testnet3 dir as a wallet to open and allows opening it":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16107#issuecomment-2208479289)
Is this fixed after #18554?