💬 achow101 commented on issue "scriptPubKey no address":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30450#issuecomment-2228784230)
Inputs do not have scriptPubKeys.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "refactor: interfaces, make 'createTransaction' less error-prone ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/807#issuecomment-2228793605)
Concept ACK.

> Additionally, this PR moves the `CreatedTransactionResult` struct into its own file.

This part of the PR description seems no longer relevant.

> Thanks for the review ryanofsky!
>
> > I just noticed [bitcoin/bitcoin#25269](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25269), which I hadn't seen when I posted my comment above. It looks like that PR was closed for inactivity but it does look like a good approach that solves the issue I didn't like in my comment. (Though maybe
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432#issuecomment-2228808132)
I also incorporated the new `waitFeesChanged()` mining interface method from #3044, which required a bit an overhaul: I ended up adding a second event loop `ThreadSv2MempoolHandler` that deals exclusively with mempool updates.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Correct tooltip wording for watch-only wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/792#issuecomment-2228809247)
Closing for now. Please feel free to reopen it when a non-draft version is ready.

✅ hebasto closed a pull request: "Correct tooltip wording for watch-only wallets"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/792)

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "refactor: add coinbase constraints to BlockAssembler::Options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30356#issuecomment-2228822746)
@ryanofsky thanks! I'll look into using your patch. After that I'll check where @ismaelsadeeq's feedback still applies.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: build zeromq with CMake":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29723#issuecomment-2228835080)
Rebased, and reworked the changes here, to hopefully make them easier to review.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "optimization: Precalculate SipHash constant XOR with k0 and k1 in SaltedOutpointHasher":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30442#issuecomment-2228844594)
> Could you please send me the exact command and compiler versions you've used?

`gcc version 11.4.0 (Ubuntu 11.4.0-1ubuntu1~22.04) `

I ra
`./configure --enable-bench`
`make`
`./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter=.*Out[pP]oint.*`

💬 theuni commented on pull request "depends: remove Darwin ENV unsetting":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30451#issuecomment-2228853767)
Whoa, this greatly simplifies things. When/why where these removed in guix? I thought they were pretty fundamental there.

I wonder if we should check for the use of these in depends and bail out if they're set though.

👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "net: Allow -proxy=[::1] on nodes with IPV6 lo only"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30245#pullrequestreview-2178157576)
ACK 23333b7ed243071c9b4e4f04c727556d8065acbb

Tested with a similar approach to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30245#pullrequestreview-2151672225

Created an LXC container with an external and loopback IPv4 address, and with a loopback IPv6 address.

```
root@test30245:~/bitcoin# ip a | grep inet
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
inet6 ::1/128 scope host noprefixroute
inet 192.168.10.81/24 brd 192.168.10.255 scope global eth0
```

Inserted some extra log statments
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: [refactor] Pass TestOpts"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30407)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: Add arguments for creating a slimmer TestingSetup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30399#discussion_r1678096936)
#30407 is now merged.

👍 ryanofsky approved a pull request: "log: LogError with FlatFilePos in UndoReadFromDisk"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30428#pullrequestreview-2178200481)
Code review ACK fa14e1d9d5c5dc44396a01583ae94480b7bc29ee. This should make logging clearer and more consistent

💬 theStack commented on pull request "locks: introduce mutex for tx download, flush rejection filters on UpdatedBlockTip":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30111#issuecomment-2228934930)
Concept ACK

👍 dergoegge approved a pull request: "net: fix race condition in self-connect detection"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30394#pullrequestreview-2178208060)
ACK 16bd283b3ad05daa41259a062aee0fc05b463fa6

👍 dergoegge approved a pull request: "Add fuzz test for FSChaCha20Poly1305, AEADChacha20Poly1305"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28263#pullrequestreview-2178213334)
tACK 8607773750e60931e51a33e48cd077a1dedf9db3

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "script/sign: avoid duplicated signature verification after signing (+introduce signing benchmarks)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28923#pullrequestreview-2178233778)
light review ACK fe92c15f0c44d1405b9048306736bd0eae868506

Not super familiar with this area, did some code review to try to make sure the `VerifyScript` in `ProduceSignature` and end of `SignTransaction` have the same arguments, and `complete` can't e.g. be from a `DummySignatureChecker`. AFAICT the `MutableTransactionSignatureCreator::Checker()` and `TransactionSignatureChecker(...)` here should be equivalent.

🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "test: Fix intermittent failure in p2p_v2_misbehaving.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30420#pullrequestreview-2178308012)
Code Review ACK c6d43367a1ec47c004991143f031417c4e4b8095

🚀 ryanofsky merged a pull request: "log: LogError with FlatFilePos in UndoReadFromDisk"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30428)

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "Bugfix on TransactionsView - Disable if privacy mode is set during wallet selection":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/815#issuecomment-2229091476)
> @pablomartin4btc
>
> > ... was introduced in #718...
>
> Sure about PR number? ('cause there is no such a number in this repo)

oh! my bad.. a typo there... how lucky! I'll play the lottery with that one today... I meant #708, I think it's the only place related to the "mask value" where I switched to the overview tab when the mask value checkbox on the menu is ticked but still need to check it.