💬 maflcko commented on pull request "doc: Update dependency installation for Debian/Ubuntu":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31621#issuecomment-2596407548)
weak ACK 160c27ec078346fbf07f9b84dc10cef2b9809327

The code changes look fine, and the passing CI seems to indicate that pkgconf works even on Jammy and Bullseye. However, I haven't spend much time looking into the background here.

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "Add new "address type" column to the "receiving tab" address book page":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/753#issuecomment-2596476999)
Rebased.

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "build: Make config warnings fatal if -DWERROR=ON":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31665#issuecomment-2596507213)
> Related to #31476.

🤦 I did not realize that's what #31593 was fixing.

> Assuming the CI is always configured to use `-DWERROR`, this seems like the more logical/generic solution for #31476 compared to #31669. Although one thing that could be improved is making the error more clear, as in the current output, it's hidden far back in the scrollback.

Done, by logging `configure_warnings` to the cmake-configure-log.

> > if we start using syntax features and behavior that are only ava
...

📝 glozow opened a pull request: "[test] fix p2p_orphan_handling.py empty orphanage check"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31675)
Fix CI: https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4584274617171968?logs=ci#L2784

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: track and use all potential peers for orphan resolution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31397#discussion_r1919049643)
#31675

🤔 BrandonOdiwuor reviewed a pull request: "rpc: add cpu_load to getpeerinfo"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31672#pullrequestreview-2557008931)
Concept ACK

💬 theuni commented on pull request "cmake: Do not modify `CMAKE_TRY_COMPILE_TARGET_TYPE` globally":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31662#discussion_r1919054574)
I meant as `LINK_OPTIONS`. I'd rather have LDFLAGS forward to that unless there's a reason not to.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "[test] fix p2p_orphan_handling.py empty orphanage check":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31675#issuecomment-2596559337)
lgtm ACK 2e75ebb6169da08b04c4769555c4c84d6b5ca0ec

I guess this is a race from disconnecting the p2ps. So waiting seems the correct fix.

👋 hebasto's pull request is ready for review: "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861)

💬 glozow commented on pull request "test: p2p: fix sending of manual INVs in tx download test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31658#issuecomment-2596595387)
> > Good find! I think that `p2p_orphan_handling.py` has a similar [spot](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/e7c479495509c068215b73f6df070af2d406ae15/test/functional/p2p_orphan_handling.py#L431).
>
> Ah right, missed that one. If I interpret the `test_orphan_inherit_rejection` sub-test correctly, we want to send the INV with MSG_TX there to "announce again with potentially different witness", so the solution in this case to avoid ignoring the INV would be to add peer3 with wtxidrelay=Fal
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2596595610)
> What is the status of this?

Reworked. The PR description has been updated.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1919073119)
I did not test this branch for code coverage reports.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "[test] fix p2p_orphan_handling.py empty orphanage check":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31675#issuecomment-2596606081)
ACK 2e75ebb6169da08b04c4769555c4c84d6b5ca0ec

don't see any other problematic orphanage checks

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1919076576)
If it happens, the project might be re-built with `-DWITH_CCACHE=OFF`.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: track and use all potential peers for orphan resolution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31397#discussion_r1919078592)
Good point. I seem to recall drafting a version that randomly selected 1 peer. That maybe saves us from a peer purposefully disconnecting (since they don't know whether we assigned them), but doesn't have this redundancy problem? What do you think?

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: track and use all potential peers for orphan resolution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31397#discussion_r1919083797)
Added in #31666

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: track and use all potential peers for orphan resolution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31397#discussion_r1919085298)
Ah, makes sense - I thought you meant a different bit of code. Added in #31666

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1919085335)
This should be harmless to set in the CI, because dir should be the same for all tasks anyway. If it isn't then the compiler should differ as well.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: track and use all potential peers for orphan resolution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31397#discussion_r1919085616)
I feel like they're about the same, so going to leave as is

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: track and use all potential peers for orphan resolution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31397#discussion_r1919085794)
Added in #31666