🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "index: initial sync speedup, parallelize process"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#pullrequestreview-3029621925)
> I tried to use this to boost the silent payment indexer, but I don't know what I'm doing :-) [Sjors#96](https://github.com/Sjors/bitcoin/pull/96)

@Sjors, see https://github.com/furszy/bitcoin-core/commits/2025_bip352_blind_fix.
Note: I only spent a few minutes with it and the test seem to pass (I'm partially afk these days). Let me know how it goes and could check it in detail next week.
The first commit there (413ce51bf10326a6c56bd4250f9a9f19fde44ed4) is merely a code improvement + clean
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Bump SCRIPT_VERIFY flags to 64 bit":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32998#issuecomment-3084150541)
> > CI failure seems to be due to [a bug in qt6 6.4](https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-31496?focusedId=888930&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-888930):
>
> Although both failed CI job use Clang 20.1.7, the error can also be reproduced with GCC 13.3.

[Refactoring](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/commits/pr32998/0717.refactored/) helps.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "validation: docs and cleanups for MemPoolAccept coins views":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32973#issuecomment-3084178413)
@marcofleon

This seed:
ALoAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZNpogAyAAAAAAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAB5AAAA
AAAhAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABk2miADIAAAAAAACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAHkAAAAA
ACEBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABwAAAGTaaIAMgAAAAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAn////AZNpogAyAAAAAAAAAQAA
AAAAAAAAAAEAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACNAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABkYXRhZGlyYXRhAAAA

Should cause failure if you ap
...

📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "test: add option to skip large re-org test in feature_block"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33003)
Fixes #32877

This PR adds a config flag `--skipreorg` which is used to skip the large re-org test. According to corecheck, `feature_block` is our slowest functional test and primarily because of this large re-org test. However, this test might not be useful for the mutation analysis of some files and could be skipped to save a huge amount of time.

```
time ./build/test/functional/feature_block.py --skipreorg
./build/test/functional/feature_block.py --skipreorg 11.38s user 0.33s system
...

👋 brunoerg's pull request is ready for review: "test: add option to skip large re-org test in feature_block"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33003)

👍 willcl-ark approved a pull request: "ci: Use APT_LLVM_V in msan task"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32999#pullrequestreview-3029741547)
ACK fad040a5787a8ac0a13aef5c54e5a675de239e92

Code changes look correct to me.

In the CI run this installed `clang-20.1.7` from `apt`, before cloning `https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project -b llvmorg-20.1.7` and building the llvm runtimes with msan enabled.

nit: I do notice that bitcoin configure output claims it's using clang from `/bin/clang++` which differs from the `update-alternatives` dir used: `/usr/bin/clang++`, but it appears to be the correct version so I guess it's an `apt inst
...

💬 Sjors commented on issue "Guix build fails on M4 macOS host with Ubuntu in UTM":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32759#issuecomment-3084264672)
> Perhaps the M4 chipset doesn't allow for this functionality either.

That's quite possible, because trying to run the arm CI job also doesn't work, see #31344.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: Use APT_LLVM_V in msan task":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32999#issuecomment-3084286466)
> bin

It is a symlink:

```
# podman run --rm 'ubuntu:questing' ls -ld /bin
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 Apr 24 16:59 /bin -> usr/bin

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: add option to skip large re-org test in feature_block":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33003#discussion_r2213532921)
i wonder if the small test cases can be run before the reorg, to avoid having to branch on the move_tip

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "net, pcp: handle multi-part responses and filter for default route while querying default gateway":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32159#issuecomment-3084380035)
Put this on the `v30.0` milestone.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "checkqueue: implement a new scriptcheck worker pool with atomic variables":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32791#issuecomment-3084382725)
Are the first two commits related to the PR? Seem REST-related?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Do not pass tests on unhandled exceptions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33001#discussion_r2213588799)
Agree; thx, done

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "ci, iwyu: Treat warnings as errors for specific directories":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31308#issuecomment-3084437964)
> may be good to fix the aarch64 ci.

Fixed.

💬 sybot99 commented on issue "GUI bitcoin core shows wrong amount":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32976#issuecomment-3084461340)
> coin control is an expert feature, but you can enable it in
>
> ```
> Settings > Options > Wallet
> Check "Enable coin control features (experts only!)"
> ```
>
> The RPC has a manual, you can just go to "Window"->"Console" and type `help`.

Yes I understand this. But I dont understand how to send that btc(UTXO as I understand) from invisible wallet to my visible wallet with all other btc )

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "test: Do not pass tests on unhandled exceptions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33001#discussion_r2213637486)
Printing the exception `e` seems more useful than "Unexpected exception", and imo completely obviates the need for having the `CalledProcessError` and `KeyboardInterrupt` exceptions?

🤔 rkrux reviewed a pull request: "wallet/rpc: fix listdescriptors RPC fails to return descriptors with private key information when wallet contains descriptors missing any key"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32471#pullrequestreview-3025316172)
Partial review bb14e8ac7d38f3698d76ea3d6dce09e1387d59f3

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet/rpc: fix listdescriptors RPC fails to return descriptors with private key information when wallet contains descriptors missing any key":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32471#discussion_r2210645024)
In a0a458965c944434b1f3e4d83277257793435edb "descriptor: ToPrivateString() pass if at least 1 priv key exists"

Not a bug but `bitwise or` for boolean operations is not ideal.
```diff
- has_priv_key |= tmp;
+ has_priv_key = has_priv_key || tmp;
```

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet/rpc: fix listdescriptors RPC fails to return descriptors with private key information when wallet contains descriptors missing any key":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32471#discussion_r2210652033)
In bb14e8ac7d38f3698d76ea3d6dce09e1387d59f3 "test: Test listdescs with priv works even with missing priv keys"

Nit: I prefer to only check for the data that we really want to assert on, helps in keeping the tests code cleaner as well besides being minutely faster. Checking `desc` for every imported descriptor in this case.

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet/rpc: fix listdescriptors RPC fails to return descriptors with private key information when wallet contains descriptors missing any key":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32471#discussion_r2210641706)
In a0a458965c944434b1f3e4d83277257793435edb "descriptor: ToPrivateString() pass if at least 1 priv key exists"

Fine to add `assert` here because for all intents and purposes I don't suppose there would ever be a case where `ToStringHelper` returns `false` here. Perhaps we can add a helpful assert message here for debugging purposes?

```diff
- assert(ToStringHelper(&arg, out, StringType::PRIVATE, has_priv_key));
+ assert(ToStringHelper(&arg, out, StringType::PRIVATE, has_priv_key), "");
...

💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet/rpc: fix listdescriptors RPC fails to return descriptors with private key information when wallet contains descriptors missing any key":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32471#discussion_r2210625173)
In a0a458965c944434b1f3e4d83277257793435edb "descriptor: ToPrivateString() pass if at least 1 priv key exists"

```diff
+ @return true if at least one private key available
```