✅ 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.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1801661898)
Thanks for noticing, very subtle! Added a commit to make this change explicit, though it is overwritten immediately afterwards.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1801662930)
Added a comment that this specifically refers to peers in the map.

I also added a doxygen comment to the `TxDownloadManager` definition saying that this class isn't thread-safe and needs to be externally synced.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#issuecomment-2414663136)
Resolved https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#issuecomment-2391859626 by adding this:

> don't return package if child is in rejects filter(seems most robust?)

I like this suggestion as well:

> Call TxOrphanage::EraseTx using both txid and wtxid in this case (witness-free tx can never be valid)

I've dropped the one_honest_peer fuzzer and plan to open it as a separate PR, because it's quite a large portion of the new code and imo underripe compared to the rest of the changes.
...

💬 1440000bytes commented on pull request "wallet: Deniability API (Unilateral Transaction Meta-Privacy)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27792#issuecomment-2414671643)
Its true there was a lack of interest to review this pull request and its not the best tool for privacy. However, a worse way to do the same thing was used in Samourai earlier and still available in Ashigaru. Ricochet fee is 0.001 BTC for the default 4 hops, with an additional fee for each extra hop beyond 4.



http://ashicodepbnpvslzsl2bz7l2pwrjvajgumgac423pp3y2deprbnzz7id.onion/Ashigaru/Ashigaru-Mob
...

⚠️ D33r-Gee opened an issue: "cpp: exposing AssumeUTXO functionality to the GUI (QML) via the Node interface"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31094)
### Issues, reports or feature requests related to the GUI should be opened directly on the GUI repo

- [X] I still think this issue should be opened here

### Report

To facilitate UTXO snapshot loading through the GUI, specifically for the QML implementation, we need to extend the Node interface in [src/interfaces/node.h](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/interfaces/node.h) and provide a corresponding implementation in [src/node/interfaces.cpp](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitco
...