🤔 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?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Treat warnings as errors for specific directories":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31308#discussion_r2121670336)
The following `git diff` prints this patch even IWYU did not apply any modifications.

💬 darosior commented on pull request "policy: make pathological transactions packed with legacy sigops non-standard":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32521#discussion_r2121670967)
Wow my bad.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Treat warnings as errors for specific directories":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31308#discussion_r2121672661)
?

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Treat warnings as errors for specific directories":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31308#discussion_r2121672770)
?

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "depends: Bump boost to 1.88.0 and use new CMake buildsystem"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32665)
Originally #30434.

This has a few advantages over the old method of simply copying headers:
- Installs proper CMake files which can be picked up by our buildsystem
- Only installs necessary headers, not all of Boost

Pulls in upstreamed https://github.com/boostorg/test/pull/445.

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "depends: bump boost to 1.87.0 and use new CMake buildsystem"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30434)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: bump boost to 1.87.0 and use new CMake buildsystem":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30434#issuecomment-2931555985)
I've pulled @hebasto's newer branch into #32665.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "uint256 cxx-20 constexpr patch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32663#issuecomment-2931558582)
Was this opened by accident?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "depends: Bump boost to 1.88.0 and use new CMake buildsystem":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32665#issuecomment-2931563110)
Concept ACK.