💬 hebasto commented on pull request "qa: Ensure consistent use of decimals instead of floats":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31595#issuecomment-2571327656)
> See [python/cpython#128005](https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/128005) (long discussion, skip to [this post](https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/128005#issuecomment-2547582533) to save time) for more background on this. This is NetBSD-specific, and apparently caused by a pkgsrc patch which inadvertently caused `sys.float_repr_style` to be "legacy". So the question is if this qualifies as a bug in NetBSD or not and whether we need to accomodate it by moving to Decimals.

The NetBSD
...

✅ hebasto closed a pull request: "qa: Ensure consistent use of decimals instead of floats"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31595)

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#discussion_r1903111922)
If I understand correctly passing `-m -M` will give precedence to `-M`. Should we really support this? Might it better if providing multiple flags at once be an error? E.g. currently running
```
./bitcoin -h -m daemon
```
will print the help string and run the daemon, which might be confusing, since it is not doing the same for `-v`.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Switch to latest macOS and Windows images":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31597#issuecomment-2571328087)
@maflcko

> > Alternatively, these comments should be removed.
>
> Makes sense to remove the comment and explain that the xcode version is supposed to denote the minimum supported version to compile from xcode. I presume this is equal to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blame/6aa0e70ccbd5491ec9d7c81892820f3341ccd631/doc/release-notes-empty-template.md#L46, where 13.0+, means 13+. I assume that anyone on 13.0 is able to, and must upgrade to the latest 13.x anyway, so that the minimum requ
...

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "qa: Ensure consistent use of decimals instead of floats":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31595#issuecomment-2571328486)
I could see this going in a different way: not storing RPC parameters as python floats, and changing all such usages to strings instead (as shown in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31595#discussion_r1901722976).

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "qa: Ensure consistent use of decimals instead of floats":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31595#issuecomment-2571330376)
> I could see this going in a different way: not storing RPC parameters as python floats...

I agree with that plus https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31595#discussion_r1901893390.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "sync: improve CCoinsViewCache ReallocateCache - 2nd try":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30370#issuecomment-2571333030)
@fjahr, I've measured the effect of this change on a full IBD - <1%, doesn't seem significant.

<details>
<summary>benchmarks</summary>

> master
```bash
Benchmark 1: COMMIT=d73f37dda221835b5109ede1b84db2dc7c4b74a1 ./build/src/bitcoind -datadir=/mnt/my_storage/BitcoinData -stopatheight=870000 -printtoconsole=0
Time (mean ± σ): 39690.021 s ± 333.717 s [User: 51244.778 s, System: 3430.580 s]
...

💬 MarnixCroes commented on pull request "contrib: fix BUILDDIR in gen-bitcoin-conf script":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31332#issuecomment-2571336672)
sorry forgot to reply.

while `BUILDDIR` can be set, it's odd that simply executing the script doesn't work imo

It's not clear for me what is the desired way forward.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Test cross-built Windows executables on Windows natively":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31176#issuecomment-2571340498)
Rebased on top of the merged https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31542 and a commit picked from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31428.

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "wallet, desc spkm: Return SigningProvider only if we have the privkey":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31242#issuecomment-2571340870)
ACK f6a6d912059c66792f48689632d2a7f14f8bdad9

Reviewed and verified that the test works.

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "descriptor: check whitespace in `ParsePubkeyInner`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31603#pullrequestreview-2530760911)
As you are forbidding something that was previously allowed, this breaks compatibility with earlier versions. Wallets containing any key with a whitespace in the descriptor will fail to parse during the load procedure and shut down abruptly.
Will either need a descriptor upgrade procedure or a compatibility + warning window.

💬 hugohn commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#issuecomment-2571350247)
@starius Kind of. We build on top of the descriptor template defined in [BIP 129 (BSMS)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0129.mediawiki#user-content-Descriptor_Template). The above snippet is part of a larger BSMS wallet configuration file, which includes derivation path restrictions.

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "ci: Run functional tests in msan task"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31592#pullrequestreview-2530766486)
ACK fa0411ee305fe04800c54d141fbbeac342eaa764

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "qa: Ensure consistent use of decimals instead of floats":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31595#issuecomment-2571386445)
Why? While we are currently relying on the `short` python `repr()` algorithm for floats, this has been stable and reliable since it's been introduced in python 3.1 as far as I know - so I don't really see the benefit of changing dozens of functional tests / adding a new linter - unless there have been bugs related to this in the past?

📝 epysqyli opened a pull request: "test: fix typo in mempool_ephemeral_dust"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31604)
The `test_node_restart` test in `test/functional/mempool_ephemeral_dust.py` has a repetition in the comment.

💬 starius commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#issuecomment-2571430256)
@hugohn I built bitcoin core using this PR rebased on master.
I tried the descriptor from your message, replacing `/**/` with `/0/*` and `/1/*`. It works!

```
getdescriptorinfo "tr(musig([15d62cdf/87'/0'/0']xpub6CpM1svHYyNMTVdmDh5syFXCJHKctJNajbyLEdA8pAgAeg1jotmg9G1aVkND5Rzf37uhwhs8o2Lvq22iRpWwcbNGCrYxAozQfYQYi1eduES/0/*,[7f15646b/87'/0'/0']xpub6ChFTmSdBrhN3D16Rna7hJVQe4w56Gx83U4uNhT3oJaEXiPv7LKnY2gXi3FbbusCb145c3SMEUsSLMRdkxa82MNKqkatnK5b77BXPc3aK8h/0/*),{{{pk(musig([15d62cdf/87'/0'/0']xpu
...

💬 bigspider commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#issuecomment-2571431685)
> @starius Kind of. We build on top of the descriptor template defined in [BIP 129 (BSMS)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0129.mediawiki#user-content-Descriptor_Template). The above snippet is part of a larger BSMS wallet configuration file, which includes derivation path restrictions.

@hugohn: FYI [BIP-388](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0388.mediawiki) generalizes descriptor templates to arbitrary wallets, including with miniscript and musig; it should be e
...

💬 starius commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#issuecomment-2571497025)
I attempted to test this on Signet with a 2-of-2 MuSig2 Taproot address (without script leaves).

Succeeded using `walletprocesspsbt`, but failed when using GUI "Load PSBT from keyboard" option.

**Setup:**
- **Node 1**: Watch-only, connected to the network.
- **Node 2**: Offline, holds the first private key.
- **Node 3**: Offline, holds the second private key.

**Steps to Reproduce:**

1. Imported descriptors for each node:

```
node 2 (first private key):
importdescrip
...

💬 1440000bytes commented on issue "Fake bitcoin core website at the top of duckduckgo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31602#issuecomment-2571545965)
> I haven't actually visited the site but I am assuming it is offering malware downloads to the unsuspecting. Is there anything that can be done about this?

Yes, downloads look malicious because I see different checksum for v27.0

You can report the search results: https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/company/contact-us


💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "rpc: fix mintime field testnet4, expand timewarp attack test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31600#issuecomment-2571595908)
> Additionally this PR adjusts the timewarp test to better illustrate the griefing attack discussed here

I think adding the example to the functional test is good, but it is not clear from the description what the griefing attack is that it seeks to prevent.