💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: re-bucket long-running tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30879#issuecomment-2378902126)
review ACK f5a2000579b140a1f51fc433706c775ca560c62c

Haven't checked what effect this has, but it sounds plausible and harmless.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: generalize HasReason and use it in FailFmtWithError"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30921)

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "docs: Add instructions on how to self-sign bitcoin-core binaries for macOS":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30982#issuecomment-2378938037)
The GUI users [may be able to temporarily override your Mac security settings to open it](https://support.apple.com/en-gb/102445#openanyway) (tested on the same machine for `Bitcoin Core.app` downloaded from https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-28.0/test.rc2/bitcoin-28.0rc2-x86_64-apple-darwin.zip).

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "docs: Add instructions on how to self-sign bitcoin-core binaries for macOS":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30982#issuecomment-2378938200)
> Concept ACK.
>
> I've tested the content of the [`bitcoin-28.0rc2-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.gz`](https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-28.0/test.rc2/bitcoin-28.0rc2-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.gz) on macOS (Apple M1) Sequoia 15.0 (24A335).
>
> The `code sign -s - ...` command is _not_ required to run downloaded binaries. However, I didn't test other maOS versions.

I certainly see an error and ask for it to be removed, also on 15.0

<img width="908" alt="image" src="https://github.com/u
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: re-bucket long-running tests"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30879)

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "docs: Add instructions on how to self-sign bitcoin-core binaries for macOS":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30982#issuecomment-2378944754)
My bad! I downloaded binaries for `x86_64` arch on `arm64` machine. They were using the Rosetta framework.

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "docs: Add instructions on how to self-sign bitcoin-core binaries for macOS":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30982#issuecomment-2378949502)
> I downloaded binaries for `x86_64` arch on `arm64` machine. They were using the Rosetta framework.

A very sneaky undocumented workaround!

🤔 ismaelsadeeq reviewed a pull request: "Cluster linearization: separate tests from tests-of-tests"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30605#pullrequestreview-2333401196)
Code review ACK 0cae0c487cb8b32b96f888a31e818f2a90f848cc

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "tinyformat: refactor: increase compile-time checks and don't throw for tfm::format_error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30928#discussion_r1778429402)
I assumed the next step would be to validate the `bilingual_str` overload at compile-time too, but I've been looking at implementing that and with the run-time translation dependency (`QCoreApplication::translate`) it doesn't really seem feasible.

I hadn't considered that translations can introduce format errors too, which makes the case for `bilingual_str` format errors not throwing ever stronger indeed. I was worried that blanket catching all formatting errors at the `tfm` level could be co
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add multiprocess binaries to release build":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30975#issuecomment-2379013786)
Rebased after #30940

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: add optional blockhash to waitfornewblock":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30635#discussion_r1778446846)
So this effects GUI users that use the console, rather than bitcoin-cli?

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "tinyformat: refactor: increase compile-time checks and don't throw for tfm::format_error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30928#issuecomment-2379043395)
Force-pushed to address @maflcko's [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30928/#discussion_r1776965132) about generally not letting `tinyformat` throw format errors, instead of just for the `util::ConstevalFormatString` overloads. Most notably, this changes behaviour for the `bilingual_str` `format` overload to also not throw.

👍 maflcko approved a pull request: "tinyformat: refactor: increase compile-time checks and don't throw for tfm::format_error"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30928#pullrequestreview-2333489859)
lgtm

💬 hebasto commented on issue "RFC: Multiprocess binaries and packaging options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30983#issuecomment-2379073216)
> I like the idea of a unified `bitcoin` command.

So do I.

Would it be beneficial for users if we started shipping DEB and RPM packages? The package manager would handle the proper installation of multiple executables.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Split CConnman":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30988#issuecomment-2379079961)
Nice! I'll try to use this for `Sv2Connman` in https://github.com/Sjors/bitcoin/pull/50 and will let you know if anything is missing.

Can you put `sockman.h` in `libbitcoin_common` instead of `libbitcoin_node`? For the Template Provider I'm trying to prevent a circular dependency on the node. I think this can be done by moving a few more things out of net.h. This should do the trick: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/4dd51b2924860bf10466da080ea4ff7bed1a3e3f

👋 brunoerg's pull request is ready for review: "p2p: rpc: add `tx_reconciliation` to `getpeerinfo`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30984)

💬 antonilol commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#issuecomment-2379086150)
How hard is it for attackers to deliberately insert collisions? Is it worth to (try to) counteract this?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Split CConnman":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30988#discussion_r1778257807)
nit: Arrays are sorted and I don't think it is user-friendly to shuffle them by ID. I think this comment can just be removed.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "RFC: Multiprocess binaries and packaging options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30983#issuecomment-2379102811)
> Would it be beneficial for users if we started shipping DEB and RPM packages? The package manager would handle the proper installation of multiple executables.

IIRC there were some in the packagin repo, but they were both removed due to being unmaintained, see https://github.com/bitcoin-core/packaging?tab=readme-ov-file#bitcoin-core-packaging

💬 sstone commented on pull request "Add a "tx output spender" index":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24539#issuecomment-2379167604)
> How hard is it for attackers to deliberately insert collisions? Is it worth to (try to) counteract this?

The index is currently based on suggestions by @hodlinator and @antonilol and the key for a given outpoint is the last 8 bytes of the outpoint's tx hash, represented as an 8 bytes integer, to which we add the outpoint's output index.
=> to generated collisions attackers need to generate transactions which hash to values that have the same first 8 bytes. I guess that would not be that d
...