💬 Sjors commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r2003786422)
Opened #32097 to track linux installation in general.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Feature: Use different datadirs for different signets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29838#issuecomment-2737337314)
> This patch only affects custom signets with `signetchallenge` and the goal was to run those on custom directories `signet_XXXXXXXX` so as not to interfere with the default signet which runs on `signet` directory if you run multiple signets

Not sure if this is true, looking at the current code.

If someone provides the default signet challenge via `-signetchallenge`, it will pick a custom dir, no? Please add a test for this as well.

Also, the CI fails currently.

🤔 i-am-yuvi reviewed a pull request: "test: replace assert with assert_equal and assert_greater_than"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32091#pullrequestreview-2699368715)
Great! ACK 387385ba1edf9febdc75d39bd77b35b29714b3d0

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "wallet: add coin selection parameter `add_excess_to_recipient_position` for changeless txs with excess that would be added to fees":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30080#issuecomment-2737436613)
> I now believe we can achieve equivalent behavior without changing the wallet by just using it to find the best funding utxo, and if there is change we can (when appropriate) build the actual tx with the change amount added to the recipient output position before submitting the transaction.

Yes, that's a good idea.

> I'll close this PR for now because this doesn't seem generally useful outside of Lightning liquidity providers that want to optimizing their UTXO set management, and a good a
...

💬 vasild commented on pull request "i2p: make a time gap between creating transient sessions and using them":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32065#issuecomment-2737446144)
I wonder what happens after the 10 minutes? For example, if a client does `SESSION CREATE` to acquire a session id and then waits for 12 minutes and does `STREAM CONNECT` with that session id. Is a new tunnel established by the I2P router immediately and transparently to the client at the 10th minute, or when the session is actually used at the 12th minute?

Thinking about this more, given that opening of new connections is done serially, one after another (not in parallel), and occasionally (
...

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "doc: clarify that testnet min-difficulty is not optional":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32095#issuecomment-2737476437)
ACK 288481aabd77b90876489e39403b6eab9d4ae74d

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "Multiprocess bitcoin":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10102#issuecomment-2737514540)
> From comments, it sounds like 19461 is closest, and provides the most functionality for the feature; would it make any sense to maybe change release order, putting 19461 (and a more complete #19460?) ahead of #31740 and #31741?

There isn't really a predefined order between #19461 and #31741 and the changes do not overlap so they they could be reviewed, tested, and merged in either order. The merge order will just depend on where people want to spend effort reviewing and testing. I expect #3
...

💬 Chand-ra commented on issue "test: No unit test covers BIP342 tapscript signatures":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32012#issuecomment-2737545631)
> Hi, [@jirijakes](https://github.com/jirijakes). I've tried to reproduce it but the unit test fails when running it with this mutation.

Hmm, I seem to be able to reproduce the bug with the following:

```
$ git diff
diff --git a/src/script/interpreter.cpp b/src/script/interpreter.cpp
index a35306b693..d9c119ae77 100644
--- a/src/script/interpreter.cpp
+++ b/src/script/interpreter.cpp
@@ -1484,7 +1484,7 @@ bool SignatureHashSchnorr(uint256& hash_out, ScriptExecutionData& execdata, cons

...

💬 yancyribbens commented on pull request "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#issuecomment-2737580772)
Couldn't much of this be done by using a `just` file? I saw a PR a while that tried to add something about a `justfile` which is a way to wrap command to make them easier and more discoverable.

💬 Emzy commented on issue "29.0 RC Testing Guide Feedback":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32026#issuecomment-2737590259)
I tested the PCP functionality with v29.0rc2.

Started it like this on am3 mac ```/Applications/Bitcoin-Qt.app/Contents/MacOS/Bitcoin-Qt -signet -natpmp=1 -debug=net```

Router is a FRITZ!Box 7530 AX with up to date firmware version 8.02.

First I got this for ipv4:
```
2025-03-19T17:13:52Z [net] pcp: Requesting port mapping for addr 0.0.0.0 port 38333 from gateway 192.168.99.1
2025-03-19T17:13:52Z [net] pcp: Internal address after connect: 192.168.99.114
2025-03-19T17:13:52Z [net] pcp: Receiv
...

