💬 stratospher commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1776344227)
b4a84ab: any reason for skipping 29?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1776344227)
b4a84ab: any reason for skipping 29?
💬 stratospher commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1791964862)
b588ff8: nit: could move the MixHash log up (after `DecryptAndHash`)and before Validate log for more clarity.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1791964862)
b588ff8: nit: could move the MixHash log up (after `DecryptAndHash`)and before Validate log for more clarity.
💬 stratospher commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1791274447)
b588ff8: shouldn't this be "Noise_NX_Secp256k1+EllSwift_ChaChaPoly_SHA256" (from spec)?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1791274447)
b588ff8: shouldn't this be "Noise_NX_Secp256k1+EllSwift_ChaChaPoly_SHA256" (from spec)?
💬 stratospher commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1792116481)
b588ff8: typo - s/ephmeral/ephemeral in a few places.
since the template provider behaves as the server and only performs the responder handshake flow, it might be useful to mention initiator handshake flow is just for tests.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1792116481)
b588ff8: typo - s/ephmeral/ephemeral in a few places.
since the template provider behaves as the server and only performs the responder handshake flow, it might be useful to mention initiator handshake flow is just for tests.
💬 stratospher commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1792055061)
b588ff8: (micro nit/feel free to ignore) could `return m_cs1.EncryptMessage` to keep it consistent with how it's done in `DecryptMessage`.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1792055061)
b588ff8: (micro nit/feel free to ignore) could `return m_cs1.EncryptMessage` to keep it consistent with how it's done in `DecryptMessage`.
💬 stratospher commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1792872756)
b588ff8: `(valid_from < now) && (valid_to > now)`
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1792872756)
b588ff8: `(valid_from < now) && (valid_to > now)`
💬 stratospher commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1792239111)
d08a2ebf: sv2 is OFF when fuzzing - so we need to turn it ON here to fuzz locally. Also the sv2 fuzz tests aren't run on the CI.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#discussion_r1792239111)
d08a2ebf: sv2 is OFF when fuzzing - so we need to turn it ON here to fuzz locally. Also the sv2 fuzz tests aren't run on the CI.
💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "Halt processing of unrequested transactions v2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30572#issuecomment-2401651398)
> Is anyone running this currently with the code set to always enforce or just log? it would be useful to know at what rate nodes are currently seeing unsolicited.
I switched one of my monitoring nodes to run https://github.com/0xB10C/bitcoin/commit/ba39837d999407a55c3784059f7cf07bdbdfce76 to collect some data on this. Having a glance at the logs since yesterday, I've mostly seen the same few peers sending me unsolicited transactions - at a rate of a few per minute.
> I'm particularly inte
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30572#issuecomment-2401651398)
> Is anyone running this currently with the code set to always enforce or just log? it would be useful to know at what rate nodes are currently seeing unsolicited.
I switched one of my monitoring nodes to run https://github.com/0xB10C/bitcoin/commit/ba39837d999407a55c3784059f7cf07bdbdfce76 to collect some data on this. Having a glance at the logs since yesterday, I've mostly seen the same few peers sending me unsolicited transactions - at a rate of a few per minute.
> I'm particularly inte
...
🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "refactor: include the proper header rather than forward-declaring RemovalReasonToString"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31058)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31058)
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "RFC: build: support for pre-compiled headers.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31053#issuecomment-2401784317)
> Combining with #30911 produces even more of a speedup (with Make, ninja is about the same).
Why are ninja builds not affected?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31053#issuecomment-2401784317)
> Combining with #30911 produces even more of a speedup (with Make, ninja is about the same).
Why are ninja builds not affected?
💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-2401821128)
`a51c2cdda5...09a7394759`: silence the bogus GCC warning about uninitialized `std::optional`
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-2401821128)
`a51c2cdda5...09a7394759`: silence the bogus GCC warning about uninitialized `std::optional`
💬 vasild commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-2401828752)
`09a7394759...6b10008441`: rebase due to conflicts
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-2401828752)
`09a7394759...6b10008441`: rebase due to conflicts
💬 dergoegge commented on issue "Disallow building fuzz binary without `-DBUILD_FOR_FUZZING`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31057#issuecomment-2401942272)
> I build with these options to be able to be able to know if changes not related to fuzzing will break the build.
I assumed (incorrectly) that almost no one would be doing this anymore since building the fuzz binary is no longer the default behavior. What I'm proposing would require you to do a separate build with `-DBUILD_FOR_FUZZING=ON`, which is of course annoying if you just want to check that the fuzz binary compiles.
Another assumption I have (perhaps also incorrect) is that no one
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31057#issuecomment-2401942272)
> I build with these options to be able to be able to know if changes not related to fuzzing will break the build.
I assumed (incorrectly) that almost no one would be doing this anymore since building the fuzz binary is no longer the default behavior. What I'm proposing would require you to do a separate build with `-DBUILD_FOR_FUZZING=ON`, which is of course annoying if you just want to check that the fuzz binary compiles.
