✅ pinheadmz closed a pull request: "net: use interruptible async getaddrinfo wrapper from libevent for DNS"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27505)

⚠️ vostrnad opened an issue: "Coinstats index corrupted after invalidateblock and clean shutdown"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27558)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

I tried running `invalidateblock` on a block a few hundred blocks behind the chain tip. While this command was running, I also ran `stop` and the node apparently shut down cleanly:

<details>
<summary>Last logs before shutdown</summary>

```
2023-05-02T18:31:17Z UpdateTip: new best=00000000000000000003518599da068e68cca93b3d74bcc25e240229f7a86293 height=787853 version=0x23608000 log2_
...

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: bugfix, 'wallet_load_ckey' unit test fails with bdb":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26644#issuecomment-1532015825)
Would it be easier to do this on top of #26715?

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "validate package transactions with their in-package ancestor sets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26711#discussion_r1182968218)
under what situations does the "representative tx" not get filled, and why is `TX_MISSING_INPUTS` the right value to set?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "Add support for "partial" fuzzers that indicate usefulness":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27552#discussion_r1182981008)
Also, might be good to make the return type type-safe with a C++ `enum class` to avoid confusion due to under-documentation and accidental typo bugs?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "fuzz: BIP 42, BIP 30, CVE-2018-17144":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17860#issuecomment-1532052827)
Rebased and partly rewritten

🤔 TheCharlatan requested changes to a pull request: "contrib: add ELF OS ABI check to symbol-check.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26953#pullrequestreview-1409806683)
Concept ACK

Seems worthwhile to check these in case we accidentally increment the ABI version.

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "contrib: add ELF OS ABI check to symbol-check.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26953#discussion_r1182998138)
I tested all these versions manually first by reading them with `readelf --notes bitcoin-cli` and then running this script against the 24.0.1 release binaries. All the others matched, but the power pc little endian version gave me `3.2.0`. Against which binaries did you check these?

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "contrib: add ELF OS ABI check to symbol-check.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26953#discussion_r1183002436)
This is against master (binaries produced with a Guix build). The symbol/security scripts are (only) expected to work with the version of the source they are shipped with. In this case, we are using a newer version of glibc to produce the binaries in master, hence the difference. Think I also alluded to this in a comment above.

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "contrib: add ELF OS ABI check to symbol-check.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26953#discussion_r1183005546)
Ah right, all the better that we catch these now. I found a recent guix build and it checks out there.

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "contrib: add ELF OS ABI check to symbol-check.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26953#pullrequestreview-1409819053)
ACK 65ba8a79a2919a0bd89f2f2d981e072d4f2f549d

👍 theStack approved a pull request: "test: Simplify feature_fastprune.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27553#pullrequestreview-1409826743)
ACK fa17767154e21e9ed00782a9e4cf9a3d1d66f5d1

Checked that the size of the generated blocks in master and PR are about equal by adding
`print(len(bytes.fromhex(self.nodes[0].getblock(self.nodes[0].getbestblockhash(), 0))))`
at the end of the test (interestingly, in the PR the block is exactly 1 byte larger [65904 vs. 65903] but that doesn't matter of course).

📝 0xB10C opened a pull request: "doc: clarify processing of mempool-msgs when NODE_BLOOM"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27559)
Under which circumstances we process received 'mempool' P2P messages caused confusion in #27426. Rather than bike-shedding the formulation of the IF-statement, this adds a comment clarifying when we process the message. Also, correcting the `m_send_mempool` description.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: bugfix, 'wallet_load_ckey' unit test fails with bdb":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26644#issuecomment-1532254497)
> Would it be easier to do this on top of #26715?

Was waiting for #27556 CI to close this in favor of #26715 actually. The heart of this PR is 32ffea2 which is just a test code re-ordering to by-pass the memory-only db limitations in the db rewrite + environment reload events executed in the wallet encryption process (we don't care about what db engine the test uses, we test exercises loading invalid data into the wallet).

With #26715 inclusion, the test db is just a raw map in-memory and
...

✅ furszy closed a pull request: "wallet: bugfix, 'wallet_load_ckey' unit test fails with bdb"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26644)

💬 litch commented on pull request "Allow configuring target block time for a signet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27446#issuecomment-1532325830)
tACK - we're running this fork in several contexts and it works as expected

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "mempool: keep CPFP'd transactions when loading from mempool.dat":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27476#discussion_r1183227419)
As a datapoint, importing my mempool now (600MB used, 237k entries) seems to take about 25 minutes. Not a particularly fast machine (though not an rpi either), debug build, etc, so something of a worst-case scenario, but still.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "lint: stop ignoring LIEF imports":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27507#issuecomment-1532639812)
> or an issue with the LIEF stubs. Am following up.

This has now been resolved upstream in LIEF. See https://github.com/lief-project/LIEF/issues/909 & https://github.com/lief-project/LIEF/commit/2e06bdb4af4586d1f5dcb9e9ccb027b55d457e24.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "contrib: add ELF OS ABI check to symbol-check.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26953#issuecomment-1532649068)
Guix Build:
```bash
80e0201c2f4c0c2639bfa4f53d7a0ca982e42e19e7abcbd013675e8323394bd8 guix-build-65ba8a79a291/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
c19b6dd1413d1796d59cee5243b8b004460e36ff0f86f277febbdcc43e5c5356 guix-build-65ba8a79a291/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-65ba8a79a291-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
9a6f9a798d1d686828e1c658735bc230e4d141b6abfb75e6e819058566707535 guix-build-65ba8a79a291/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-65ba8a79a291-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
20b76fd565b64c01
...

💬 darosior commented on pull request "MiniTapscript: port Miniscript to Tapscript":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27255#discussion_r1183400073)
Because the current codebase only support P2WSH, there is no support for legacy P2SH.