💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "Modernize rpcauth.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27081#discussion_r1104630727)
Since you're replacing `base64` lib to use `secrets`, perhaps would be good to do the same in `rpcauth-test`?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27081#discussion_r1104630727)
Since you're replacing `base64` lib to use `secrets`, perhaps would be good to do the same in `rpcauth-test`?
💬 hebasto commented on pull request "refactor: wallet, remove global 'ArgsManager' dependency":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#discussion_r1104633385)
See:
- https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines.html#es101-use-unsigned-types-for-bit-manipulation
- https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines.html#es102-use-signed-types-for-arithmetic
- [Signed and Unsigned Types in Interfaces](https://www.aristeia.com/Papers/C++ReportColumns/sep95.pdf)
Suggesting:
```suggestion
int64_t m_keypool_size{DEFAULT_KEYPOOL_SIZE};
```
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#discussion_r1104633385)
See:
- https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines.html#es101-use-unsigned-types-for-bit-manipulation
- https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines.html#es102-use-signed-types-for-arithmetic
- [Signed and Unsigned Types in Interfaces](https://www.aristeia.com/Papers/C++ReportColumns/sep95.pdf)
Suggesting:
```suggestion
int64_t m_keypool_size{DEFAULT_KEYPOOL_SIZE};
```
💬 TysonsTech commented on pull request "Minor edits - punctuation, spelling to make the contributing instructions more readable for all.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27082#discussion_r1104634402)
Appreciate the feedback, and the helpful article links! Thank you, sir!
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27082#discussion_r1104634402)
Appreciate the feedback, and the helpful article links! Thank you, sir!
👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "mapport: require miniupnpc API version 17 or later"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27016)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27016)
💬 fanquake commented on pull request "security-check: test for `_FORTIFY_SOURCE` usage in release binaries":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27038#issuecomment-1428171645)
> we don't end up with any foritfied funcs in bitcoin-util or bitcoin-cli.
`bitcoin-cli` is fixed once we fortify libevent.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27038#issuecomment-1428171645)
> we don't end up with any foritfied funcs in bitcoin-util or bitcoin-cli.
`bitcoin-cli` is fixed once we fortify libevent.
💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "Handle CJDNS from LookupSubNet()":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27071#discussion_r1103877367)
Does this need a Mutex, considering it's being accessed from both Node and GUI?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27071#discussion_r1103877367)
Does this need a Mutex, considering it's being accessed from both Node and GUI?
💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "Handle CJDNS from LookupSubNet()":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27071#discussion_r1104641668)
Now that `MaybeFlipIPv6toCJDNS` is available in `netbase`, would it make sense (maybe in follow-ups) to also use it in the `Lookup(` functions, not just `LookupSubNet` and reduce the number of occurrences we have to call `MaybeFlipIPv6toCJDNS` from outside it?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27071#discussion_r1104641668)
Now that `MaybeFlipIPv6toCJDNS` is available in `netbase`, would it make sense (maybe in follow-ups) to also use it in the `Lookup(` functions, not just `LookupSubNet` and reduce the number of occurrences we have to call `MaybeFlipIPv6toCJDNS` from outside it?
💬 brokenprogrammer commented on pull request "build: Check usages of #if defined(...)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25302#issuecomment-1428231398)
@fanquake No worries, I've squashed and updated the commit message according to the contributing guidelines.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25302#issuecomment-1428231398)
@fanquake No worries, I've squashed and updated the commit message according to the contributing guidelines.
💬 Semisol commented on issue "Allow several OP_RETURN in one tx and no limited size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27043#issuecomment-1428236333)
Concept NACK, at least SegWit allows for this data to be not downloaded. Alternative would be to make 256-512 byte OP_RETURNs.
Also, `OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_PUSH` is an unintended way to store data and should not be used as rationale for doing protocol changes.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27043#issuecomment-1428236333)
Concept NACK, at least SegWit allows for this data to be not downloaded. Alternative would be to make 256-512 byte OP_RETURNs.
Also, `OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_PUSH` is an unintended way to store data and should not be used as rationale for doing protocol changes.
