✅ hebasto closed a pull request: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31790)

📝 hebasto locked a pull request: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31790)
### Changes

1. **File:** `/test/lint/README.md`
- Fixed `LIEF` to `LEAF, LIFE` (Line 48)
1. **File:** `/doc/build-osx.md`
- Fixed `useable` to `usable` (Line 74)
1. **File:** `/doc/psbt.md`
- Fixed `Asend` to `Ascend, As end` (Line 137)

### Purpose

- Enhanced the clarity and professionalism of the documentation.
- Fixed minor grammatical issues for better understanding.

✅ hebasto closed a pull request: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31788)

📝 hebasto locked a pull request: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31788)
### Changes

1. **File:** `/contrib/guix/INSTALL.md`
- Fixed `debbugs` to `debugs, bedbugs` (Line 761)
1. **File:** `/doc/psbt.md`
- Fixed `Asend` to `Ascend, As end` (Line 129)
1. **File:** `/doc/tracing.md`
- Fixed `stap` to `step, stop` (Line 378)

### Purpose

- EImproved the documentation's clarity and professional tone.
- Corrected small grammatical errors to enhance comprehension.

👋 hebasto's pull request is ready for review: "cmake: Improve safety and robustness during building `crc32c` subtree"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31779)

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "multi-peer orphan resolution followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31666#discussion_r1939898933)
Looks good to me now, rest is just a matter of taste.

💬 theuni commented on pull request "build: simplify by flattening the dependency graph":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30911#issuecomment-2631884794)
$ cmake -G Ninja -B build
$ cmake --build build -t test_bitcoin
$ touch src/test/data/bip341_wallet_vectors.json
$ cmake --build build -t test_bitcoin

`[2/5] cd /home/cory/dev/bitcoin/build/src/test && /usr/bin/cmake -DJSON_SOURCE_PATH=/home/cory/dev/bitcoin/src/test/data/bip341_wallet_vectors.json -DHEADER_PATH=/home/cory/dev/bitcoin/build/src/test/data/bip341_wallet_vectors.json.h -P /home/cory/dev/bitcoin/cmake/script/GenerateHeaderFromJson.cmake`

Why would the headers need to be reg
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: simplify by flattening the dependency graph":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30911#issuecomment-2631897249)
> Why would the headers need to be regenerated unless the .json/.raw files themselves were touched?

The `.json`/`.raw` files are _explicit_ dependencies specified via the `DEPENDS` option. The `DEPENDS_EXPLICIT_ONLY` option changes the treatment of `_implicit_ dependencies.

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "cmake: Set top-level target output locations":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31161#issuecomment-2631914588)
I think if this PR is going to be merged without providing backward compatibility, something should be done to warn developers, like adding a tag `[BREAKING]` or `[INCOMPATIBLE]` or `[!]` or emoji ‼️ or ⚠️ to the subject and a clear warning in the description and maybe saying something in IRC channel too.

In its current form, this change seems likely to cause confusion and wasted time because when upgrading or downgrading around the change, **builds will appear to succeed but old binaries wil
...

💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "Fix -norpcwhitelist, -norpcallowip, and similar corner case behavior":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30529#discussion_r1939932758)
I agree when it comes to `assert()`s in C/C++, guess I haven't fully transferred that to Python yet, but this discussion helped. What do you think of doing a scripted diff renaming our `assert_*()`-functions and their usage to `check_*()` to signal that they won't be optimized out?

