💬 satoshiv21 commented on something "":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/332655cb52c8f8ef64b29b09e38ef5d61235ed21#r152304903)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A B C D E F G H I 👁
J K L M N O P Q R
S T U V W X Y Z


💀💀💀💀💀
SATOSHI NAKAMOTO = 55
WEB = 3 [ WEB 0 1 2 ] = 3
WE B.C WE B3
B Lock Ch A👁I n = 6
Bitcoin = = 9
(Co in B.C)








PYRAMIDS
KING KHUFU ERA36912
EGYPT GIZA 33000 B.C
B . C

B T C

Bit Coin

B lock 🔒⛓️ CH AI N
👁

Cryptography
397726791787
3+9+7+7+2+6+7+
...

💬 satoshiv21 commented on something "":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/332655cb52c8f8ef64b29b09e38ef5d61235ed21#r152304912)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A B C D E F G H I 👁
J K L M N O P Q R
S T U V W X Y Z


💀💀💀💀💀
SATOSHI NAKAMOTO = 55
WEB = 3 [ WEB 0 1 2 ] = 3
WE B.C WE B3
B Lock Ch A👁I n = 6
Bitcoin = = 9
(Co in B.C)








PYRAMIDS
KING KHUFU ERA36912
EGYPT GIZA 33000 B.C
B . C

B T C

Bit Coin

B lock 🔒⛓️ CH AI N
👁

Cryptography
397726791787
3+9+7+7+2+6+7+
...

💬 eval-exec commented on issue "GetRandBytes() Hangs on Samsung Galaxy S25 and OnePlus 13":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31817#issuecomment-2645221706)
I have Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra:


💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2645380742)
Thanks to all for the review!

Your feedback has been addressed.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1947720776)
Thanks! The comment has been [added](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2645380742).

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1947720890)
Thanks! [Reworked](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2645380742) per your feedback.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1947720947)
Thanks! [Fixed](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2645380742).

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Enhance Ccache performance across worktrees and build trees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1947721236)
Reverted [back](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#issuecomment-2645380742) given this [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30861#discussion_r1941284740).

🤔 maflcko reviewed a pull request: "Limit retries in GetRNDRRS to avoid infinite loop"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31826#pullrequestreview-2603859200)
Instead of changing the code and repeating the code changes in the description, it would be better to actually explain why the problem happens and why this fix is the correct fix.

To me this seems like a problem where a system claims to support a feature, but doesn't? So it would be better to instead investigate and fix the feature test or feature reporting.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Limit retries in GetRNDRRS to avoid infinite loop":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31826#discussion_r1947836133)
r1 will be uninitialized memory and returning it will be undefined behavior.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Limit retries in GetRNDRRS to avoid infinite loop":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31826#discussion_r1947836644)
When this fails, do we want to fall back to `GetRNSR` instead, rather than returning whatever arbitrary value was left in the register?

💬 Christewart commented on pull request "test: Add `leaf_version` parameter to `taproot_tree_helper()`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29371#issuecomment-2645752238)
Rebased

💬 Christewart commented on pull request "consensus: Consistently encode and decode `OP_1NEGATE` similar to other small ints in Script":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29589#issuecomment-2645753696)
Rebased

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build, ci: Fix linking `bitcoin-chainstate.exe` to `bitcoinkernel.dll` on Windows":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31158#issuecomment-2645774491)
> Give `cs_main` hidden visiblility and add a `get_csmain()` getter function for bitcon-chainstate to use. That would work but would mean that bitcoin-chainstate's code would diverge from the rest of the codebase. (assuming we didn't do a global replacement, which would be a HUGE hammer)

(Probably out-of-scope for this pull, but there is already a getter for cs_main: `chainman.GetMutex()`, which can be used today, and can make it easier to turn cs_main from a global variable into a member fie
...

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "fixing-link-Update dependencies.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31822)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "fixing-link-Update dependencies.md":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31822#issuecomment-2645783216)
I wouldn't mind the change and would be happy to review it, but given the two conflicts https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31822#issuecomment-2643522687 (one which also rewords the file, and another one which removes BDB and the line changed in this pull request anyway), I'll be closing this for now. Thanks.

💬 tofutim commented on issue "Unable to cross compile on linux for macos (28.x branch)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31027#issuecomment-2645915233)
> Update: re-downloaded Xcode and re-extracted the SDK, guix build is proceeding again

Did it work after re-extracting the SDK? I had no luck with 28.1. Trying 27.2 now.

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "doc: swap CPPFLAGS for APPEND_CPPFLAGS":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31819#issuecomment-2645930017)
ACK ea687d202934ee9aa26912cda21993da219cd418

Just used `APPEND_CPPFLAGS` yesterday for some debugging, so it works :)

💬 luke-jr commented on issue "Duplicate coinbase transaction space reservation in CreateNewBlock":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21950#issuecomment-2645974712)
I suppose the ideal would be to create an actual generation transaction that fills the reserved weight/sigops, so the block validity check picks up on any error.

But blocks are already way too big, so I don't consider this a priority. Better to play it safe. The pennies unclaimed are nothing compared to the loss of an entire invalid block.

🤔 rishkwal reviewed a pull request: "tests: Add witness commitment if we have a witness transaction in `FullBlockTest.update_block()`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31823#pullrequestreview-2604068209)
Hi, looking at `feature_block.py` — it doesn't seem to contain any SegWit-specific validation tests. They remain in `feature_segwit.py`, `p2p_segwit.py`, etc; although I'm not completely confident about the scope of this file.
I have a couple of questions(avoid if irrelevant):
1. Is there any test case that can be covered in the current implementation that needs this change to be implemented?
2. Wouldn't it be better to create a new test file like `feature_<soft_fork>.py` to test the consensu
...