💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "bench: Adds a benchmark for CheckInputScripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29745#issuecomment-2402804271)
> Closing for now due to inactivity since the day it was opened. Leave a comment below if you want this re-opened, or open a new pull.
ya sorry about that I can leave it up for grabs if anyone else wants to look at it otherwise I can reopen when I have a more finalized PR open, again sorry for leaving it open but inactive
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29745#issuecomment-2402804271)
> Closing for now due to inactivity since the day it was opened. Leave a comment below if you want this re-opened, or open a new pull.
ya sorry about that I can leave it up for grabs if anyone else wants to look at it otherwise I can reopen when I have a more finalized PR open, again sorry for leaving it open but inactive
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402903171)
@Sjors
I cannot reproduce the issue on macOS Intel w/o Xcode you mentioned in:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2388568119
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2396235386
On my MacBook Pro (2019, Intel) + macOS 15.0.1, no Xcode, I can successfully build 86837bc75c4c1282fc652dfd755273db956222db as follows:
```
% brew list
==> Formulae
cmake ninja pkg-config
==> Casks
% make -j 16 -C depends NO_WALLET=1 NO_UPNP=1 NO_ZMQ=1
% cm
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402903171)
@Sjors
I cannot reproduce the issue on macOS Intel w/o Xcode you mentioned in:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2388568119
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2396235386
On my MacBook Pro (2019, Intel) + macOS 15.0.1, no Xcode, I can successfully build 86837bc75c4c1282fc652dfd755273db956222db as follows:
```
% brew list
==> Formulae
cmake ninja pkg-config
==> Casks
% make -j 16 -C depends NO_WALLET=1 NO_UPNP=1 NO_ZMQ=1
% cm
...
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402950941)
> They'd have to be cleared on all machines. Let me known if you want that to happen.
At some point, we may have to do this anyway.
> If you are just looking for a temporary workaround for testing, you can pick a different qt version, like `6.7.1`.
Not really, as it'll break patches.
> Or you can temporarily use a new sources volume, similar to the diff in [#30851 (comment)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30851#issuecomment-2337816419).
Thanks for a hint. I've added a t
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402950941)
> They'd have to be cleared on all machines. Let me known if you want that to happen.
At some point, we may have to do this anyway.
> If you are just looking for a temporary workaround for testing, you can pick a different qt version, like `6.7.1`.
Not really, as it'll break patches.
> Or you can temporarily use a new sources volume, similar to the diff in [#30851 (comment)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30851#issuecomment-2337816419).
Thanks for a hint. I've added a t
...
👍 itornaza approved a pull request: "build: Bump minimum supported macOS to 12.0"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31048#pullrequestreview-2357857323)
Concept ACK
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31048#pullrequestreview-2357857323)
Concept ACK
🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "init: Some small chainstate load improvements"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31046#pullrequestreview-2357858524)
Code Review / lightly tested ACK 31cc5006c3de4dd6a1f7a238684163956604df45
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31046#pullrequestreview-2357858524)
Code Review / lightly tested ACK 31cc5006c3de4dd6a1f7a238684163956604df45
👍 itornaza approved a pull request: "doc: update IBD requirements in doc/README.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30992#pullrequestreview-2357871419)
ACK 36a6d4b0078ebb39ed082c866bf49214a2a01241
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30992#pullrequestreview-2357871419)
ACK 36a6d4b0078ebb39ed082c866bf49214a2a01241
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402990346)
The issue with two copies of patches has been resolved. See:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1791797379
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1791799818
Additionally, a few other comments have been addressed.
---
In the meantime, Qt 6.8.0 has been [released](https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-6.8-released). However, it [breaks](https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5888564838268928) cross-compiling for Windows on Debian Bookworm, which uses [GCC 12.2](htt
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402990346)
The issue with two copies of patches has been resolved. See:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1791797379
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1791799818
Additionally, a few other comments have been addressed.
---
In the meantime, Qt 6.8.0 has been [released](https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-6.8-released). However, it [breaks](https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5888564838268928) cross-compiling for Windows on Debian Bookworm, which uses [GCC 12.2](htt
...
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1793963952)
Fixed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402990346.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1793963952)
Fixed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402990346.
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1793964163)
Fixed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402990346.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1793964163)
Fixed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402990346.
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1793964598)
Addressed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402990346.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r1793964598)
Addressed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2402990346.
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793837788)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793533834
Thanks, it's a good point that Untranslated(strprintf) is not equivalent to strprintf(Untranslated) in all cases. But I think those cases are basically broken because they are substituting non-english string fragments inside english strings.
I created a branch which removes these (4) cases and adds a scripted-diff to remove the remaining strprintf(Untranslated) uses. This allows a lot of simplifications to this PR:
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793837788)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793533834
Thanks, it's a good point that Untranslated(strprintf) is not equivalent to strprintf(Untranslated) in all cases. But I think those cases are basically broken because they are substituting non-english string fragments inside english strings.
