💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#discussion_r2053298127)
Maybe add something like

```python
genblock = create_block(hashprev=int(block["hash"], 16), tmpl=dict(height=block["height"]+1), ntime=block["time"]+1)
genblock.vtx[0].vin[0].nSequence = SEQUENCE_FINAL
genblock.vtx[0].rehash()
genblock.hashMerkleRoot = genblock.calc_merkle_root()
genblock.solve()
self.nodes[0].submitblock(genblock.serialize().hex())
assert_equal(self.nodes[0].getbestblockhash(), genblock.hash)
```

to ensure th
...

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#discussion_r2053231954)
Would it be more elegant to leave the genesis block's nSequence as `MAX_SEQUENCE` to avoid the implication that the genesis block might be timelocked? ie,

```c++
coinbase_tx.vin.resize(1);
coinbase_tx.vin[0].prevout.SetNull();
if (height > 0) {
coinbase_tx.nLockTime = static_cast<uint32_t>(height - 1);
coinbase_tx.vin[0].nSeqeunece = CTxIn::MAX_SEQUENCE_NONFINAL;
}
```

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#discussion_r2053297415)
Should be sorted

⚠️ whitslack opened an issue: "PIE+LTO causes Bitcoin-Qt to segfault at startup"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/867)
### Issues, reports or feature requests related to the GUI should be opened directly on the GUI repo

- [x] I still think this issue should be opened here

### Report

When PIE and LTO are combined, Qt applications crash at startup. See [Gentoo bug 954171](https://bugs.gentoo.org/954171). You can read all the gorey details about the underlying issue (that also affected Wireshark) [here](https://bugs.gentoo.org/754021). Basically, the issue is that Qt's `qcompilerdetection.h` prohibits building Q
...

✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "Update multiprocess.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32321)

💬 eli-schwartz commented on issue "PIE+LTO causes Bitcoin-Qt to segfault at startup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/867#issuecomment-2820150044)
To be clear, the actual issue is that cmake has POSITION_INDEPENDENT_CODE, which claims to implement PIC, but it does not. It enables PIE instead, which is not what you actually asked for, and they are unfortunately different enough to matter.

It's quite fine to enforce -fPIC (and also to link with -pie), but cmake simply does not provide the necessary builtin functionality to do it correctly.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Run all benchmarks in the sanity check":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32310#issuecomment-2820281253)
> Why is the CI failing?

Thx, excluded msvc for now, with the same approach as the temporary win-cross exclusion.

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "kernel: Separate UTXO set access from validation functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32317#discussion_r2053511978)
Added a commit.

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "fuzz: enable running fuzz test cases in Debug mode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32113#issuecomment-2820499887)
Renamed to `G_FUZZING_BUILD`. Added ryanofsky's docs. Left the constexpr optimisations in.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#discussion_r2053579424)
It affects any miner that uses the Mining interface, because `createNewBlock` returns a `BlockTemplate` which includes a `getBlock()` method which returns a `CBlock` that contains the coinbase transaction.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "doc: warn that CheckBlock() underestimates sigops":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31624#discussion_r2053597806)
The original context was that a miner created an invalid block with too many sigops. I wanted to make sure that it was because they made an invalid patch, and not because our code is broken. I wrote this comment while trying to understand the behaviour better.

It may be a good idea to actually improve the check here, since it's relied on by `getblocktemplate` in proposal mode and by #31981. But that would be another PR imo.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add checkBlock() to Mining interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31981#issuecomment-2820550469)
Note to self, figure out if the sigops check needs to be fixed here or in another PR: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31624/files#r2053597806

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: add optional blockhash to waitfornewblock, unhide wait methods in help":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30635#discussion_r2053618061)
I replaced the `/**`.

I dropped the warmup comment, but will keep the `CHECK_NONFATAL`. If the RPC starts listening before `ActiveChain().Tip()` is set, then `getTip()` returns nothing. I'm not sure if that can ever happen. `SetRPCWarmupFinished()` is called as step 13 in `init.cpp` with a somewhat ominous comment above it.

⚠️ fanquake opened an issue: "ci: failure in interface_usdt_coinselection.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32322)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/14579386142/job/40892496346#step:6:5102:
```bash
122/318 - interface_usdt_coinselection.py failed, Duration: 16 s

stdout:
2025-04-21T19:37:36.056000Z TestFramework (INFO): PRNG seed is: 4088013170701346751
2025-04-21T19:37:36.066000Z TestFramework (INFO): Initializing test directory /home/runner/work/_temp/ci/scratch/test_runner/test_runner_₿_🏃_20250421_192058/interface_usdt_coinselection_192
2025-04-21T19:37:38.378000Z TestFramework (INFO): hoo
...

💬 fanquake commented on issue "ci: failure in interface_usdt_coinselection.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32322#issuecomment-2820637063)
cc @0xB10C

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: failure in interface_usdt_coinselection.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32322#issuecomment-2820656309)
Probably an erroneous kernel that was pushed to GHA by microsoft? Seems fixed by now

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "fuzz: enable running fuzz test cases in Debug mode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32113#issuecomment-2820675009)
re-ACK 3669ecd4ccd8e7a1e2b1a9dcbe708c51c78e4d6c 🏉

<details><summary>Show signature</summary>

Signature:

```
untrusted comment: signature from minisign secret key on empty file; verify via: minisign -Vm "${path_to_any_empty_file}" -P RWTRmVTMeKV5noAMqVlsMugDDCyyTSbA3Re5AkUrhvLVln0tSaFWglOw -x "${path_to_this_whole_four_line_signature_blob}"
RUTRmVTMeKV5npGrKx1nqXCw5zeVHdtdYURB/KlyA/LMFgpNCs+SkW9a8N95d+U4AP1RJMi+krxU1A3Yux4bpwZNLvVBKy0wLgM=
trusted comment: re-ACK 3669ecd4ccd8e7a1e2b1
...

💬 hebasto commented on issue "gui: translation spam?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32295#issuecomment-2820714655)
I'm on it.

💬 marcofleon commented on pull request "fuzz: enable running fuzz test cases in Debug mode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32113#issuecomment-2820825720)
re ACK 3669ecd4ccd8e7a1e2b1a9dcbe708c51c78e4d6c

💬 hebasto commented on issue "PIE+LTO causes Bitcoin-Qt to segfault at startup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/867#issuecomment-2820828813)
1. It seems reasonable to move this issue to the [main](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues) repository to increase its visibility to the build system developers.

2. I can't reproduce the issue on Ubuntu 24.10 using GCC 14.2.0:
```
$ rm -rf build && cmake -B build -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS=-flto -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS=-flto -DBUILD_GUI=ON
$ cmake --build build -t bitcoin-qt
$ ./build/bin/bitcoin-qt
```

This suggests the issue may be specific to the default compiler options. If so, please consider updat
...