💬 jsarenik commented on issue "not punishing manually connected peer":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30426#issuecomment-2222249865)
Yes! Calling `gettxoutsetinfo muhash` triggered this:

```
2024-07-11T07:36:31Z Fatal LevelDB error: Corruption: block checksum mismatch: /home/b/.bitcoin/chainstate/13938982.ldb
2024-07-11T07:36:31Z You can use -debug=leveldb to get more complete diagnostic messages
2024-07-11T07:36:31Z *** System error while flushing: Fatal LevelDB error: Corruption: block checksum mismatch: /home/b/.bitcoin/chainstate/13938982.ldb
2024-07-11T07:36:31Z Error: A fatal internal error occurred, see debug.lo
...

✅ jsarenik closed an issue: "not punishing manually connected peer"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30426)

💬 jsarenik commented on issue "not punishing manually connected peer":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30426#issuecomment-2222253823)
Thank you for support, @maflcko !

👍 alfonsoromanz approved a pull request: "test, assumeutxo: Remove resolved todo comments and add new test"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30403#pullrequestreview-2171156459)
Re ACK e1018672672f39910655ab37080bf3213ca55a39

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc, rest: Improve getblock error when only header is available":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30410#issuecomment-2222264395)
> Makes sense to me, so concept a c k to that! Depending on how large this PR is going to be and how long it's going to take to complete it, I could either close this simple PR, which changes return errors and is not a refactor, or it could be a pure refactor on top of it? Let me know what you prefer.

Ok, I'll give it a try.

Another thing to check before closing the issue is the RPC return code: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20978#issuecomment-764846601 to confirm it is accurat
...

👍 darosior approved a pull request: "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#pullrequestreview-2168736128)
ACK 00337ef0e115f8bd8c1ede425f21ae7a1b6d30de

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1672053063)
nit: not dramatic but could have used a set to avoid `O(n^2)` complexity.

In any case we'll probably have to put some bounds on the number of multipaths steps in the fuzzer to avoid timeouts (as in #30197) as there is a few operations quadratic in the number of steps. Of course, not in this PR.

💬 darosior commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#discussion_r1673572894)
I still think this behaviour should be documented in the help of `importmulti` and `importdescriptors`.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "net: additional disconnect logging":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28521#issuecomment-2222360783)
Rebased after #29431

@davidgumberg this PR makes it easier to do something like `cat ~/.bitcoin/debug.log | grep disconnect`, and avoid the need for e.g. `grep -n2` (or more) to get additional context.

I switched to `LogDebug` in the lines touched by this PR.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "refactor: add coinbase constraints to BlockAssembler::Options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30356#discussion_r1673640115)
Thanks.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432#issuecomment-2222418506)
@ryanofsky wrote:

> If it would help, I could make a draft PR for a test program that will do what you describe: connect to bitcoin-node over a unix socket if it is running, or start bitcoin-node if it is not running, and then call a mining interface function like `getTipHash()` and print the result.

Yes that would be very helpful.

At least one large objection I have to the sidecar approach is that it tends to be very clunky, having to deal with our p2p, rpc and zmq interfaces which are
...

💬 glozow commented on pull request "system: use %LOCALAPPDATA% as default datadir on windows":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27064#discussion_r1673700081)
Not a big deal, just don't want it to get missed when releasing 28.0

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "Tr partial descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30243#issuecomment-2222479283)
You can squash some commits.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "refactor: add coinbase constraints to BlockAssembler::Options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30356#issuecomment-2222490758)
Spurious CI / ASan failure, see #30419.

💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "locks: introduce mutex for tx download, flush rejection filters on UpdatedBlockTip":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30111#discussion_r1673668471)
IIUC `ActivateBestChain` will fire `ActiveTipChange` as long as the current instance is the active chain state. `InvalidateBlock` and `ActivateBestChain` are both called on active chain state so it doesn't seem like there's a situation where `ActiveTipChange` won't be fired before this point. Could this comment be misleading?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "contrib: use c++ compiler rather than c compiler for binary checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30387#issuecomment-2222552415)
> Getting a check failure during a guix build:

I think we should avoid `#include <iostream>` in our test stubs, [which](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/header/iostream)
> behaves as if it defines a static storage duration object...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1673772773)
Looks like this was duplicated from the comment below. Dropped.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1673775142)
Fixed.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "contrib: use c++ compiler rather than c compiler for binary checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30387#discussion_r1673776901)
```suggestion
std::printf("42");
```

as suggested in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30387#issuecomment-2208993921.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "contrib: use c++ compiler rather than c compiler for binary checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30387#discussion_r1673776130)
```suggestion
#include <cstdio>
```

as suggested in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30387#issuecomment-2208993921.