✳️ fanquake pushed commits to a branch: bitcoin/bitcoin:master
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8126551d54ff...1ad0711d7c10)
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#27016: mapport: require miniupnpc API version 17 or later
b3b673f7048cce1d1368819abb0b58b7c6699fa5 mapport: require miniupnpc API version 17 or later (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Version 17 is currently the latest version, see: https://github.com/miniupnp/miniupnp/blob/master/miniupnpc/apiversions.txt, and has been available since the release of 2.1. 2.1 or newer is readily available across all distros, see https://repology.org/project/miniupnpc/versions, so drop support for the older API versions.
Split out of #22644.
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK b3b673f7048cce1d1368819abb0b58b7c6699fa5, tested on Ubuntu 20.04 w/ and w/o [`libminiupnpc-dev`](https://packages.ubuntu.com/focal/libminiupnpc-dev) package.
TheCharlatan:
ACK b3b673f7048cce1d1368819abb0b58b7c6699fa5
Tree-SHA512: f53b36b82462c4ea83d9b83413dca8097885d1620f7ca0a53a79d6b3d3cf37c7773828b23f4278ccfcc3b14fcb0faffa35f60191b519b04570f3d2783d0303e2
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8126551d54ff...1ad0711d7c10)
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#27016: mapport: require miniupnpc API version 17 or later
b3b673f7048cce1d1368819abb0b58b7c6699fa5 mapport: require miniupnpc API version 17 or later (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Version 17 is currently the latest version, see: https://github.com/miniupnp/miniupnp/blob/master/miniupnpc/apiversions.txt, and has been available since the release of 2.1. 2.1 or newer is readily available across all distros, see https://repology.org/project/miniupnpc/versions, so drop support for the older API versions.
Split out of #22644.
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK b3b673f7048cce1d1368819abb0b58b7c6699fa5, tested on Ubuntu 20.04 w/ and w/o [`libminiupnpc-dev`](https://packages.ubuntu.com/focal/libminiupnpc-dev) package.
TheCharlatan:
ACK b3b673f7048cce1d1368819abb0b58b7c6699fa5
Tree-SHA512: f53b36b82462c4ea83d9b83413dca8097885d1620f7ca0a53a79d6b3d3cf37c7773828b23f4278ccfcc3b14fcb0faffa35f60191b519b04570f3d2783d0303e2
💬 theuni commented on pull request "build: Add CMake-based build system (1 of N)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27060#issuecomment-1428240250)
@hebasto Yes. I'm going to review/test the CMake work (starting with this PR) in earnest this week. Until then, I'll hold off on further commenting/judgement.
I do stand by my comment on timing though. Getting this merged "as-is" for v25 is a bad idea imo. I suggest that we create a staging branch/repo for reviewing and merging chunks at a time, with the goal of merging from staging to master after v26 branch. Similar to the workflow (though not necessarily the timing) @sipa used for segwit.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27060#issuecomment-1428240250)
@hebasto Yes. I'm going to review/test the CMake work (starting with this PR) in earnest this week. Until then, I'll hold off on further commenting/judgement.
I do stand by my comment on timing though. Getting this merged "as-is" for v25 is a bad idea imo. I suggest that we create a staging branch/repo for reviewing and merging chunks at a time, with the goal of merging from staging to master after v26 branch. Similar to the workflow (though not necessarily the timing) @sipa used for segwit.
🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "mapport: require miniupnpc API version 17 or later"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27016)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27016)
💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "test: Fix intermittent sync issue in wallet_pruning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27066#issuecomment-1428249997)
> https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5441089956478976 cry
Ah, good catch. This is the still exactly the same error as in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27065. While the fix here is unrelated to fixing that bug, I think it is still needed to fix the same bug happening in a different line.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27066#issuecomment-1428249997)
> https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5441089956478976 cry
Ah, good catch. This is the still exactly the same error as in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27065. While the fix here is unrelated to fixing that bug, I think it is still needed to fix the same bug happening in a different line.
📝 MarcoFalke opened a pull request: "test: Fix intermittent sync issue in wallet_pruning"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27093)
The `sync_fun=self.no_op` has no motivation or rationale, and seems to be causing issues.
