💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Update minisketch subtree":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32485#issuecomment-2886088208)
> Apologies for my git-ignorance, but why are there two commits with the same changes? Is that how a subtree update normally looks?

If you want to preserve the subtree, the only way to update is via a merge (I think), so you need one commit for the subtree changes itself and then a merge commit to merge them into this repo.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "refactor: reenable `implicit-integer-sign-change` check for `serialize.h`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32296)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Update minisketch subtree":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32485#issuecomment-2886091020)
lgtm ACK 46b533dfe6fc6c956ac178896d9caf1d59b73d9f

The changes look like the merged upstream changes. I haven't run the subtree check locally to confirm.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: bdb removals":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32511#issuecomment-2886105442)
> The functions in the last 3 commits do look like good helper functions but I don't mind their removal as they are not used besides tests, making it easier to navigate the codebase that I prefer.
> An alternative could be to move some of them under tests directory. But fine with current state of the PR too.

It is hard for me to see a use case for the functions, even in tests. The tests only used them to generate dummy values, but those are trivially created inline. Generally, when it comes
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Update minisketch subtree":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32485#issuecomment-2886105544)
For reference, the command used here is `git subtree pull --prefix src/minisketch https://github.com/bitcoin-core/minisketch.git master --squash`.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "Update minisketch subtree"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32485)

👍 fanquake approved a pull request: "fuzz: Delete wallet_notifications"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32526#pullrequestreview-2846049871)
ACK fad2faf6c5d8f09a91fb291e30b4989b06a6fe86

📝 maflcko opened a pull request: "test: Remove unused verify_flags suppression"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32527)
`static bool verify_flags(unsigned)` was removed in commit 80f8b92f4f2311b9e9a25361c9dd973244e6f95c

👍 fanquake approved a pull request: "test: Remove unused verify_flags suppression"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32527#pullrequestreview-2846116986)
ACK fab5a3c803c7427ab5a6f4b478bf0ea7a734537a

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "(RFC) kernel: Replace leveldb-based BlockTreeDB with flat-file based store":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32427#issuecomment-2886216404)
> 2\. what guarantees do we need to provide? Are we just protecting against power outages? Cosmic bit-flip corruption? Bad sectors?

I'd say ideally all of them. In the rare case where they happen, detecting them early on Bitcoin Core startup (before a validation-internal assert is hit) may help finding the root-cause and also could free up some developer time due to making it easier to remote-diagnose hardware issues (many of them have more than 5 comments: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/
...

💬 maflcko commented on issue "intermittent issue in rpc_signer.py (enumeratesigners timeout)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32524#issuecomment-2886268084)
Same here: https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5811469742243840?logs=ci#L1

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci: remove 3rd party js from windows dll gha job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32513#issuecomment-2886274977)
> It might be better to use a more general solution for setting up VS prompts, this would also work once #32396 is merged.

@m3dwards

Could you please rebase this PR on top of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32396?

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "test: Remove unused verify_flags suppression"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32527#pullrequestreview-2846209173)
ACK fab5a3c803c7427ab5a6f4b478bf0ea7a734537a, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "intermittent issue in rpc_signer.py (enumeratesigners timeout)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32524#issuecomment-2886364853)
Same https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4561849141690368?logs=ci#L6059

So I guess this was recently introduced

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: document why we check for `std::system`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32491#issuecomment-2886365558)
> i'm not sure any other such platforms exist right now, i'm fine with removing the check. But adding a comment makes sense nevertheless.

Yea. Wanting to remove the check is what led me to end up documenting it, given it's unclear wether we support these builds or not.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "build: document why we check for `std::system`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32491)

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "refactor: bdb removals":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32511#issuecomment-2886368804)
> Generally, when it comes to providing helper functions for tests, my preference would be to focus on porting the real and user-exposed (wallet) RPCs to similarly-named or similarly-featured helper functions to be used in tests.

Interesting, something like this is done in this PR #32452 for `importprivkey`.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "intermittent issue in rpc_signer.py (enumeratesigners timeout)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32524#issuecomment-2886372110)
Maybe #32343? @hebasto @laanwj

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: Remove unused verify_flags suppression"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32527)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "wallet: Remove watchonly behavior and isminetypes":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32523#issuecomment-2886387048)
```bash
/home/runner/work/_temp/src/wallet/spend.cpp:474:12: error: calling function 'AvailableCoins' requires holding mutex 'wallet.cs_wallet' exclusively [-Werror,-Wthread-safety-analysis]
474 | return AvailableCoins(wallet, coinControl, /*feerate=*/ std::nullopt, params);
| ^
1 error generated.
```