I created a branch which removes these (4) cases and adds a scripted-diff to remove the remaining strprintf(Untranslated) uses. This allows a lot of simplifications to this PR:
...
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793913422)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793403826
> I don't think this is possible with a simple diff touching only lines that are already touched in this pull request. If you disagree, I am happy to accept any commit that compiles. I am also happy to review any pull request that achieves this and is split up from this pull request.
I see what you mean: it's not possible to introduce a util::detail namespace because it would conflict with the util::detail in the hex_
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793913422)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793403826
> I don't think this is possible with a simple diff touching only lines that are already touched in this pull request. If you disagree, I am happy to accept any commit that compiles. I am also happy to review any pull request that achieves this and is split up from this pull request.
I see what you mean: it's not possible to introduce a util::detail namespace because it would conflict with the util::detail in the hex_
...
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793960605)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793488009
> in [aaaa4fb](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/aaaa4fb20156b4375d92e1eca4acc90a425a1896): seems more straightforward to just extend `ConstevalStringLiteral` instead of creating a new `util::Original`? This would 1) minimize the diff and 2) I find `ConstevalStringLiteral` a much more helpful name than `Original`.
I think this is only a question of naming since `Original` class is replacing `ConstevalStringLit
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793960605)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793488009
> in [aaaa4fb](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/aaaa4fb20156b4375d92e1eca4acc90a425a1896): seems more straightforward to just extend `ConstevalStringLiteral` instead of creating a new `util::Original`? This would 1) minimize the diff and 2) I find `ConstevalStringLiteral` a much more helpful name than `Original`.
I think this is only a question of naming since `Original` class is replacing `ConstevalStringLit
...
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793914825)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793544349
> Thanks, added unrelated change to fix comment.
Thanks, comment makes sense. I knew there was probably some reason for doing it that way but couldn't figure out what it was.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793914825)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793544349
> Thanks, added unrelated change to fix comment.
Thanks, comment makes sense. I knew there was probably some reason for doing it that way but couldn't figure out what it was.
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793951571)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793744937
This is a good catch, but it seems better to just drop the template method instead of trying to fix it up and use it. It just seems to add complexity and it doesn't seem like there is another use-case for it.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793951571)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793744937
This is a good catch, but it seems better to just drop the template method instead of trying to fix it up and use it. It just seems to add complexity and it doesn't seem like there is another use-case for it.
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793948085)
> nit: I would prefer templating this on an enum `{Translateable,Untranslateable}` for readability over the non-obvious `<{true,false}>` boolean
Note: with changes in suggested branch it should no longer be necessary for this to be templated.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793948085)
> nit: I would prefer templating this on an enum `{Translateable,Untranslateable}` for readability over the non-obvious `<{true,false}>` boolean
Note: with changes in suggested branch it should no longer be necessary for this to be templated.
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793952960)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793707636
Would be reasonable to change this but no more change is actually required here with my suggested branch.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793952960)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793707636
Would be reasonable to change this but no more change is actually required here with my suggested branch.
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793944625)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793642022
Yes I do think that's better and basically made the same change in my branch, though without the str() method since it seems it makes it a little less clear what return type is.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793944625)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793642022
Yes I do think that's better and basically made the same change in my branch, though without the str() method since it seems it makes it a little less clear what return type is.
👍 itornaza approved a pull request: "build: have "make test" depend on "make all""
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31015#pullrequestreview-2358061805)
ACK 2957ca9611916efb570d157b9c7a0b188161660d
Followed the testing steps from the description on macOS 15.0.1 with cmake version 3.30.5 from brew.
1. `cmake -S . -B build`
2. `cmake -C build -j24`
3. `touch src/primitives/transaction.cpp`
<details>
<summary>Confirmed the timestamp change on the file compared to the other ones</summary>
```
transaction.cpp -rw-r--r-- 1 ioannis staff 4170 9 Oct 21:42 transaction.cpp
transaction.h -rw-r--r-- 1 ioannis staff 13730 5 Aug
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31015#pullrequestreview-2358061805)
ACK 2957ca9611916efb570d157b9c7a0b188161660d
Followed the testing steps from the description on macOS 15.0.1 with cmake version 3.30.5 from brew.
1. `cmake -S . -B build`
2. `cmake -C build -j24`
3. `touch src/primitives/transaction.cpp`
<details>
<summary>Confirmed the timestamp change on the file compared to the other ones</summary>
```
transaction.cpp -rw-r--r-- 1 ioannis staff 4170 9 Oct 21:42 transaction.cpp
transaction.h -rw-r--r-- 1 ioannis staff 13730 5 Aug
...
👍 theuni approved a pull request: "build: scripted-diff: drop config/ subdir for bitcoin-config.h"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30937#pullrequestreview-2358193872)
utACK 09b0161c4a2502564f50fa2b3ce9b19d8fc40d8b
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30937#pullrequestreview-2358193872)
utACK 09b0161c4a2502564f50fa2b3ce9b19d8fc40d8b