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "multi-peer orphan resolution followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31666#issuecomment-2631921775)
Code Review ACK 7426afbe62414fa575f91b4f8d3ea63bcc653e8b

💬 theuni commented on pull request "build: simplify by flattening the dependency graph":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30911#issuecomment-2631925054)
Without that commit, the headers must be generated late in the build, after a bunch of other libs have been built:

`base58_encode_decode.json /home/cory/dev/bitcoin/cmake/script/GenerateHeaderFromJson.cmake || libcrc32c.a libcrc32c_sse42.a libleveldb.a libminisketch.a minisketch_clmul src/bitcoin_clientversion src/crypto/libbitcoin_crypto.a src/crypto/libbitcoin_crypto_avx2.a src/crypto/libbitcoin_crypto_sse41.a src/crypto/libbitcoin_crypto_x86_shani.a src/generate_build_info src/libbitcoin_c
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "cmake: Set top-level target output locations":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31161#issuecomment-2631926352)
> IMO, there is isn't a good reason to break compatibility here at all, if a shim that just adds one new line and one new file to the build [#31161 (comment)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31161#issuecomment-2623350369) can provide it.

Thanks! Applied.

💬 mzumsande commented on issue ""Rolling forward" at startup can take a long time, and is not interruptible":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11600#issuecomment-2631941438)
> Any more on this? I've been stuck on 90% for hours. Wondering if a smaller dbcache is more preventative, albeit slower? My internet provider shut off at midnight over the weekend for maintenance, causing this issue.

This shouldn't be caused by internet issues - it happens in case of an unclean shutdown.
A smaller dbcache doesn't prevent the need to roll forward, but it should reduce the time rolling forward takes - as does #30611, after which we would flush more often even if running with a
...

⚠️ BartzZin opened an issue: "Bug Report RescanWallet backup.cpp"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31791)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [x] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

static void RescanWallet(CWallet& wallet, const WalletRescanReserver& reserver, int64_t time_begin = TIMESTAMP_MIN, bool update = true)
{
int64_t scanned_time = wallet.RescanFromTime(time_begin, reserver, update);
if (wallet.IsAbortingRescan()) {
throw JSONRPCError(RPC_MISC_ERROR, "Rescan aborted by user.");
} else if (scanned_time > time_begin) {
throw JSONRPCE
...

📝 darosior opened a pull request: "Double check all block rules in `ConnectBlock`, not only `CheckBlock`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31792)
We currently only sanity check `CheckBlock()` in `ConnectBlock()`. Not running the rest of the block
checks makes it hard to reason about upgrade edge cases if we were to introduce new consensus rules
(which would necessarily be context-dependent checks). For instance a timewarp fix or a BIP34
supplementation.

This is fine to do as the expensive check in `ContextualCheckBlock()` is cached since
1ec6bbeb8d27d31647d1433ccb87b362f6d81f90 and the future-timestamp check is split out of
`Conte
...

💬 Oztayls commented on issue ""Rolling forward" at startup can take a long time, and is not interruptible":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11600#issuecomment-2632008462)
Thanks. You are correct, when I looked into it some more, I had set windows to update automatically, and it rebooted during the night. I've now turned that feature off, and uninstalled nearly all the software on the machine.

The rolling forward process finally completed last night, but now Bitcoin Core (V27) is not connecting to peers and has not recommenced downloading. Network traffic is zero. I'm now at 54% of the initial download after 1 week. I rebooted it, but it's not responding. Progre
...

💬 willcl-ark commented on pull request "ci: run in worktrees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31787#discussion_r1940003059)
Is the (possible) running of 01_base_install.sh more than once deliberate? If so, then I'm curious why we ever do that? Is it just for the `DANGER_RUN_CI_ON_HOST` path or is there another use?

If not then it seems like we could just mark install as done when building the image, something like [this](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/410b01403346553a0aab9ac3d8347fa69398257c)...

> It is also used in tidy via git --no-pager diff.

Does this not mean that it requires the actual .git
...

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "Bug Report RescanWallet backup.cpp":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31791#issuecomment-2632046659)
@BartzZin Can you please rewrite the "current behavior" and "expected behavior" fields in your issue in English so we can understand what you are experiencing? Otherwise this issue may be closed as off-topic.

🤔 jonatack reviewed a pull request: "rpc, logging: return "verificationprogress" of 1 when up to date"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31177#pullrequestreview-2590980640)
Approach ACK