🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "fuzz: Implement G_TEST_GET_FULL_NAME"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31333)

💬 hebasto commented on issue "CMake `CheckPIESupported` doesn't always work":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30771#issuecomment-2491293124)
An upstream issue: https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/26463.

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "Drop script_pub_key arg from createNewBlock":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31318#discussion_r1852145969)
I would squash the last commit, then you can also drop the `using node::BlockAssembler` declaration entirely by just calling `MineBlock(g_setup->m_node, {})`.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Drop script_pub_key arg from createNewBlock":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31318#issuecomment-2491372423)
I dropped a few spurious `(...)coinbase(_output)_script_pub_key` renames from the test commit.

And dropped another unneeded `OP_TRUE` from tx_pool.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add multiprocess binaries to release build":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30975#issuecomment-2491393950)
Rebased after fe3457c.

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "fuzz: set the output argument of FuzzedSock::Accept()":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31316#issuecomment-2491407513)
> Perhaps this makes more sense in combination with a test that uses it? Currently FuzzedSock::Accept seems entirely unused: https://maflcko.github.io/b-c-cov/fuzz.coverage/src/test/fuzz/util/net.cpp.gcov.html

I agree. I was going to ask steps to reproduce then I noticed this is unused.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: Remove submitblock pre-checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31175#discussion_r1852276089)
@mzumsande I don't recall such discussions. The only thing that matters for `getblockfrompeer` is that it _can_ store previously pruned blocks.

That said, I do think it's useful to allow `submitblock` to store a previously pruned block. It lets a user dump the block on one node and submit it on this node, without having go through the effort of establishing a p2p connection, figuring out the peer id and then calling `getblockfrompeer`.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: Remove submitblock pre-checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31175#discussion_r1852312507)
@maflcko it's probably useful to briefly reopen #10146 and link to this thread for the likely real reason for that PR.

I'm speculating it was done in a stealthy way because there might be someone running a public service to submit blocks, and it would use that RPC under the hood. Or they were worried that since mining pools use this RPC internally (see e.g. #3658) they might have it exposed to the internet and therefore could be attacked.

cc @dergoegge @darosior in case you want to add it
...

📝 theStack opened a pull request: "test: add missing segwitv1 test cases to `script_standard_tests`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31340)
Currently we have two segwitv1 output script types that are considered standard:
- `TxoutType::WITNESS_V1_TAPROOT` (P2TR): witness program has size 32 (introduced with taproot soft-fork)
- `TxoutType::ANCHOR` (P2A): witness program is {0x4e, 0x7e} (introduced with #30352)

This PR adds them to the script standardness unit tests where missing, i.e. for using them with the `ExtractDestination` and `GetScriptForDestination` functions.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: Remove submitblock pre-checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31175#issuecomment-2491534171)
Note that #31196 drops `processNewBlock()` from the Mining IPC interface, which straight-forwardly uses `ProcessNewBlock`. The interface does still use it via `submitSolution()`.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Prune mining interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31196#issuecomment-2491565760)
I tested cherry-picking this PR on top of #31175 and the tests still pass.

📝 Parkeragan opened a pull request: "Add files via upload"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31341)

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test improvements or new tests that improve coverage are always welcome.
* All other changes should have accompanying unit tests (see `src/test/`) or
functional tests (see `test/`). Contributors sh
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: Remove submitblock pre-checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31175#issuecomment-2491616239)
Something I noticed while looking at df7ad9223025b5d75e27813ce3b89ef6fc431805

The release notes of 0.18 "promise" that the RPC never returns `duplicate-invalid`:

```md
- The `submitblock` RPC previously returned the reason a rejected block
was invalid the first time it processed that block, but returned a
generic "duplicate" rejection message on subsequent occasions it
processed the same block. It now always returns the fundamental
reason for rejecting an invalid block and on
...

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "Add files via upload"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31341)

📝 fanquake locked a pull request: "Add files via upload"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31341)

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test improvements or new tests that improve coverage are always welcome.
* All other changes should have accompanying unit tests (see `src/test/`) or
functional tests (see `test/`). Contributors sh
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: Remove submitblock pre-checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31175#discussion_r1852357156)
6993836cb6488afa48922f19778ecef6d122bb69 nit: adding these log messages could be its own commit to de-obfuscate what it's actually testing.

💬 Parkeragan commented on issue "When opening or autoloading wallets there should be clear messages about rescanning in progress and wallets' names.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/259#issuecomment-2491683772)
Get wallet type

💬 jobeirne-nydig commented on pull request "rpc: add getdescriptoractivity":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30708#issuecomment-2491695788)
Thanks for the review, all. 3 ACKs so far - any notes from maintainers?

👍 Sjors approved a pull request: "rpc: Remove submitblock pre-checks"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31175#pullrequestreview-2452017538)
utACK 563278b6a125f1a3d2111d4ebd74b9cc16d83ec5

It would be good to test the new pruned node behavior, in a way similar to `rpc_getblockfrompeer.py`.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: Remove submitblock pre-checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31175#discussion_r1852467087)
3c6eeaf39e01a599829648ecd34990540835962f: even if it was previously pruned.