🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "Update minisketch subtree"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32485)
(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
(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
(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
(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/
...
(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
(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?
(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.
(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
(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.
(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)
(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`.
(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
(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)
(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.
```
(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.
```
💬 fanquake commented on pull request "scripted-diff: Remove unused leading newline in RPC docs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32514#issuecomment-2886391559)
Concept ACK - did you want to fix any more of the [Grammar] here?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32514#issuecomment-2886391559)
Concept ACK - did you want to fix any more of the [Grammar] here?
💬 laanwj commented on pull request "doc: Add hint about avoiding spaces in paths when building on Windows":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32397#issuecomment-2886410945)
It would be useful to document, but not in the way it is here. It's not a problem when cloning the repository.
> I believe it would be helpful to mention a workaround in the build documentation. [Here](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/commit/6a2a5428346634c80e6856e17b2c737bb523fd14)'s a suggestion you could consider including.
+1
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32397#issuecomment-2886410945)
It would be useful to document, but not in the way it is here. It's not a problem when cloning the repository.
> I believe it would be helpful to mention a workaround in the build documentation. [Here](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/commit/6a2a5428346634c80e6856e17b2c737bb523fd14)'s a suggestion you could consider including.
+1
👍 brunoerg approved a pull request: "fuzz: Delete wallet_notifications"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32526#pullrequestreview-2846316142)
ACK fad2faf6c5d8f09a91fb291e30b4989b06a6fe86
I agree to remove it.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32526#pullrequestreview-2846316142)
ACK fad2faf6c5d8f09a91fb291e30b4989b06a6fe86
I agree to remove it.
💬 laanwj commented on issue "intermittent issue in rpc_signer.py (enumeratesigners timeout)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32524#issuecomment-2886420662)
If it's #32343 i don't understand why. It was changed so that the brute force fd-closing path isn't even *compiled* on Linux.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32524#issuecomment-2886420662)
If it's #32343 i don't understand why. It was changed so that the brute force fd-closing path isn't even *compiled* on Linux.
📝 maflcko opened a pull request: " rpc: Round verificationprogress to 1 for a recent tip "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32528)
Some users really seem to care about this. While it shouldn't matter much, the diff is so trivial that it is probably worth doing.
Fixes #31127
This implements my own suggestion from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31177#issuecomment-2639659890
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32528)
Some users really seem to care about this. While it shouldn't matter much, the diff is so trivial that it is probably worth doing.
Fixes #31127
This implements my own suggestion from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31177#issuecomment-2639659890