Fix that by removing it.
Actually fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27065, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27066#issuecomment-1428249997
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27093)
The `sync_fun=self.no_op` has no motivation or rationale, and seems to be causing issues.
Fix that by removing it.
Actually fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27065, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27066#issuecomment-1428249997
💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "test: Fix intermittent sync issue in wallet_pruning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27066#issuecomment-1428252597)
See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27093
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27066#issuecomment-1428252597)
See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27093
💬 furszy commented on pull request "refactor: wallet, remove global 'ArgsManager' dependency":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#discussion_r1104733597)
ah, you are suggesting to change it to a signed type. Sure.
Pushed.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#discussion_r1104733597)
ah, you are suggesting to change it to a signed type. Sure.
Pushed.
💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "refactor: wallet, remove global 'ArgsManager' dependency":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#discussion_r1104753896)
I might have missed something, but why not use the `m_keypool_size` from the available wallet here?
```
diff --git a/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp b/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp
index 64253789ec..d9c6755bcb 100644
--- a/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp
+++ b/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp
@@ -15,7 +15,6 @@
#include <script/standard.h>
#include <sync.h>
#include <util/bip32.h>
-#include <util/system.h>
#include <util/time.h>
#include <util/translation.h>
#include <wallet/rpc/util.h>
@@ -1480,7
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#discussion_r1104753896)
I might have missed something, but why not use the `m_keypool_size` from the available wallet here?
```
diff --git a/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp b/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp
index 64253789ec..d9c6755bcb 100644
--- a/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp
+++ b/src/wallet/rpc/backup.cpp
@@ -15,7 +15,6 @@
#include <script/standard.h>
#include <sync.h>
#include <util/bip32.h>
-#include <util/system.h>
#include <util/time.h>
#include <util/translation.h>
#include <wallet/rpc/util.h>
@@ -1480,7
...
💬 furszy commented on pull request "refactor: wallet, remove global 'ArgsManager' dependency":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#issuecomment-1428276879)
Updated per feedback. Thanks hebasto.
Plus added 1ff1b9c to protect `importdescriptors` from negative '-keypool' value.
Applied the same approach used in the wallet code to handle a negative keypool size. Currently, the keypool size is set to 1 in such cases, although it could also be handled by throwing an initialization error but.. the objective was to implement the smallest change in this PR to avoid extending its scope.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#issuecomment-1428276879)
Updated per feedback. Thanks hebasto.
Plus added 1ff1b9c to protect `importdescriptors` from negative '-keypool' value.
Applied the same approach used in the wallet code to handle a negative keypool size. Currently, the keypool size is set to 1 in such cases, although it could also be handled by throwing an initialization error but.. the objective was to implement the smallest change in this PR to avoid extending its scope.
💬 furszy commented on pull request "refactor: wallet, remove global 'ArgsManager' dependency":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#discussion_r1104756635)
ha, because I'm still sleepy, good catch. Pushing it..
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26889#discussion_r1104756635)
ha, because I'm still sleepy, good catch. Pushing it..
💬 instagibbs commented on issue "24.0.1 crash on restart":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27088#issuecomment-1428279748)
Happened againt today: https://gist.github.com/instagibbs/17d6513f26d8999ffebc25cf745d84fb
I'll try and see if I can interleaved bitcoind logs in CI as well, but it looks like at this line https://gist.github.com/instagibbs/17d6513f26d8999ffebc25cf745d84fb#file-bitcoind-crash-cln-ci-L2725 CLN thinks it talked to bitcoind fine, but immediately after it has an issue due to the crash.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27088#issuecomment-1428279748)
Happened againt today: https://gist.github.com/instagibbs/17d6513f26d8999ffebc25cf745d84fb
I'll try and see if I can interleaved bitcoind logs in CI as well, but it looks like at this line https://gist.github.com/instagibbs/17d6513f26d8999ffebc25cf745d84fb#file-bitcoind-crash-cln-ci-L2725 CLN thinks it talked to bitcoind fine, but immediately after it has an issue due to the crash.