💬 tdb3 commented on issue "V2 Only Option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29618#issuecomment-2376991344)
> Any v2only option should apply only to IPv4 and IPv6 peers, but not to Tor, I2P, CJDNS because the latter already have (stronger) MITM prevention and encryption.
A somewhat minor nuance, but seems worth mentioning:
Unless I'm missing something, Tor entry and exit nodes would see v1 traffic in the clear. If it's decided to proceed with the option, it should be clear to users that it's only clearnet, Tor/I2P would still allow v1, and e.g. using Tor isn't a cure for P2P protection (it really
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29618#issuecomment-2376991344)
> Any v2only option should apply only to IPv4 and IPv6 peers, but not to Tor, I2P, CJDNS because the latter already have (stronger) MITM prevention and encryption.
A somewhat minor nuance, but seems worth mentioning:
Unless I'm missing something, Tor entry and exit nodes would see v1 traffic in the clear. If it's decided to proceed with the option, it should be clear to users that it's only clearnet, Tor/I2P would still allow v1, and e.g. using Tor isn't a cure for P2P protection (it really
...
📝 fjahr opened a pull request: "contrib: Update asmap link in seeds readme"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30979)
I am moving all my ASMap related repositories to an asmap org. While there is a redirect in place that works for now, GitHub doesn't guarantee that it will keep working in the long term. So we should still fix the links.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30979)
I am moving all my ASMap related repositories to an asmap org. While there is a redirect in place that works for now, GitHub doesn't guarantee that it will keep working in the long term. So we should still fix the links.
💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Disable RBF Rule 2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30964#issuecomment-2377062209)
@instagibbs Sure, I'd agree with that.
Another way to think about it: let's say we scrapped rule 2 as proposed here. The resulting set of rules would have their own logical inconsistencies, specifically rule 6:
> The replacement transaction's feerate is greater than the feerates of all directly conflicting transactions.
Specifically, a large transaction that had lower feerate than one of its direct conflicts could be split into two -- a parent with super low feerate, and a child with a
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30964#issuecomment-2377062209)
@instagibbs Sure, I'd agree with that.
Another way to think about it: let's say we scrapped rule 2 as proposed here. The resulting set of rules would have their own logical inconsistencies, specifically rule 6:
> The replacement transaction's feerate is greater than the feerates of all directly conflicting transactions.
Specifically, a large transaction that had lower feerate than one of its direct conflicts could be split into two -- a parent with super low feerate, and a child with a
...
📝 marcofleon opened a pull request: "fuzz: fix bug in p2p_headers_presync harness"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30980)
The calculation for the test chain's work (`total_work`) should be outside of the loop. Previously, `total_work` was being miscalculated due to multiple additions of work from the same headers. Now, each header's work is only counted once, providing an accurate total.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30980)
The calculation for the test chain's work (`total_work`) should be outside of the loop. Previously, `total_work` was being miscalculated due to multiple additions of work from the same headers. Now, each header's work is only counted once, providing an accurate total.
👋 ryanofsky's pull request is ready for review: "multiprocess: Add capnp wrapper for Chain interface"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29409)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29409)
💬 maflcko commented on issue "win64-cross CI timeout after 2h in allocator_tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30969#issuecomment-2377098663)
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4822998216081408?logs=ci#L2609
So I guess it is not allocator tests.
Maybe a wine issue?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30969#issuecomment-2377098663)
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4822998216081408?logs=ci#L2609
So I guess it is not allocator tests.
Maybe a wine issue?
📝 willcl-ark opened a pull request: "ci: add timestamps to cirrus jobs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981)
Currently, debugging where time is spent in the cirrus jobs feels annoying, e.g. trying to see where time may be spent in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30969
Enable timestamps in the logs for more information.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981)
Currently, debugging where time is spent in the cirrus jobs feels annoying, e.g. trying to see where time may be spent in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30969
Enable timestamps in the logs for more information.
💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "win64-cross CI timeout after 2h ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30969#issuecomment-2377147030)
I opened https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981 to enable cirrus log timestamps. They may help in shedding some more light on where these timeout jobs are spending time, although in this case it seems to be a deeper bug...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30969#issuecomment-2377147030)
I opened https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981 to enable cirrus log timestamps. They may help in shedding some more light on where these timeout jobs are spending time, although in this case it seems to be a deeper bug...
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: add timestamps to cirrus jobs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981#issuecomment-2377165712)
review ACK f951f1fab258f782a88bb006b5ae4ea486705388
It may be a bit annoying when looking at functional test failures, which have a timestamp included and would then get a "wrong" timestamp, but this seems fine .
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981#issuecomment-2377165712)
review ACK f951f1fab258f782a88bb006b5ae4ea486705388
It may be a bit annoying when looking at functional test failures, which have a timestamp included and would then get a "wrong" timestamp, but this seems fine .
💬 sipa commented on pull request "Cluster linearization: separate tests from tests-of-tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30605#discussion_r1777269039)
I've improved the comments a bit.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30605#discussion_r1777269039)
I've improved the comments a bit.
👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "ci: add timestamps to cirrus jobs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981#pullrequestreview-2331638443)
Code Review ACK f951f1fab258f782a88bb006b5ae4ea486705388
There are a few times I've wished these timestamps were present.
```
[14:35:19.384] 127/137 Test #132: wallet_crypto_tests .................. Passed 2.48 sec
[14:35:19.385] Start 137: db_tests
[14:35:19.572] 128/137 Test #137: db_tests ............................. Passed 0.19 sec
[14:35:19.993] 129/137 Test #131: spend_tests .......................... Passed 3.13 sec
[14:35:20.153] 130/137 Test #31: coins_
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981#pullrequestreview-2331638443)
Code Review ACK f951f1fab258f782a88bb006b5ae4ea486705388
There are a few times I've wished these timestamps were present.
```
[14:35:19.384] 127/137 Test #132: wallet_crypto_tests .................. Passed 2.48 sec
[14:35:19.385] Start 137: db_tests
[14:35:19.572] 128/137 Test #137: db_tests ............................. Passed 0.19 sec
[14:35:19.993] 129/137 Test #131: spend_tests .......................... Passed 3.13 sec
[14:35:20.153] 130/137 Test #31: coins_
...
💬 marcofleon commented on pull request "test: Add missing sync_mempools() to fill_mempool()":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30948#issuecomment-2377284536)
Tested ACK faf801515f8fcd11a3454105cab66c38f6f240fe.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30948#issuecomment-2377284536)
Tested ACK faf801515f8fcd11a3454105cab66c38f6f240fe.
🤔 marcofleon reviewed a pull request: "test: Add missing sync_mempools() to fill_mempool()"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30948#pullrequestreview-2331663285)
Tested ACK faf801515f8fcd11a3454105cab66c38f6f240fe
Saw `AssertionError: 0.00001000 <= 0.00001000` on master.
On this branch:
```
TEST | STATUS | DURATION
mempool_limit.py | ✓ Passed | 6 s
mempool_package_rbf.py | ✓ Passed | 24 s
p2p_1p1c_network.py | ✓ Passed | 53 s
p2p_opportunistic_1p1c.py | ✓ Passed | 43 s
p2p_tx_download.py | ✓ Passed | 31 s
rpc_packages.py | ✓ Passed | 4 s
ALL | ✓ Pa
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30948#pullrequestreview-2331663285)
Tested ACK faf801515f8fcd11a3454105cab66c38f6f240fe
Saw `AssertionError: 0.00001000 <= 0.00001000` on master.
On this branch:
```
TEST | STATUS | DURATION
mempool_limit.py | ✓ Passed | 6 s
mempool_package_rbf.py | ✓ Passed | 24 s
p2p_1p1c_network.py | ✓ Passed | 53 s
p2p_opportunistic_1p1c.py | ✓ Passed | 43 s
p2p_tx_download.py | ✓ Passed | 31 s
rpc_packages.py | ✓ Passed | 4 s
ALL | ✓ Pa
...
