💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Automatically repair corrupted metadata with doubled derivation path":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29124#issuecomment-2414410272)
cc @davidgumberg

💬 jasonandjay commented on pull request "doc: add dustThreshold explain of P2SH & P2TR":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30023#discussion_r1801486857)
This explanation will make the entire dust calculation logic more complete and I think it should be considered carefully.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "test: cover base32/base58/base64 with symmetric roundtrip fuzz (and padding) tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30746#issuecomment-2414420014)
cc @hodlinator

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Policy: Report reason inputs are non standard":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29060#issuecomment-2414421152)
cc @tdb3

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "refactor: policy: Pass kernel::MemPoolOptions to IsStandard[Tx] rather than long list of individual options":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30232#issuecomment-2414424598)
This PR does not seem to have attracted much attention from reviewers. As such, it does not seem important enough right now to keep it sitting idle in the list of open PRs. The motivation is vague/missing.

Closing due to lack of interest.

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "refactor: policy: Pass kernel::MemPoolOptions to IsStandard[Tx] rather than long list of individual options"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30232)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "build: improve cxx and linker flag caching":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30732#issuecomment-2414428036)
cc @hodlinator

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "CAT in Tapscript (BIP-347)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29247#issuecomment-2414433454)
Converting to draft while waiting for consensus on this.

📝 achow101 converted_to_draft a pull request: "CAT in Tapscript (BIP-347)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29247)
# CAT in Tapscript

This PR provides the necessary code to enable the opcode OP\_CAT in Tapscript as specified in [BIP-347: OP\_CAT in Tapscript](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0347.mediawiki) and [BIN-2024-0001](https://github.com/bitcoin-inquisition/binana/blob/master/2024/BIN-2024-0001.md),

**Important:** This PR *does not* include miner activation functionality. This means that merging this PR into bitcoin-core will not make OP\_CAT functional in Bitcoin.
If this PR is
...

👍 stickies-v approved a pull request: "Bump python minimum supported version to 3.10"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30527#pullrequestreview-2369902240)
ACK fa1b139d17d04cb23bdfb1dd9c2abcdad4bdcd27

> For reference:
> ...
> * https://packages.ubuntu.com/jammy/python3

Note: focal is [supported until April 2025](https://ubuntu.com/about/release-cycle) and ships with [`3.8`](https://packages.ubuntu.com/focal/python3), so since that's already unsupported as per our current `3.9` requirements that doesn't really change anything.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "doc: add dustThreshold explain of P2SH & P2TR":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30023#discussion_r1801509062)
I somewhat agree that if the code does something slightly different from what one could expect, it may be worth adding a comment - it would depend on the situation. Verbose discussions of engineering tradeoffs usually belong in discussion forums, docs, and bips, not function descriptions.

What we have currently seems fine to me: "Note this computation is for spending a Segwit v0... For Segwit v1... this computation was kept. See discussion... for more details". It is in a suitable location, i
...

💬 jasonandjay commented on pull request "doc: add dustThreshold explain of P2SH & P2TR":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30023#discussion_r1801516249)
OK, I agree with you. It may be more appropriate to put it in discuss.

I will close this issue. Thank you for your review.

✅ jasonandjay closed a pull request: "doc: add dustThreshold explain of P2SH & P2TR"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30023)

🤔 TheCharlatan reviewed a pull request: "Safegcd-based modular inverses in MuHash3072"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21590#pullrequestreview-2369959877)
Concept ACK

💬 panicfarm commented on issue "LevelDB read failure: Corruption: block checksum mismatch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30159#issuecomment-2414498815)
I wanted to weigh in here. Tried to sync a 27.1 node on a KVM with Ubuntu 24.04.01/xfs. During the initial sync I got mysterious crashes, apparently due to `.dat` files or LevelDB corruption. I unmounted the volume, but `xfs_repair` did not find any filesystem errors. Downgraded the node to `25.0`, segfaults still persisted. I also checked the KVM's RAM with memtest86+, no errors. In the kernel log there were some xfs warnings however.

After this, I reinstalled 24.04.01 on the same KVM with
...

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "set `DEFAULT_PERMIT_BAREMULTISIG` to false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28217#issuecomment-2414516227)
Closing as this lacks conceptual support and is still obviously controversial.

✅ achow101 closed an issue: "Witness scripts being abused to bypass datacarriersize limit (CVE-2023-50428)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187)

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1801611171)
Good point - I feel like we actually shouldn't be adding the `Assume(IsInvalid())` here then. We don't have the `MempoolAcceptResult` here (and we shouldn't do that imo as txdownloadman.h would have a dependency on validation.h)

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1801611396)
Ooh good catch.