💬 github12101 commented on issue "b-msghand[4988] general protection fault":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30706#issuecomment-2315720133)
Thanks for all the replies! @fanquake where I can get trip program? Couldn't find it anywhere in Debian Stable using apt-file search.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "b-msghand[4988] general protection fault":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30706#issuecomment-2315722021)
> where I can get trip program?

https://codeberg.org/pkal/trip

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: [refactor] Use m_rng directly"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30571)

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "refactor: Replace ParseHex with consteval ""_hex literals":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30377#issuecomment-2315742637)
Changes since 92e599d57c507f35d889c3a804d2a7020dcc6b1d:
```diff
diff --git a/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp b/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp
index 452baebff3..e9b0d0ec1d 100644
--- a/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp
+++ b/src/test/miniscript_tests.cpp
@@ -596,11 +596,11 @@ BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(fixed_tests)
// - no pubkey before the CHECKSIG
constexpr KeyConverter tap_converter{miniscript::MiniscriptContext::TAPSCRIPT};
constexpr KeyConverter wsh_converter{miniscript::Miniscri
...

🤔 TheCharlatan reviewed a pull request: "guix: Bump time machine to 53396a22afc04536ddf75d8f82ad2eafa5082725"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30730#pullrequestreview-2266708095)
Guix build (aarch64):
```
b3506f1628995572aa544429361195e436306a3ad8104db04796889d12d66193 guix-build-60d4398a345c/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
60a8c2afdb972ae23d4e2c4a9135a88a983476ea8366c0b07020e0574405399e guix-build-60d4398a345c/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-60d4398a345c-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
8e50f840a94b3db48cf7fcfac7a94e06656ae11ac6a70cc23600b5e7a19b0c35 guix-build-60d4398a345c/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-60d4398a345c-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
55e93e0f36
...

📝 TheCharlatan opened a pull request: "kernel: Use spans instead of vectors for passing block headers to validation functions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30742)
Avoids the need for copying by having to wrap the header in a std::vector when just a single block header is passed. Also makes it friendlier for potential future users of the kernel library if they do not store the headers in a std::vector, but can guarantee contiguous memory.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Re-add configs removed in cmake migration":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30740#issuecomment-2315774706)
> > many configs were removed from the CI without explanation.
>
> Nice catch. It's not clear why a bunch of CI configs would have been removed..

Sorry for overlooking them.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "doc: fix 3 simple CI codespell warnings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30700#discussion_r1734967088)
> src/qt/forms/optionsdialog.ui

I don't think that adding a single file here, for which we are responsible for the spelling, is correct.

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "doc: update dev note examples for CMake"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30739#pullrequestreview-2266739050)
ACK 7de0c99804bca98ef159b7b778e6f5b602507d2c

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "doc: fix 3 simple CI codespell warnings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30700#discussion_r1734974933)
Otherwise, we would have to whitelist an incorrect word - or can you suggest a better solution?

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "Bugfix: Ensure Atomicity in Wallet Settings Updates from Chain Interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30697#issuecomment-2315790624)
Thanks, I think a natural cleanup or followup to this PR could move the `interfaces::Node` settings methods (`isSettingIgnored`, `getPersistentSetting`, `updateRwSetting`, `forceSetting`, and `resetSettings`) and the `interfaces::Chain` settings methods (`getSetting`, `getSettingList`, `getRwSetting`, `updateRwSetting`, `overwriteRwSetting`, `deleteRwSettings`) into a new `interfaces::Settings` class and add a new `interfaces::Init` method returning it.

In the longer run, I think wallet proce
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "doc: fix 3 simple CI codespell warnings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30700#discussion_r1734978338)
Whitelisting a word seems fine compared to ignoring the spelling for an entire user-facing settings page.

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "doc: fix 3 simple CI codespell warnings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30700#discussion_r1734979304)
Still hasn't been addressed.

> Not sure, in other cases we've just fixed "re-used"

A good guideline would be to use the ignore list when the "fix up" is only to appease an overzealous linter. That avoids needing to re-fix non-issues.

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "doc: fix 3 simple CI codespell warnings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30700#discussion_r1734980852)
Agree with @fanquake; better add a word to the ignore list than to exclude the file.

💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "build: Introduce CMake-based build system":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30454#discussion_r1734981334)
I think this is supposed to be `ctest`, not `ctests`?

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "doc: fix 3 simple CI codespell warnings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30700#discussion_r1734981410)
You'd rather we silence "incomin" everywhere? See: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30700#issuecomment-2308524353

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "build: Introduce CMake-based build system":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30454#discussion_r1734982273)
Yes, already fixed in a differt pr

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: Introduce CMake-based build system":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30454#discussion_r1734983385)
See #30734. Docs should be improving (generally) over the next day or so.

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "doc: fix 3 simple CI codespell warnings":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30700#discussion_r1734983803)
While touching the ignore list, can also remove entries that are no longer needed (mentioned a few above and in other comments).

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "doc: fix a few likely documentation typos related to CMake migration":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30734#issuecomment-2315803237)
> I tried separating them by topic

I don't think that's necessary. Just going to merge this one now, given the other one is still a WIP.