💬 JayBitron commented on issue "Unable to cross compile on linux for macos (28.x branch)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31027#issuecomment-2394960152)
@hebasto can you try compiling yourself, including the qt wallet

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "doc: Archive 28.0 release notes":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31035#issuecomment-2394995331)
Does not exactly match the release notes on the v28.0 tag:
```
git diff f019fcec4126aa2618734016711063d3b44260fc:doc/release-notes/release-notes-28.0.md v28.0:doc/release-notes.md | wc
333
```
It does match the one on the website, minus Jekyll metadata wrapping and two EOL space differences.

ACK f019fcec4126aa2618734016711063d3b44260fc

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add multiprocess binaries to release build":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30975#issuecomment-2395041597)
Added a commit to enable multiprocess on more CI environments.

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "Unable to cross compile on linux for macos (28.x branch)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31027#issuecomment-2395054359)
I'm getting the same error but inside a guix build: https://gist.github.com/pinheadmz/a2603f7f62c7627f33a10d8f39443f20

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "Unable to cross compile on linux for macos (28.x branch)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31027#issuecomment-2395065939)
Update: re-downloaded Xcode and re-extracted the SDK, guix build is proceeding again

👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "[28.x] doc: Sync 28.0 release notes with website"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31034#pullrequestreview-2349595994)
ACK 89d34cffedcb6ec752fa2ca355ad32e1e413b2f0

Release notes in #31034 and #31035 match
git diff 89d34cffedcb6ec752fa2ca355ad32e1e413b2f0:doc/release-notes.md f019fcec4126aa2618734016711063d3b44260fc:doc/release-notes/release-notes-28.0.md

👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "doc: Archive 28.0 release notes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31035#pullrequestreview-2349596049)
ACK f019fcec4126aa2618734016711063d3b44260fc

Release notes in #31034 and #31035 match
git diff 89d34cffedcb6ec752fa2ca355ad32e1e413b2f0:doc/release-notes.md f019fcec4126aa2618734016711063d3b44260fc:doc/release-notes/release-notes-28.0.md

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "doc: Archive 28.0 release notes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31035)

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "[28.x] doc: Sync 28.0 release notes with website"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31034)

🚀 glozow merged a pull request: "rpc: add getorphantxs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793)

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#issuecomment-2395092244)
I just pushed from 114a5405c41 to 693a1d079ea for this review https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#pullrequestreview-2343039535
I'll push again to address the silent merge conflict, and also address https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#pullrequestreview-2342669240

💬 mzumsande commented on issue "Listen on random port by default (not 8333)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31036#issuecomment-2395099390)
This would make the DNS seeds in their current from unusable (see #30900 for a related suggestion, though that would only remedy that for IPv4).

💬 itornaza commented on issue "depends: llvm-ranlib (etc): "No such file or directory" on Intel macOS 15.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30978#issuecomment-2395110662)
To get a better understanding I run some experiments on the `depeds/hosts/darwin.mk` file.

When either:

1. Comment out the lines with the definitions of `darwin_RANLIB`, `darwin _STRIP`, `darwin_OBJDUMP`, `darwin_NM`, and `darwin_DSYMUTIL`, or

2. Set the values there as
```
RANLIB := llvm-ranlib
STRIP := llvm-strip
NM := llvm-nm
OBJDUMP := llvm-objdump
DSYMUTIL := dsymutil
```

instead of

```
darwin_AR=$(shell $(SHELL) $(.SHELLFLAGS) "command -v llvm-ar")
darwin_DSYMUTIL
...

💬 luke-jr commented on issue "rfc: DATUM mining interface requirements":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31002#issuecomment-2395111539)
Bitcoin Core has been working toward trying to centrally dictate mining policy, so should really not be used for mining. OCEAN/DATUM's goal is to decentralise mining, not merely switch the central dictator from Bitmain/Foundry to Bitcoin Core.

That being said, there is already a generic/standard mining interface: getblocktemplate. It has worked for years and nothing additional is needed for DATUM.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2395115546)
All non-determinism issues have been resolved.

Guix build hashes for both `aarch64` and `x86_64`:
```
5214a1585050ee8504bf20db8bc70bc8e0f7282ef8eb453290ab8e909b32bd83 guix-build-27f3847d9f97/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
b714cadb11d1250f7f5f27ed9d0d1ad10550e279de4f15e40c9008392b5189c3 guix-build-27f3847d9f97/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-27f3847d9f97-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
06d41ffcf080d583e0cfb41c55286300e0f36d05d32f546177b54cb8d3e7531f guix-build-27f3847d9f97/out
...

✅ Sjors closed an issue: "rfc: DATUM mining interface requirements"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31002)

📝 tdb3 opened a pull request: "test: enhance p2p_orphan_handling"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31037)
Previously, `p2p_orphan_handling` relied on checking the debug log for orphanage changes. This updates the tests to reduce debug log checking and add additional checks using `tx_in_orphanage()` and `getorphantxs` introduced in #30793.

Leaving as draft for now, since I'd like to review `p2p_orphan_handling` again to identify any other useful enhancements. Suggestions welcome.

🤔 naiyoma reviewed a pull request: "ci: set a ctest test timeout of 1200 (20 minutes)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31026#pullrequestreview-2349899770)
ACK [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31026/commits/93dda4c70254750a5b5c0e7f7d2d89032519b999](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31026/commits/93dda4c70254750a5b5c0e7f7d2d89032519b999)

💬 1440000bytes commented on pull request "[27.x] Even more backports":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30558#discussion_r1788656362)
Its weird that it was added in release notes for 27.2 but not 28.0.

Anyway, it doesn't really make any difference. Just shows the lack of courtesy.

Cc: @jonatack

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1785530379)
added