✅ fanquake closed an issue: "test: wallet_reorgsrestore.py failure under valgrind"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32493)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "ci: Exclude failing wallet_reorgsrestore.py from valgrind task for now"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32507)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "doc: Improve `dependencies.md`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31895#discussion_r2091455024)
Anything here seems fine, we don't link to https://sqlite.org/download.html or https://freetype.org/download.html.

💬 szarka commented on pull request "rfc: only put replaced txs in extra pool":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32510#issuecomment-2884240017)
> I have to imagine that especially with policy changes happening, this vector is useful (yes, in the absence of attackers). If you don't support 1p1c yet, you'll currently be throwing the `TX_RECONSIDERABLE` parent and `TX_MISSING_INPUTS` child in there. Same if you don't support TRUC yet. I think I had a comment somewhere about returning false for `TX_CONSENSUS` errors.
>
> @0xB10C was collecting data on how often we use this for compact block relay reconstruction I think? Correct me if I'm
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "doc: Improve `dependencies.md`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31895#discussion_r2091461356)
I don't any x11 packages are listed here, so it seems unrelated?

🤔 ismaelsadeeq reviewed a pull request: "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#pullrequestreview-2843509023)
Code review 7af6e1089ea264e870b26ac83e81e7aa374acbe1

I've also tested this on macOS.

It was running smoothly. I tried shutting it down using the CLI interface, and it worked as expected.

However, I encountered an issue when performing an unclean shutdown using CTRL+C.
The process hung, and I had to `pkill bitcoind` to terminate it.

I wasn’t running with -debug option, so I couldn’t figure out exactly what went wrong. I tried to reproduce the issue but couldn’t It worked smoothly in
...

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#discussion_r2091450477)
In "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable" https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ceabc8cd43fa17be795974a85083aa8e865c654d

help seems redundant here we can get same behavior with -h, maybe just add -a?

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#discussion_r2091062670)
In "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable" https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ceabc8cd43fa17be795974a85083aa8e865c654d

Should the list of executable mentioned that bitcoin-node and bitcoin-gui since are hidden unlike bitcoind and should be accessed via bitcoin process?

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#discussion_r2091131888)
Shouldn't we throw when that happen?

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#discussion_r2091060261)
In "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable" https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ceabc8cd43fa17be795974a85083aa8e865c654d
Copy right bump to 2025-present.

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#discussion_r2091447427)
In "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable" https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ceabc8cd43fa17be795974a85083aa8e865c654d

I think we should prevent mixing up options with commands using this suggestion or something like it.

If you pass -v you should not pass any other command same with help

```suggestion
if (cmd.show_version) {
if (argc > 2) {
tfm::format(std::cout, "Error: too many arguments");
return EXIT_FAILURE;

...

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31375#discussion_r2091152243)
In "multiprocess: Add bitcoin wrapper executable" ceabc8cd43fa17be795974a85083aa8e865c654d

Are these actually commands?

Maybe *target* would be a better name. The commands are what's being forwarded to the executable, right?

It gets confusing in the error message, like when you pass `cli`:

```
Error: Unrecognized command: 'cli'
```

Maybe it would be clearer as:

```
Error: Unrecognized target: 'cli'
```


It gets more ambigous when you omit the command in the RPC

the
...

👋 fanquake's pull request is ready for review: "[28.x] 28.2rc1"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32480)

📝 pinheadmz opened a pull request: "rpc: add "ischange: true" to decoded tx outputs in wallet gettransaction response"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32517)
This change is motivated by external RBF clients like https://github.com/CardCoins/additive-rbf-batcher/. It saves the user a redundant re-looping of tx outputs, calling `getaddressinfo` on each one, looking for the change output in order to adjust the fee.

The field `"ischange"` only appears when `gettransaction` is called on a wallet, and is either `true` or not present at all. I chose not to include `ischange: false` because it is confusing to see that on *received* transactions.

Exampl
...

🤔 jonatack reviewed a pull request: "doc: Improve `dependencies.md`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31895#pullrequestreview-2844215334)
ACK e62423d6f1514b022155edb5bc930cecc4236731

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "doc: Improve `dependencies.md`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31895#discussion_r2091490497)
> Anything here seems fine, we don't link to https://sqlite.org/download.html or https://freetype.org/download.html.

But we do link to https://www.boost.org/users/download/ and https://github.com/libevent/libevent/releases.

I’ve ACKed the current branch and am content with it as is.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "doc: Improve `dependencies.md`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31895#discussion_r2091491960)
It was a nit. I am OK with the current branch.

⚠️ fatmirsul1234 opened an issue: "f"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32518)
### Motivation

f

### Possible solution

_No response_

### Useful Skills

* Compiling Bitcoin Core from source
* Running the C++ unit tests and the Python functional tests
* ...


### Guidance for new contributors

Want to work on this issue?

For guidance on contributing, please read [CONTRIBUTING.md](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md) before opening your pull request.

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "f"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32518)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "doc: Improve `dependencies.md`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31895)