💬 rkrux commented on pull request "rpc: Allow fullrbf fee bump in (psbt)bumpfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31953#discussion_r1973242725)
Not a fan of looping here and explicitly creating an array of just 1 element `[seq_in]` only for assertion because the test explicitly spends 1 input, but okay I guess.

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "rpc: Allow fullrbf fee bump in (psbt)bumpfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31953#discussion_r1973158236)
Nit: Not introduced in this PR instead older code but in case you retouch and agree, this is to improve readability. Otherwise it makes one wonder what's the difference b/w the 2 tests.

```
BumpFee(transactionView, txid_non_bip125_replaceable, /*expectDisabled=*/false, /*expectError=*/{}, /*cancel=*/true);
BumpFee(transactionView, txid_bip125_replaceable, /*expectDisabled=*/false, /*expectError=*/{}, /*cancel=*/true);
```

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: Allow fullrbf fee bump in (psbt)bumpfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31953#discussion_r1973289411)
I'll open the follow-up when (and if) this is merged

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: Allow fullrbf fee bump in (psbt)bumpfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31953#discussion_r1973289863)
thx, but leaving as-is for now

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: Allow fullrbf fee bump in (psbt)bumpfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31953#discussion_r1973291329)


thx, but leaving as-is for now

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: Allow fullrbf fee bump in (psbt)bumpfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31953#discussion_r1973299230)
thx, done. Should be trivial to re-ack with `git range-diff bitcoin-core/master A B`

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Use std::span over Span":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31519#issuecomment-2687525449)
thx, done. Should be trivial to re-ack with `git range-diff bitcoin-core/master A B`

👍 rkrux approved a pull request: "rpc: Allow fullrbf fee bump in (psbt)bumpfee"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31953#pullrequestreview-2647353039)
reACK fa16051

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "rpc: Allow fullrbf fee bump in (psbt)bumpfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31953#discussion_r1973326667)
Typo in case retouched, fine otherwise.

`canceled fullrbf bump`

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "doc: Update documentation to include Clang/llvm based coverage report generation"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31933#pullrequestreview-2647444983)
Concept ACK [5f7b426](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31933/commits/5f7b42642ad83faf23c8e75511f2379f9eae25ad)

Using the new instructions of the document on MacOS using Nix-shell (so using the non mac instructions) I do endup gettting the warning that was mentioned before:
"warning: 2 functions have mismatched data"

The rapport is still generated.

Tested both under clang 19.1.7 / 18.1.8 and LLVM 19.1.7 / 18.1.8

This is an improvement because I cannot get the "old way" of cove
...

🤔 maflcko reviewed a pull request: "wallet, rpc: deprecate settxfee"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31278#pullrequestreview-2647515703)
Please squash your commits according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#squashing-commits

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: deprecate settxfee":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31278#discussion_r1973427058)
```suggestion
def restart_node(self, i, extra_args=None, clear_addrman=False, *, expected_stderr=''):
```

could force named args for new named args?

📝 rkrux opened a pull request: "rpc: add cli examples, update docs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31958)
### add cli example for `walletcreatefundedpsbt` RPC
The only example present earlier was one that creates an OP_RETURN output. This
lack of examples has discouraged me earlier to use this RPC. Adding an example
that creates PSBT sending bitcoin to address, a scenario that is much more common.

### rpc: update the doc for `data` field in `outputs` argument
It was not evident to me that this field creates an `OP_RETURN` output until
I read the code and tried it out. Thus, makin
...

⚠️ rkrux opened an issue: "cmake: unable to build binaries from my fork repo but can do so from bitcoin repo"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31959)
macOS 15.1

Not sure if it's a bug or something I missed.
I can build the binaries fine when I do so from my `projects/bitcoin` but I get the following error when I build from my fork repo here `projects/rkrux/bitcoin`.

```
➜ bitcoin git:(master) cmake --build build -j 13
...
...
make[2]: *** No rule to make target `/Library/Developer/CommandLineTools/SDKs/MacOSX14.4.sdk/usr/lib/libsqlite3.tbd', needed by `src/bitcoind'. Stop.
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
[ 75%] Building CXX o
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Revert merge of PR #31826":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31908#issuecomment-2687917758)
I tested the 28.0 release and it looks like the code isn't cross-compiled into the release binary. I guess defining `HWCAP2_RNG` requires a specific cross-compile target?

So the only use case for now would be self-compilation in a specific cloud pod in AWS or GCE (or possibly on some specific Laptops where the user installed Linux over Windows and did self-compilation)?

If so, maybe c8a883a4123ab466f9d911ee2865625ba5314c9e could be temporarily reverted and the bug be reported upstream to L
...

💬 maflcko commented on issue "cmake: unable to build binaries from my fork repo but can do so from bitcoin repo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31959#issuecomment-2687926573)
Did you try a fresh, clean build? Hint: `rm -rf ./build`


If not, what are the exact steps to reproduce, starting from a fresh git clone?

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "doc: Update translation generation instructions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31930)

📝 theuni converted_to_draft a pull request: "build: create Depends build type for depends and use it by default for depends builds"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31920)
As discussed a good bit with fanquake and hebasto. Would be nice to have for v29, but it's very late, so no worries if it doesn't make it.

Fundamentally, this creates a "Depends" build type which represents the flags that were used to build depends as opposed to colliding with the other types.

This allows the forwarding of optional flags into the CMake build for the "Depends" build type, but the user can now optionally use an existing (Debug/RelWitDebInfo/etc.) type to ignore the optimizat
...

💬 rkrux commented on issue "cmake: unable to build binaries from my fork repo but can do so from bitcoin repo":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31959#issuecomment-2688065840)
Fresh clean build seems to have done the trick, thank you @maflcko !

This can be closed.

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "cmake: unable to build binaries from my fork repo but can do so from bitcoin repo"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31959)