👍 willcl-ark approved a pull request: "doc: add missing copyright headers"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31864#pullrequestreview-2853699729)
ACK c7c3bfadfc6e294547cbc0077a175845c0633906

This changeset:

- Adds copyright headers to files where they're missing
- Updates copyright headers which are missing "group" info (i.e. to whom the copyright is granted)

It does **not** update all headers with "-present". This is left for a future change.

I did a cursory check on git files to see if any had been missed using:

```bash
❯ fd -e cpp -e h -e py -E src/secp256k1 -E src/leveldb -E src/minisketch -E src/crc32 | xargs rg --pc
...

📝 hebasto opened a pull request: "subprocess: Backport upstream changes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32567)
A list of the backported PRs:
- https://github.com/arun11299/cpp-subprocess/pull/119

The following PRs were skipped for backporting:
- https://github.com/arun11299/cpp-subprocess/pull/118 because there is no changes in the header code.

Required for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32566.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "subprocess: Backport upstream changes":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32567#issuecomment-2893909163)
cc @laanwj

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Use subprocess library for notifications":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32566#discussion_r2097661935)
Backported from upstream in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32567.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "subprocess: Backport upstream changes":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32567#issuecomment-2893928418)
Can't this just go in with #32566? Why does it need it's own PR?

🤔 rkrux reviewed a pull request: "wallet: Fix logging of wallet version"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32553#pullrequestreview-2853743852)
ACK 4b2cd0b41ff4800c8801f2c44883eaec60a035fa

I can see the difference in the logs, certainly better to have.

**Master**
```
2025-05-20T10:31:39Z init message: Loading wallet…
2025-05-20T10:31:39Z [test] Wallet file version = 10500, last client version = 299900
2025-05-20T10:31:40Z [test] Descriptors: 13, Descriptor Keys: 1 plaintext, 0 encrypted, 1 total.
```

**PR**
```
2025-05-20T10:22:15Z init message: Loading wallet…
2025-05-20T10:22:15Z [test] Last client version = 299900
2
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "subprocess: Backport upstream changes":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32567#issuecomment-2893947117)
> Can't this just go in with #32566? Why does it need it's own PR?

It would be easier to track backports.

⚠️ maflcko reopened an issue: "intermittent issue in rpc_signer.py (enumeratesigners timeout)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32524)
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5094568045051904?logs=ci#L4419

```
[18:26:32.573] test_framework.authproxy.JSONRPCException: 'enumeratesigners' RPC took longer than 1200.000000 seconds. Consider using larger timeout for calls that take longer to return. (-344)
```

Looking at the full log, the test is just idle and then times out. However, there is no indication why the RPC does not proceed.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "intermittent issue in rpc_signer.py (enumeratesigners timeout)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32524#issuecomment-2893966294)
It even happens on gcc-14, it seems:

https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5476449961902080?logs=ci#L5506

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "doc: add missing copyright headers"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31864)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "wallet: Fix logging of wallet version"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32553)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "Reintroduce external signer support for Windows"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29868)

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "depends: use "mkdir -p" when installing xproto"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32568)
It looks like the mkdir detection in xproto is broken on Alpine. Ensure we always use `mkdir -p`.

Fixes #32494.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "wallet: Fix logging of wallet version":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32553#issuecomment-2894002871)
Backported to `29.x` in #32292.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: generatetomany":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32468#discussion_r2097722076)
not sure about forcing an array, when all tests mostly just want to provide a single dummy value.

it would be good to make this optional and then, require one of `output` or `outputs` to be present, or maybe even fallback to `OP_TRUE` if none are given?

👍 luke-jr approved a pull request: "merkle: pre‑reserve leaves to prevent reallocs with odd vtx count"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32497#pullrequestreview-2853787748)
utACK main commit. Not sure why the benchmark is being changed.

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "merkle: pre‑reserve leaves to prevent reallocs with odd vtx count":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32497#discussion_r2097724115)
Wouldn't it be better to benchmark the less-performant input?

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "merkle: pre‑reserve leaves to prevent reallocs with odd vtx count":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32497#discussion_r2097711372)
This assumes `size_t` is `unsigned long long` I think? Can we avoid that easily?

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "merkle: pre‑reserve leaves to prevent reallocs with odd vtx count":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32497#discussion_r2097725346)
How does this avoid optimisations?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "depends: use "mkdir -p" when installing xproto":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32568#discussion_r2097735642)
Perhaps include a comment explaining why `MKDIRPROG` being added?