💬 achow101 commented on pull request "validation: write chainstate to disk every hour":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30611#issuecomment-2843597954)
ACK e976bd3045010ee217aa0f2dca4c962aabb789d5

💬 ADAMSALAMA6667 commented on issue "Cannot import descriptors with label and internal:false":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32376#issuecomment-2843684526)
[]()****

💬 w0xlt commented on issue "An "output descriptor" should not have many different checksums":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30632#issuecomment-2843736550)
Can this issue be closed ?

✅ achow101 closed an issue: "An "output descriptor" should not have many different checksums"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30632)

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "policy: allow more than one OP_RETURN outputs per tx":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32381#issuecomment-2843801037)
> My intention with this PR was to have a first step that is consensual among regular contributors,

The minimal change would just be to bump the default value of datacarrier, afaics.

💬 w0xlt commented on issue "`keypoolrefill` doesn't fill keypool to specified parameter":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29924#issuecomment-2843818428)
Yes, by default, descriptor wallets start with 4 `ScriptPubKeyManager` (WPKH, TR, PKH, and SH(WPKH())), each with a size of 1,000. Therefore, the initial value is 4,000.

Incrementing the key pool with 4,001 keys gives 4001 * 4 = 16,004.

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "validation: write chainstate to disk every hour":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30611#issuecomment-2843857723)
utACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/e976bd3045010ee217aa0f2dca4c962aabb789d5

This will likely slow down IBD by a small amount for those running large dbcache values close to or greater than the old maximum (~16GB) because we lose some write "cut-through"[^1] but I seriously doubt there are that many people allocating >16GB to their DBCache, and I don't think sparing those users ~10 minutes during IBD is worth having every node on the network have a medium sized stall to flush ever
...

💬 davidgumberg commented on issue "build: x86 afl++ ASan build broken "error: inline assembly requires more registers than available"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31913#issuecomment-2843872570)
> Could you please try the following patch:
>
> [...]

It failed with this build command:

```
26.64 /AFLplusplus/afl-clang-fast++ -pipe -std=c++20 -O2 -g -fstack-protector-all -fcf-protection=full -fstack-clash-pro
tection -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-z,now -Wl,-z,separate-code -fsanitize=address -fPIE -pie -fcf-protection=none CMakeFiles/bitco
ind.dir/bitcoind.cpp.o CMakeFiles/bitcoind.dir/init/bitcoind.cpp.o -o ../bin/bitcoind ../lib/libbitcoin_node.a ../lib/l
ibbitcoin_wallet.a libleveldb.a libcrc32c
...

🤔 monlovesmango reviewed a pull request: "Refactor BnB tests"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29532#pullrequestreview-2809059556)
ACK dbf1f2663b1afbe03d6b1855f83db604bc79979e

I like how it now covers a variety of fee rates.

💬 monlovesmango commented on pull request "Refactor BnB tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29532#discussion_r2069787909)
Nit: this also seems to be checking for a match
```suggestion
BOOST_CHECK_MESSAGE(result->GetSelectedValue() == expected_amount, strprintf("Selected amount match in BnB-Success: %s. Expected %d, and got %d", test_title, expected_amount, result->GetSelectedValue()));
```

💬 monlovesmango commented on pull request "Refactor BnB tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29532#discussion_r2069786399)
Nit: this seems to be checking for a match, not a mismatch
```suggestion
BOOST_CHECK_MESSAGE(HaveEquivalentValues(expected_result, *result), strprintf("Result match in BnB-Success: %s. Expected %s, and got %s", test_title, InputAmountsToString(expected_result), InputAmountsToString(*result)));
```

📝 monlovesmango opened a pull request: "doc: Fix test_bitcoin path"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32389)
This commit fixes a couple command paths for interacting with the test_bitcoin binary within the Unit Test documentation.

If the commands are run as is a `command not found` error is returned.

```bash
❯ test_bitcoin --list_content
bash: test_bitcoin: command not found
```

```bash
❯ test_bitcoin --help
bash: test_bitcoin: command not found
```

<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be
...

💬 monlovesmango commented on pull request "doc: Fix fuzz test_runner.py path":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32353#issuecomment-2843997945)
For anyone interested, I just opened another PR for this same type of documentation fix in the Unit Test README.md, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32389

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "crypto: Use secure_allocator for `AES256_ctx`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31774#issuecomment-2844095843)
Rebased to address merge conflict.

⚠️ eth opened an issue: "Please add evm support"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32390)
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.

Bitcoin will surely die if it doesn't copy Ethereum (as you can see by the eth/btc chart)

### Is your feature related to a problem, if so please describe it.

_No response_

### Describe the solution you'd like

_No response_

### Describe any alternatives you've considered

_No response_

### Please leave any additional context

_No response_

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "crypto: Use secure_allocator for `AES256_ctx`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31774#issuecomment-2844149953)
Rebased to address merge conflict, dropped legacy wallet encryption benchmark, and reduced number of keys since the benchmark was taking an unreasonably long time.

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "doc: Fix test_bitcoin path":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32389#issuecomment-2844153778)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32389/commits/6cbc28b8dd629062950f195facc009fd8ba86310

✅ achow101 closed an issue: "Please add evm support"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32390)

💬 romanz commented on pull request "Replace libevent with our own HTTP and socket-handling implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32061#discussion_r2069908553)
Thinking about it, doing the copy here is definitely fine for now (we can optimize it in a following PR).

💬 laanwj commented on pull request "[PoC] Modernize use of UTF-8 in Windows code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32380#issuecomment-2844227744)
After this we should revert our custom [leveldb unicode patch](f8ae182c1e5176d12e816fb2217ae33a5472fdd7). This would make the `env_windows` backend go back to using the `A` functions, which already take UTF-8 as-is.