Another assumption I have (perhaps also incorrect) is that no one
...
💬 VivaRado commented on issue "support BIP39 mnemonic in descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19151#issuecomment-2402017418)
So we delete the comment about BIP39 UI implementation because @junderw down voted, without probably even looking at the code. @junderw your behavior is not appreciated. If you do not have something constructive to add, avoid negative displays of grandeur.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19151#issuecomment-2402017418)
So we delete the comment about BIP39 UI implementation because @junderw down voted, without probably even looking at the code. @junderw your behavior is not appreciated. If you do not have something constructive to add, avoid negative displays of grandeur.
💬 Xaspr commented on issue "Unable to sync blockchain on laptop: ERROR: ReadBlockFromDisk: Deserialize or I/O error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29255#issuecomment-2402048557)
Thanks for the heads up. I'm now doing IBD with 28.0 on the same Windows installation. On earlier versions, the issue came up after a few days. I will check in again after a week if the issue is solved with blocksxor.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29255#issuecomment-2402048557)
Thanks for the heads up. I'm now doing IBD with 28.0 on the same Windows installation. On earlier versions, the issue came up after a few days. I will check in again after a week if the issue is solved with blocksxor.
💬 naumenkogs commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1793328846)
Similarly, the `AddKnownTx` won't be ever called upon this return.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1793328846)
Similarly, the `AddKnownTx` won't be ever called upon this return.
💬 naumenkogs commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1793322248)
673d6ee17dd48281fa42983f8b95553d5494e914
In this particular commit the updated value of `add_extra_compact_tx` is dropped on the floor. I think this is fixed in the final version on this PR :)
(and `AddToCompactExtraTransactions` is not called anymore inside ` if (state.GetResult() == TxValidationResult::TX_MISSING_INPUTS) {` )
I'm not much worried about the quality of intermediate commits, but it makes following the changes a bit difficult.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1793322248)
673d6ee17dd48281fa42983f8b95553d5494e914
In this particular commit the updated value of `add_extra_compact_tx` is dropped on the floor. I think this is fixed in the final version on this PR :)
(and `AddToCompactExtraTransactions` is not called anymore inside ` if (state.GetResult() == TxValidationResult::TX_MISSING_INPUTS) {` )
I'm not much worried about the quality of intermediate commits, but it makes following the changes a bit difficult.
💬 naumenkogs commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1793355952)
Not sure why it says the file is outdated. Probably because i commented on the un-touched line?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1793355952)
Not sure why it says the file is outdated. Probably because i commented on the un-touched line?
📝 maflcko opened a pull request: " refactor: Check original (translatable) format string at compile-time "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061)
All original format strings are fixed. This change surfaces errors in them at compile-time.
The implementation achieves this by allowing to delay the translation (or `std::string` construction) that previously happened in `Untranslated()` or `_()` by returning a new type from those functions. The new type can be converted to `bilingual_str` where needed.
This can be tested by adding a format string error in an original string literal and observing a new compile-time failure.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061)
All original format strings are fixed. This change surfaces errors in them at compile-time.
The implementation achieves this by allowing to delay the translation (or `std::string` construction) that previously happened in `Untranslated()` or `_()` by returning a new type from those functions. The new type can be converted to `bilingual_str` where needed.
This can be tested by adding a format string error in an original string literal and observing a new compile-time failure.
💬 Xaspr commented on issue "Unable to sync blockchain on laptop: ERROR: ReadBlockFromDisk: Deserialize or I/O error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29255#issuecomment-2402110673)
No luck I'm afraid. Version 28.0 also hangs after a few hours.
```
2024-10-09T11:48:11Z UpdateTip: new best=0000000000000000fee087a31f2c9c00f8a26935bf133a63ae4659bcc671460c height=287693 version=0x00000002 log2_work=76.854021 tx=33605130 date='2014-02-25T05:33:06Z' progress=0.030781 cache=323.7MiB(2627196txo)
2024-10-09T11:48:11Z UpdateTip: new best=0000000000000000db9ac4e9bbd0335f94305fc1f6772f5b39bb7c188f610f3e height=287694 version=0x00000002 log2_work=76.854163 tx=33606248 date='2014
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29255#issuecomment-2402110673)
No luck I'm afraid. Version 28.0 also hangs after a few hours.
```
2024-10-09T11:48:11Z UpdateTip: new best=0000000000000000fee087a31f2c9c00f8a26935bf133a63ae4659bcc671460c height=287693 version=0x00000002 log2_work=76.854021 tx=33605130 date='2014-02-25T05:33:06Z' progress=0.030781 cache=323.7MiB(2627196txo)
2024-10-09T11:48:11Z UpdateTip: new best=0000000000000000db9ac4e9bbd0335f94305fc1f6772f5b39bb7c188f610f3e height=287694 version=0x00000002 log2_work=76.854163 tx=33606248 date='2014
...