💬 theStack commented on pull request "contrib: utxo_to_sqlite.py: add option to store txid/spk as BLOBs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32621#discussion_r2112985346)
Agree, done.

🤔 w0xlt reviewed a pull request: "contrib: utxo_to_sqlite.py: add option to store txid/spk as BLOBs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32621#pullrequestreview-2876776591)
reACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32621/commits/7378f27b4fb512567b6152f986f67d9263d08d7a

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "wallet: migration, avoid creating spendable wallet from a watch-only legacy wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31423#issuecomment-2917980185)
I've tested this branch ([6d9bf36](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/6d9bf36b2c061088abb0d839fee90683ff1525e1)) and I still got "**bad_function_call**", as mentioned in my previous [testing](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31423#pullrequestreview-2694630661), when I try to migrate a blank legacy wallet with an imported address. I've isolated the case and it's only happening on a blank wallet with private keys enabled (disabled private keys on blank wallet with imported address wo
...

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "build: Add resource file and manifest to `bitcoin.exe`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32634#issuecomment-2918081325)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32634/commits/dbb2d4c3d54759f8c346882b6f98d26d5bb8e816"

I suggest adding a CI check like https://github.com/davidgumberg/bitcoin/commit/1b9816052b1d8ad1d9c17945530e14ead79fce33 to this PR to prevent future regressions, but OK for a separate PR if out of scope.

This is also a blocker for #32431.

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "deps: Bump lief to 0.16.5":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32431#issuecomment-2918101687)
Thanks for the patch @fanquake, I've rebased to include https://github.com/fanquake/bitcoin/tree/scikit_compat, but squashed to avoid a broken commit.

> It seems it [should](https://iscinumpy.dev/post/scikit-build-core-0-10/) be:
>
> ```
> Restore compat with python-scikit-build-core 0.9.x
> Can be dropped when using python-scikit-build-core 0.10.x
> ```

I see, in theory, it should be sufficient to fast-forward to [35c5f07e967155d2276c7ec58e5108e4da02c974](https://codeberg.org/guix/g
...

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "Replace cluster linearization algorithm with SFL":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32545#issuecomment-2918119652)
<details>
<summary>

#### AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core Processor </summary>

```bash
./build/bin/bench_bitcoin --filter="Linearize.*Example.*" -min-time=10000
```
| ns/cost | cost/s | err% | ins/cost | cyc/cost | IPC | bra/cost | miss% | total | benchmark
|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|---------------:|--------:|----------:|:----------
| 1.19 |
...

⚠️ 602kuntry opened an issue: "Concept ACK"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32637)
Concept ACK

_Originally posted by @jnewbery in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22490#issuecomment-882506347_

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "build: Make config warnings fatal if -DWCONFIGURE_ERROR=ON":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31665#issuecomment-2918368425)
Rebased to address merge conflict after legacy wallet removal.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: migration, avoid creating spendable wallet from a watch-only legacy wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31423#discussion_r2113255706)
done

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: migration, avoid creating spendable wallet from a watch-only legacy wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31423#issuecomment-2918386221)
> I've tested this branch ([6d9bf36](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/6d9bf36b2c061088abb0d839fee90683ff1525e1)) and I still got "bad_function_call", as mentioned in my previous https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31423#pullrequestreview-2694630661, when I try to migrate a blank legacy wallet with an imported address. I've isolated the case and it's only happening on a blank wallet with private keys enabled (disabled private keys on blank wallet with imported address works fine).

...

✅ achow101 closed an issue: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32637)

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "build: Add resource file and manifest to `bitcoin.exe`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32634#issuecomment-2918500203)
Concept ACK, seems consistent with the other binaries. I made a note to test a guix build on Windows later.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "ipc: add bitcoin-mine test program":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30437#issuecomment-2918504989)
When rebasing, you may also need to add a resource file like in #32634. Although we don't ship this binary for Windows builds yet, so maybe that can wait.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "ipc: add bitcoin-mine test program":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30437#discussion_r2113347751)
IIRC we decided to not include spawning support just yet to keep it simple, so the comment may be outdated.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "wallet: `addhdkey` RPC to add just keys to wallets via new `unused(KEY)` descriptor":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29136#issuecomment-2918537868)
re-utACK b4ef67a3971f19c939135aeec59f11c6250f5368

Changes seem to be due to #32475.

💬 strmfos commented on pull request "Replace dead gnome link notificator.cpp":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32629#discussion_r2113433282)
@hebasto

🤔 hebasto reviewed a pull request: "deps: Bump lief to 0.16.5"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32431#pullrequestreview-2877492771)
Tested b65a25d3d1b0e9b08c7cc102cafc0528b4eb7247:

```
Checking binary security...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/distsrc-base/distsrc-38d7664dc1a0-powerpc64-linux-gnu/contrib/guix/security-check.py", line 285, in <module>
for (name, func) in CHECKS[etype][arch]:
KeyError: ARCHITECTURES.UNKNOWN
```

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "test: add MAX_DISCONNECTED_TX_POOL_BYTES, chainlimits coverage"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32516#pullrequestreview-2877551270)
Thanks for entertaining my suggestion :)

ACK 84aa484d45e2fb3c1149941ef23779e4adb983d9

⚠️ fanquake reopened an issue: "seeds: seed.bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch not returning results"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32590)
Also shown by [check-dnsseeds.py](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-maintainer-tools/blob/main/check-dnsseeds.py):
```bash
./check-dnsseeds.py
* mainnet
OK seed.bitcoin.sipa.be (39 results)
OK dnsseed.bluematt.me (31 results)
OK dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr-list-of-p2p-nodes.us (35 results)
OK seed.bitcoinstats.com (24 results)
FAIL seed.bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch
OK seed.btc.petertodd.net (37 results)
OK seed.bitcoin.sprovoost.nl (36 results)
OK dnsseed.emzy.de (40 results)
OK see
...

💬 fanquake commented on issue "seeds: seed.bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch not returning results":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32590#issuecomment-2918785885)
I am seeing this again.