💬 marcofleon commented on pull request "fuzz: Fix difficulty target generation in `p2p_headers_presync`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31213#discussion_r1829772701)
I should also add, I used the expression in `GetBlockProof` https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/65b194193661e27cf2d9c0e0d7e3b627a379513a/src/chain.cpp#L143 to calculate the work on a single header.

📝 achow101 opened a pull request: "tests: Handle BDB dynamic pagesize"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31222)
BDB may choose to use a pagesize other than 4096. As such, the parser should use the pagesize given by the BDB file.

Fixes #31210

📝 mzumsande opened a pull request: "net, init: derive default onion port if a user specified a -port"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31223)
This resolves #31133 (setups with multiple local nodes each using a different `-port` no longer working with v28.0, see the issue description for more details) by deriving the default onion listening port to be the value specified by `-port` incremented by 1 (idea by vasild / laanwj).
Note that with this fix, the chosen `-port` values of two local nodes cannot be adjacent, otherwise there will be port collisions again.

From the discussion in the linked issue, this was the most popular option
...

💬 mzumsande commented on issue "net: Tor service target port collides when running multiple nodes, making bitcoind error out":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31133#issuecomment-2457841759)
I opened #31223 to move this forward (it seems to be consensus that we should fix this either now or not at all).

💬 bigspider commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r1829804219)
These three constants are `0x1a` , `0x1b`, `0x1c` in the final version of [BIP-373](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0373.mediawiki).

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Improve `ccache` performance for different build directories":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1829817574)
@theuni
> Arguably the issue here is that we have debug symbols for secp at all.

What are your suggestions?

💬 Christewart commented on pull request "net, init: derive default onion port if a user specified a -port":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31223#issuecomment-2457898255)
concept ACK

💬 furszy commented on pull request "bench: add support for custom data directory":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31000#issuecomment-2457975437)
Sorry for the delay.
@maflcko, the issue seems to be that the exception occurs in the test base class constructor. Which is not part of the actual test code and runs prior to it. So it might not be captured by the framework, throwing the "unknown location error".
Just dropped the fix and pushed a commit to verify it. Let's see what the CI prints now.

⚠️ Sandra-Amina-Boss opened an issue: "Sm"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31224)
https://github.com/bnb-chain/greenfield-whitepaper/tree/main

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "Sm"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31224)

:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "Sm"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31224)

💬 marcofleon commented on pull request "fuzz: Fix difficulty target generation in `p2p_headers_presync`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31213#discussion_r1829926285)
If I wanted to do a lower target based on `MinimumChainWork`, I think I could do
```
target = (~work + 1) / work
```
where work would be `MinimumChainWork / 1600` or maybe a bit less to be safe.

👋 glozow's pull request is ready for review: "TxDownloadManager followups"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31190)

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Update secp256k1 subtree to v0.6.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31216#issuecomment-2458061763)
> Should we disable the musig module in this PR and enable it only when it is needed?

Done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "BlockAssembler: return selected packages vsize and feerate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30391#discussion_r1829943882)
Nonblocking, I can understand it's a larger change to use it.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r1829944320)
Good catch! Fixed.

📝 secp512k2 opened a pull request: "doc: Fix grammatical errors in multisig-tutorial.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31225)
This pull request fixes grammatical errors in the 'multisig-tutorial.md' document.

Corrections:

1. Incorrect Phrase "As can been seen":

- Before:

There are discussions about eliminating this redundancy, as can been seen in the issue #17190 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17190).

- After:

There are discussions about eliminating this redundancy, as can be seen in the issue #17190 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17190).

2. Clarity Improveme
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Unify `-logsourcelocations` format":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30811#issuecomment-2458093729)
My Guix build:
```
aarch64
67b7e95e0f1d45debad8a8cac4c2d349e3e01efcf62e0b109345896f296758d9 guix-build-788c1324f3d8/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
cd3c67eaa5f6fadf0a73cdb1aa03563d720fc7fdae1b59aa495a0eda9d2695af guix-build-788c1324f3d8/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-788c1324f3d8-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
5c1eb4ff827336a9d113497459981e213844b87e232c33fc00317ce20302f761 guix-build-788c1324f3d8/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-788c1324f3d8-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
dd78923f
...

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "Update secp256k1 subtree to v0.6.0"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31216#pullrequestreview-2416632014)
ACK 97235c446e9986ecca09c2a4b78d6c6239853fdb, verified by updating the secp256k1 subtree locally.

💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "Remove the legacy wallet and BDB dependency":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28710#issuecomment-2458206441)
It looks like all three dependencies got merged, is this ready for review?