📝 Christewart opened a pull request: "docs: Add instructions on how to self-sign bitcoin-core binaries for macOS"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30982)
Related to #15774
This PR adds instructions to the release notes to tell users how to self sign bitcoin core binaries so they are exectuable on macOS.
Tested on
```
Darwin Chriss-MacBook-Pro.local 23.6.0 Darwin Kernel Version 23.6.0: Mon Jul 29 21:14:46 PDT 2024; root:xnu-10063.141.2~1/RELEASE_ARM64_T6031 arm64
```
These commands do not appear to require 'phoning home'. I tested these commands when disconnected from a network connection and things worked.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30982)
Related to #15774
This PR adds instructions to the release notes to tell users how to self sign bitcoin core binaries so they are exectuable on macOS.
Tested on
```
Darwin Chriss-MacBook-Pro.local 23.6.0 Darwin Kernel Version 23.6.0: Mon Jul 29 21:14:46 PDT 2024; root:xnu-10063.141.2~1/RELEASE_ARM64_T6031 arm64
```
These commands do not appear to require 'phoning home'. I tested these commands when disconnected from a network connection and things worked.
💬 marcofleon commented on pull request "fuzz: fix bug in p2p_headers_presync harness":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30980#issuecomment-2377309305)
Can be tested by running `FUZZ=p2p_headers_presync ./fuzzbuild/src/test/fuzz/fuzz chainwork_crash.txt`
Should fail on master:
```
Assertion failed: (total_work < chainman.MinimumChainWork()), function p2p_headers_presync_fuzz_target, file p2p_headers_presync.cpp, line 207.
```
and pass on this PR.
[chainwork_crash.txt](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/17151589/chainwork_crash.txt)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30980#issuecomment-2377309305)
Can be tested by running `FUZZ=p2p_headers_presync ./fuzzbuild/src/test/fuzz/fuzz chainwork_crash.txt`
Should fail on master:
```
Assertion failed: (total_work < chainman.MinimumChainWork()), function p2p_headers_presync_fuzz_target, file p2p_headers_presync.cpp, line 207.
```
and pass on this PR.
[chainwork_crash.txt](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/17151589/chainwork_crash.txt)
✅ fanquake closed an issue: "Intermittent failure in p2p_1p1c_network.py", line 58, in raise_network_minfee assert_greater_than(node.getmempoolinfo()['mempoolminfee'], FEERATE_1SAT_VB) ; AssertionError: 0.00001000 <= 0.00001000"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30922)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30922)
🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: Add missing sync_mempools() to fill_mempool()"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30948)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30948)
👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "ci: add timestamps to cirrus jobs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981#pullrequestreview-2331694004)
ACK f951f1fab258f782a88bb006b5ae4ea486705388.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30981#pullrequestreview-2331694004)
ACK f951f1fab258f782a88bb006b5ae4ea486705388.
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "guix: add multiprocess binaries":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30975#issuecomment-2377322427)
I moved the Windows build skip workaround from Guix to depends. This made me excited about the prospect of moving that bit of Autotools stuff to CMake as well. :-)
Made some minimal documentation changes.
I didn't change the non-depends build (yet).
All CI instances that use depends now use multiprocess, the others don't (yet). Let's see if that breaks anything...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30975#issuecomment-2377322427)
I moved the Windows build skip workaround from Guix to depends. This made me excited about the prospect of moving that bit of Autotools stuff to CMake as well. :-)
Made some minimal documentation changes.
I didn't change the non-depends build (yet).
All CI instances that use depends now use multiprocess, the others don't (yet). Let's see if that breaks anything...
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "docs: Add instructions on how to self-sign bitcoin-core binaries for macOS":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30982#discussion_r1777335510)
I think you'd want to edit the template `doc/release-notes-empty-template.md`, because snippets are deleted.
Also, wasn't the point that this no longer works on macOS Sequoia? Would be nice to test it there.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30982#discussion_r1777335510)
I think you'd want to edit the template `doc/release-notes-empty-template.md`, because snippets are deleted.
Also, wasn't the point that this no longer works on macOS Sequoia? Would be nice to test it there.