💬 mzumsande commented on issue "-loadblock doesn't work":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33280#issuecomment-3245814664)
are the two datadirs using the same xor.dat or have they disabled (see `-blocksxor`)?

💬 fanquake commented on issue "cmake: Errors not actually errors?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33153#issuecomment-3245855785)
Put this on v30.0, because we shouldn't ship a build system that produces errors, and then just ignores them.

💬 jesterhodl commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3245894816)
Apologies, but is WalletDescriptor an internal name or is it a typo and should be Wallet Descriptor?
> "Cannot add WalletDescriptor to a non-descriptor wallet"

💬 jesterhodl commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3245904340)
What is a "rescan reserver"?
> "Failed to acquire rescan reserver during wallet initialization"

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3245949200)
> Apologies, but is WalletDescriptor an internal name or is it a typo and should be Wallet Descriptor?
>
> > "Cannot add WalletDescriptor to a non-descriptor wallet"

An internal name.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3245967004)
> What is a "rescan reserver"?
>
> > "Failed to acquire rescan reserver during wallet initialization"

I commented this string on Transifex, but for some reason my explanation has gone.

Here it is now:

> It’s a special internal object that holds (or “reserves”) the wallet’s “rescan” state.
>
> While the wallet is rescanning, no unrelated access should be allowed. The “rescan reserver” makes sure of that.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3246003431)
> > Apologies, but is WalletDescriptor an internal name or is it a typo and should be Wallet Descriptor?
> > > "Cannot add WalletDescriptor to a non-descriptor wallet"
>
> An internal name.

There are more instances of this. I'd say, generally it is best to avoid internal names and instead use the normal/general word. Here, it could be "Cannot add descriptor to a non-descriptor wallet", or "Cannot add output script descriptor to a non-descriptor wallet"?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3246010706)
> > > Apologies, but is WalletDescriptor an internal name or is it a typo and should be Wallet Descriptor?
> > > > "Cannot add WalletDescriptor to a non-descriptor wallet"
> >
> >
> > An internal name.
>
> There are more instances of this. I'd say, generally it is best to avoid internal names and instead use the normal/general word. Here, it could be "Cannot add descriptor to a non-descriptor wallet", or "Cannot add output script descriptor to a non-descriptor wallet"?

Yes, the origi
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add functional test for IPC interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33201#discussion_r2316615719)
In e043a279da6ea901b5f6d6690f96ff0d419faf13 _ci: enable IPC tests in CI_: `pip3 install` did the trick for me, see https://github.com/Sjors/bitcoin/actions/runs/17409223017/job/49421870136?pr=103#step:8:3514

🤔 w0xlt reviewed a pull request: "kernel: chainparams & headersync updates for 30.0"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33274#pullrequestreview-3177418705)
ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33274/commits/755152ac819a23acf2f9e70316134d74a04d589b

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "rpc: followups for min fee changes":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33189#issuecomment-3246155677)
My intention wasn't to hurt, thanks for clarifying the title.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "Release: 30.0 translations update":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33275#issuecomment-3246189935)
> Is there some additional context that translators have?

We could probably get more accurate translations by creating a bot that goes through each translation (<2000 values I think, we could batch them by files) fetches the source code context for the given translations and gives 3-4 examples for translations that we think are close to how we want it to translate and ask for the missing languages from the AI (based on the English + source code usage + 3-4 other correct translations)

⚠️ fanquake opened an issue: "build: secp256k1 warnings not turned into errors in MSAN job"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33284)
master (7e58c94112d061af38648808aae87c369098f44c) https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6098524451897344:
```bash
[06:05:23.776] Treat compiler warnings as errors ..... ON
<snip>
[06:05:24.677] [ 10%] Building CXX object src/crypto/CMakeFiles/bitcoin_crypto.dir/sha256_avx2.cpp.o
[06:05:24.678] /ci_container_base/src/secp256k1/src/tests.c:6049:34: warning: variable 'pubkey' is uninitialized when passed as a const pointer argument here [-Wuninitialized-const-pointer]
[06:05:24.678] 6049 | SECP256K1_CHEC
...

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "kernel: chainparams & headersync updates for 30.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33274#issuecomment-3246220959)
ACK 755152ac819a23acf2f9e70316134d74a04d589b

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "contrib: update fixed seeds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33283#issuecomment-3246233173)
Huh, seems to have lost a bunch of i2p and cjdns nodes. My crawler might be having some connection issues.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "stabilize translations by reverting old ids by text content":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33270#issuecomment-3246245404)
It wouldn't be difficult to make this into a manual script which generates an id mapping, if we're worried about python, something like:
```
sed -E -i \
-e 's|id="_msg1160"|id="_msg1239"|g' \
-e 's|id="_msg1159"|id="_msg1160"|g' \
-e 's|id="_msg120\[0\]"|id="_msg1240\[0\]"|g' \
-e 's|id="_msg120\[1\]"|id="_msg1240\[1\]"|g' \
'src/qt/locale/bitcoin_en.xlf'
```

Would that be more useful in your opinion? What are the worries exactly, can you please point me to the discussion th
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add functional test for IPC interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33201#discussion_r2316777908)
7eb71775dce6f3f2fd0e4b62f439aab86d1b65a0: tidy doesn't run functional tests currently, because I guess it doesn't harm either.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add functional test for IPC interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33201#issuecomment-3246278325)
ACK 235016f5b78ba9f472b56df0825690307fffc7e6

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Add functional test for IPC interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33201#discussion_r2316788847)
Done.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Add functional test for IPC interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33201#discussion_r2316789881)
Fixed.