💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: init, don't error out when loading legacy wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32449#discussion_r2093585184)
removed.

📝 pinheadmz opened a pull request: "init: Configure reachable networks before we start the RPC server"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32539)
Closes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32433

`MaybeFlipIPv6toCJDNS()` relies on `g_reachable_nets` to distinguish between CJDNS addresses and other IPv6 addresses. In particular, [RFC4193](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4193#section-3.1) address or "Unique Local Address" with the L-bit unset also begins with the `fc` prefix. #32433 highlights a use case for these addresses that have nothing to do with CJDNS.

On master we don't parse init flags like `-cjdnsreachable` until *aft
...

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue ""rpcallowip=" configuration directive doesn't accept RFC4193 addresses":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32433#issuecomment-2887572908)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32539

💬 BitcoinMechanic commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2887596317)
It seems if you want people to actually use this much OP RETURN data by relaxing the filter it'd make sense to simultaneously prevent "inscriptions" with this https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "qt: drop unused watch-only functionality":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32459#issuecomment-2887600076)
ACK 0fc9bf05c36169ff746df10c5c8310f5adf2e202

There does not appear to be any visual differences, nor any remaining references to watch-only/watchonly in the GUI.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "refactor: bdb removals":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32511#issuecomment-2887602257)
ACK fafee85358397289aa4c6b799d2603a5d89e83a2

💬 theuni commented on pull request "(RFC) kernel: Replace leveldb-based BlockTreeDB with flat-file based store":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32427#issuecomment-2887607766)
> > My bikeshed color: Since block hashes start with zeroes, maybe one could shard based off the last two bytes:
>
> Just curious because the FAT32 file limit per-directory is so small, is there any scenario where a miner could DoS nodes with this format by also mining the last two bytes?
>
> I think no, because at tip the additional hash needed for two bytes would be prohibitively expensive, although I'm not sure if there is a birthday-problem-like advantage because an attacker doesn't ne
...

🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "refactor: bdb removals"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32511)

✅ Pttn closed an issue: "Inconsistent Descriptor Space Parsing"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28943)

💬 Pttn commented on issue "Inconsistent Descriptor Space Parsing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28943#issuecomment-2887649561)
Fixed by #31603 I think.

🤔 w0xlt reviewed a pull request: "test: Remove legacy wallet RPC overloads"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32452#pullrequestreview-2847707869)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32452/commits/b104d442277090337ce405d92f1398b7cc9bcdb7

🤔 w0xlt reviewed a pull request: "scripted-diff: Remove unused leading newline in RPC docs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32514#pullrequestreview-2847712472)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32514/commits/fa1f10a49e7c4f6377fbc7ae2f1520b38c86e5fa

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: init, don't error out when loading legacy wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32449#discussion_r2093740236)
In 86e1111239cdb39dd32cfb5178653c608fa30515 "test: verify node skips loading legacy wallets during startup"

Is there a reason to use settings.json instead of passing in `-wallet=legacy_up...` as part of `extra_args` during the restart?

💬 TEU7ZoTHLa7sZchXmdqZn5pE75ikooVNfv commented on pull request "wallet: init, don't error out when loading legacy wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32449#issuecomment-2887797539)
‏alvandisaeed43@gmail.com‏

💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "wallet: Keep track of the wallet's own transaction outputs in memory":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286#issuecomment-2887797583)
reACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286/commits/29cf059e6e592f7f82b982493a043219cdfa5b40

via git range-diff efac285a0d709f48856c37b15bfa09af94c1d75b..51d4846f648e79e3e098f1f1bea7d5e823ebdea8 b15c386933eb7bc5ed8644dd37f8169d81ea5a22..29cf059e6e592f7f82b982493a043219cdfa5b40

Hooray for `Txid` class!

🤔 w0xlt reviewed a pull request: "wallet: Keep track of the wallet's own transaction outputs in memory"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286#pullrequestreview-2847729722)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27286/commits/29cf059e6e592f7f82b982493a043219cdfa5b40

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: init, don't error out when loading legacy wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32449#discussion_r2093771082)
> Is there a reason to use settings.json instead of passing in `-wallet=legacy_up...` as part of `extra_args` during the restart?

I just wanted to make the test case as realistic as possible (an existing legacy wallet with `load_on_startup=true`). But there shouldn't be any difference.

🤔 fjahr reviewed a pull request: "refactor: Improve assumeutxo state representation"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30214#pullrequestreview-2846790348)
Leaving some comments in case you want to address some of them with the rebase. I am mostly happy but there are a few things that I need to spend some more time on.

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "refactor: Improve assumeutxo state representation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30214#discussion_r2093147399)
Are we then commited to the 'historical' naming now with this and I can remove all the remaining ibd/background references in a follow-up? Because that naming inconsistency has always annoyed me and now we have three names with this. I think it's very confusing for newcomers as well.

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "refactor: Improve assumeutxo state representation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30214#discussion_r2093165330)
nit: Would be really great if this conditional could be broken up to be more readable. Or maybe move comments below inline. But feel free to leave this for a follow-up.