💬 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

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: track and use all potential peers for orphan resolution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31397#discussion_r1919085877)
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_r1919085955)
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_r1919086045)
Added in #31666

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2596652055)
The CI failure is [unrelated](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31675).

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1919101037)
This is no longer relevant for the recent [push](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2596595610).

🤔 pablomartin4btc reviewed a pull request: "gui, psbt: Use SIGHASH_DEFAULT when signing PSBTs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/850#pullrequestreview-2557125142)
utACK 3e97ff9c5eaa3160426ba112930b047404c54c9e

I agree with @Sjors but tha'ts not covered by doc at the `/** Signature hash types/flags */` `enum` definition (`src/script/interpreter.h`)?

> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/e94bb4e5fc6dea67844a8495b948b679649b7b65 makes this problem go away though.

is that part of a PR?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "init: Lock blocksdir in addition to datadir":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31674#discussion_r1919104106)
I guess it is fine to ignore any "hidden" files (starting with `.`) as an alternative.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1919104517)
In the recent [push](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2596595610), this branch relies on setting the `base_dir` option by the user because the required value depends on actual user's build environment.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1919106437)
This is no longer relevant for the recent [push](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2596595610).

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "p2p: track and use all potential peers for orphan resolution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31397#discussion_r1919108948)
Yes, taking a random peer would be ok.
Though I kinda like the idea of calling `ProcessOrphanTx()` in `FinalizeNode()` in general, even if just 1 peer is involved - this is scheduled work that is assigned to but doesn't need any input from the peer, so there is no reason not do it just because the peer decides to disconnect at the wrong time.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1919109640)
[Reworked](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2596595610) to work equally well across both Git's wortktrees and build trees.