💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-2931306622)
> But `sendrawtransaction` will fail if the tx is already in our mempool, no? How will this succeed?

Are you sure about this?

```

// There's already a transaction in the mempool with this txid. Don't
// try to submit this transaction to the mempool (since it'll be
// rejected as a TX_CONFLICT), but do attempt to reannounce the mempool
// transaction if broadcast_method is not ADD_TO_MEMPOOL_NO_BROADCAST.
//
//
...

👋 m3dwards's pull request is ready for review: "test: enabling wallet migration functional test on windows"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32219)

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "Broadcast own transactions only via short-lived Tor or I2P connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29415#issuecomment-2931340529)
> Are you sure about this?

I was not sure, thanks for the correction :). I see we only check for acceptance if the tx is not already in our mempool. If it is, then we skip checking acceptance and try and broadcast again. That behavior makes sense to me, and I think this is another reason why we should treat 3 minute timeouts waiting for `GETDATA` to be a successful private broadcast connection.

📝 RandyMcMillan opened a pull request: "uint256 cxx-20 constexpr patch"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32663)

💬 mabu44 commented on pull request "policy: make pathological transactions packed with legacy sigops non-standard":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32521#discussion_r2121610418)
nHeight is indeed an int. Am I missing something?

👍 ryanofsky approved a pull request: "depends: hard-code necessary c(xx)flags rather than setting them per-host"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32584#pullrequestreview-2889108835)
Code review ACK 51f6aa8ac47b7b5412553af2e7152d250a858d0d. This seems like a good change that deduplicates host definitions, and removes nonsensical inclusion of `-std` in host options rather than package options, since c/c++ standard versions should not vary by host.

---

IIUC, this change is mostly just a refactoring. For example, it rearranges the libevent flags shown by `make print-libevent_cflags` from:

```sh
libevent_cflags=-pipe -std=c11 -O2 -fdebug-prefix-map=...
```

to:

`
...

💬 benthecarman commented on pull request "rpc: Note in fundrawtransaction doc, fee rate is for package":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32607#issuecomment-2931455300)
impl'd @achow101's suggestions, also added missing `\n` at end of the doc

📝 RandyMcMillan converted_to_draft a pull request: "uint256 cxx-20 constexpr patch"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32663)

👋 RandyMcMillan's pull request is ready for review: "uint256 cxx-20 constexpr patch"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32663)

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#pullrequestreview-2888547849)
Thanks for the review! Just addressed most comments, still have a few more to get to

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2121349624)
have consolidated the two

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2121656293)
added

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2121240683)
removed

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2121656398)
added

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2121336985)
removed

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2121334653)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2121650357)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2121336441)
added

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: improve TxOrphanage denial of service bounds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31829#discussion_r2121375791)
removed

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Treat warnings as errors for specific directories":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31308#discussion_r2121666498)
> to avoid issues

What issues? Do I understand correctly, that if we land the patch in the subtree, this will just break again?