💬 janb84 commented on issue "29.0 RC Testing Guide Feedback":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32026#issuecomment-2737599427)
> I tested the PCP functionality with v29.0rc2.
>
> Started it like this on my m3 mac `/Applications/Bitcoin-Qt.app/Contents/MacOS/Bitcoin-Qt -signet -natpmp=1 -debug=net`
>
> Router is a FRITZ!Box 7530 AX with up to date firmware version 8.02.
>
> First I got this for ipv4:
>
> ```
> 2025-03-19T17:13:52Z [net] pcp: Requesting port mapping for addr 0.0.0.0 port 38333 from gateway 192.168.99.1
> 2025-03-19T17:13:52Z [net] pcp: Internal address after connect: 192.168.99.114
> 2025-03-19T17:13:
...

💬 Emzy commented on issue "Enable PCP by default?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31663#issuecomment-2737605657)
I tested the PCP functionality with v29.0rc2.

Started it like this on my m3 mac ```/Applications/Bitcoin-Qt.app/Contents/MacOS/Bitcoin-Qt -signet -natpmp=1 -debug=net```

Router is a FRITZ!Box 7530 AX with up to date firmware version 8.02.

First I got this for ipv4:
```
2025-03-19T17:13:52Z [net] pcp: Requesting port mapping for addr 0.0.0.0 port 38333 from gateway 192.168.99.1
2025-03-19T17:13:52Z [net] pcp: Internal address after connect: 192.168.99.114
2025-03-19T17:13:52Z [net] pcp: Rece
...

💬 zzzi2p commented on pull request "i2p: make a time gap between creating transient sessions and using them":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32065#issuecomment-2737607630)
Tunnels get built when the SAM session is opened, and are automatically rebuilt when they expire, the router does that for you as long as the SAM session stays open. A session is just a pool of inbound and outbound tunnels. I assume that's what you are trying to do here, have the session open and ready before it's needed.

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#issuecomment-2737612354)
> Couldn't much of this be done by using a `just` file? I saw a PR a while that tried to add something about a `justfile` which is a way to wrap command to make them easier and more discoverable.

Yes it could also be done as a shell script or python script. If we could count on a justfile interpreter, or a portable shell, or python being installed on all platforms which bitcoin runs on, the changes in the two commits here a47cf680619cae5892d72355f56f5c5051fd5434 and cbc0bdd73ed0fd672307cf0f80
...

💬 darosior commented on issue "Enable PCP by default?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31663#issuecomment-2737618918)
Thanks for testing!

💬 yancyribbens commented on issue "BnB untested/unused condition in UTXO exclusion optimization":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32047#issuecomment-2737655586)
> This is not accurate. You could have two UTXOs of different output types that have the same effective value but differing fees. Counterexample:

Yes, I redacted that comment later in the thread as my understand of the problem improved. As I posted last, there's even a test [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/wallet/test/coinselector_tests.cpp#L427) that tests two UTXOs with the same effective_value yet different fees.

> However, since [CoinGrinder got merged](https://gi
...

💬 yancyribbens commented on issue "BnB untested/unused condition in UTXO exclusion optimization":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32047#issuecomment-2737675105)
However, doesn't the waste score account for long_term_fee_rate as well as fee_rate? In other-words, just comparing `fee` amounts and not `long_term_fee_rate` would not be enough to know if comparing two UTXOs have different was scores..

⚠️ luisschwab opened an issue: "Incorrect balance when dealing with coinbase UTXOs that will be mature on _h_ + 1"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32098)
Bitcoin Core is reporting the wrong balance when dealing with coinbase UTXOs that will become mature on the next block.

Scenario:
On regtest, I mine 101 blocks. Since coinbase maturity height is 100 blocks, I have 1 mature UTXO (50 BTC) at height 101. However, at height 102, another coinbase UTXO (50 BTC) will have matured and will be accepted by the mempool as an input to a transaction. Therefore, my _**spendable**_ balance at height 102 will be 50+50 BTC (2 UTXOs available for selection).

Cu
...

💬 luisschwab commented on issue "Incorrect balance when dealing with coinbase UTXOs that will be mature on `h + 1`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32098#issuecomment-2737775525)
Apparently this is a simple fix:

```diff
scr/wallet/wallet.cpp

int CWallet::GetTxBlocksToMaturity(const CWalletTx& wtx) const
{
AssertLockHeld(cs_wallet);

if (!wtx.IsCoinBase()) {
return 0;
}
int chain_depth = GetTxDepthInMainChain(wtx);
assert(chain_depth >= 0); // coinbase tx should not be conflicted
- return std::max(0, (COINBASE_MATURITY+1) - chain_depth);
+ return std::max(0, COINBASE_MATURITY - chain_depth);
}
```

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Fix intermittent issue in p2p_orphan_handling.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32092#discussion_r2004125240)
thx, done