💬 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

💬 maflcko 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-2737798747)
I presume this was last touched in commit bf3a20a6e8cafdf723ef101af078df303ea06fec, which explains that there may be a race condition where the transaction is rejected, because the 100th block has not been relayed yet to the peer when the transaction is sent.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Failure to run Fuzz tests when running with corpus":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32089#issuecomment-2737863589)
> libc++abi: terminating due to uncaught exception of type std::__1::ios_base::failure: DataStream::read(): end of data: unspecified iostream_category error

This looks like an upstream packaging bug or asan bug on your platform, given that it passes fine when asan is disabled on your platform.

💬 hebasto commented on issue "[rfc] build: Reject unclean configure?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31942#issuecomment-2737914378)
FWIW, at the end of configuration, Qt 6 prints:
```
If reconfiguration fails for some reason, try removing 'CMakeCache.txt' from the build directory
Alternatively, you can add the --fresh flag to your CMake flags.
```

🤔 maflcko reviewed a pull request: "contrib: Make deterministic-coverage error messages more readable"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32074#pullrequestreview-2700009626)
rebased with a move-only change, and replied to all feedback

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "contrib: Make deterministic-coverage error messages more readable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32074#discussion_r2004192240)
I found `Err(...)?` nicer as an early-return statement, but no strong opinion

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "contrib: Make deterministic-coverage error messages more readable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32074#discussion_r2004194037)
In Rust shadowing is a feature, but happy to change, no strong opinion.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "contrib: Make deterministic-coverage error messages more readable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32074#discussion_r2004190137)
thx, done

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "contrib: Make deterministic-coverage error messages more readable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32074#discussion_r2004196829)
Nice. I think this is sufficient as an approach for a dev-only tool. Happy to push it here, or review your follow-up. Just let me know.