:lock: achow101 locked an issue: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31329)

💬 naumenkogs commented on pull request "test: addrman: tried 3 times and never a success so `isTerrible=true`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30445#issuecomment-2487609939)
ACK 1807df3d9fb0135057a33e01173080ea14b0403d

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: locking -testdatadir when not specified and then deleting lock and dir at end of test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31328#discussion_r1849669093)
I think the error message was a bit incorrect. `"The test executable is probably already running."` may not be accurate, because a lockfile may be present when the test executable crashed, no?

Also, it may be confusing for the default case, which should never have a colliding test dir. The issue in that case would be the path collision, not that `"The test executable is probably already running."`.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Fix RANDOM_CTX_SEED use with parallel tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30737#issuecomment-2487689810)
> Edit: Fixed in #31317

My understanding is that with the current state of that pull, all outstanding observable issues mentioned in this thread are fixed? If not, please leave a comment.

There may or may not be some small style-fixups/follow-ups such as https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31317#discussion_r1849149324, but no real issue to be fixed.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Revert to random path element":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31317#discussion_r1849675654)
> Having `g_rng_temp_path_init` be called as soon as this compilation unit is included in a binary isn't ideal but still acceptable (`BasicTestingSetup` may not be used in a given run).

Yeah, I guess it should be fine to move the init inside the `BasicTestingSetup` constructor, as long as it is before the `SeedRandomForTest`. I am happy to review a follow-up doing that, but I'll leave this as-is for now, due to the three acks.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Feature request: Backup of datadir state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31324#issuecomment-2487740107)
> Not a software problem, but its the environment. Many events can corrupt data inside datadir, to name some: power outages, out of resources (RAM), network fail (in case of network storage).

From a Bitcoin Core perspective, none of these should lead to corruption, as the state is flushed atomically. If a flush were to fail, it will be re-done on the next startup (which could then take a long time).

If you are observing issues, it is likely hardware issues, or software issues somewhere els
...

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Feature request: Backup of datadir state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31324#issuecomment-2487763524)
> The creation of this backup also can be automated using scripts in bash, python, etc. The script need to stop bitcoind, write chainstate, blocks/index and some last .blk and .rev files. The restoration can be done manually, jsut replace chainstate, blocks/index and exclude .blk/.rev files down to current in the backup.


I am sure most people using Bitcoin Core in production will be doing backups already. However, I am also sure that everyone is using their preferred method of backing up. A
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Rework wallet_migration.py to use previous releases":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31248#issuecomment-2487825932)
Only trivial style-only changes

re-ACK 55347a5018b2c252c56548f0a6dc1e88e42f66b6 🥊

<details><summary>Show signature</summary>

Signature:

```
untrusted comment: signature from minisign secret key on empty file; verify via: minisign -Vm "${path_to_any_empty_file}" -P RWTRmVTMeKV5noAMqVlsMugDDCyyTSbA3Re5AkUrhvLVln0tSaFWglOw -x "${path_to_this_whole_four_line_signature_blob}"
RUTRmVTMeKV5npGrKx1nqXCw5zeVHdtdYURB/KlyA/LMFgpNCs+SkW9a8N95d+U4AP1RJMi+krxU1A3Yux4bpwZNLvVBKy0wLgM=
trusted c
...

💬 GabrieleBocchi commented on pull request "doc: Correct PR Review Club frequency from weekly to monthly":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31327#issuecomment-2488005127)
Thank you for the suggestion! I completely agree. I've updated the PR accordingly.

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "Feature request: Backup of datadir state"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31324)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "Feature request: Backup of datadir state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31324#issuecomment-2488095819)
Going to close this. It's unlikely we are going to introduce additional complexity to our software, to work around issues in your hardware / environment.

👍 dergoegge approved a pull request: "test: Revert to random path element"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31317#pullrequestreview-2448100194)
ACK faaaf59f71ede057b2c1d369ef8db973c2f2dbc2

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "doc: Correct PR Review Club frequency from weekly to monthly":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31327#issuecomment-2488136391)
Let's [squash](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#squashing-commits) the two commits into one. It makes for a cleaner history when this is merged.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: Revert to random path element"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31317)

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Unify `-logsourcelocations` format":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30811#issuecomment-2488163342)
I suspect that this change broke OSS-Fuzz coverage build: https://issues.oss-fuzz.com/issues/379122777.

⚠️ fanquake opened an issue: "bitcoin-qt failed assertion on startup"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/844)
Moved from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31289.

### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [x] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

I ran bitcoin-qt the same way I always do, but it failed to start up. The terminal shows this:

```
[New Thread 0x7fff337fe6c0 (LWP 4274)]
[New Thread 0x7fff32ffd6c0 (LWP 4275)]
[New Thread 0x7fff327fc6c0 (LWP 4276)]
[New Thread 0x7fff31ffb6c0 (LWP 4277)]
[New Thread 0x7fff317fa6c0 (LWP 4278)]
[New Thread 0x7fff30
...

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "bitcoin-qt failed assertion on startup"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31289)

💬 fanquake commented on issue "bitcoin-qt failed assertion on startup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31289#issuecomment-2488181320)
Moved to https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/844.

💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "test: Revert to random path element":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31317#discussion_r1850037851)
I like the robustness of the current solution. Never know where `SeedRandomForTest` might creep in inside unit/bench/fuzz. Please resolve this.

💬 GabrieleBocchi commented on pull request "doc: Correct PR Review Club frequency from weekly to monthly":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31327#issuecomment-2488188141)
Thank you @tdb3, I did it. Should I also update the PR description?
This is actually my first contribution to this project, thank you for your guidance and support!