✅ achow101 closed an issue: "CoinGrinder and SRD disagree on small change"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33352)

💬 Roasbeef commented on issue "Difficulty in reliably mapping errors from Bitcoin Core due to unstable error codes and messages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33350#issuecomment-3271824803)
> proactively avoid violating it

Avoiding violating the rules is itself a moving target. Consider that a user can set config options in `bitciond` to: affect the min relay fee, reduce the mempool size, etc (min mempool fee is itself a dynamic value). Or the user picks a fee that's below the min relay fee, and the transaction is rejected. Another example is if someone sends you some sats, and you go to spend that transaction zero conf, but get rejected as the ancestor chain is too long. Or if ne
...

💬 instagibbs commented on issue "Difficulty in reliably mapping errors from Bitcoin Core due to unstable error codes and messages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33350#issuecomment-3271843015)
> RPC calls like submitpackage (or testmempoolaccept) help, but as there isn't an atomic transaction submission API, something can show success with submitpacakge, but then rejected once it actually hits the mempool.

Sorry can you elaborate? `submitpackage` *should* return an error string if it doesn't enter the local mempool

💬 davidgumberg commented on issue "GUI (?): Copying output from console causes large mem usage/OOM":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/887#issuecomment-3271861101)
I experience this issue linking against system Qt 6.9.1, so I do not think this has been fixed upstream.

But in our `depends` build we set `-no-feature-textmarkdownwriter`:

https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/blob/689a32197638e92995dd8eb071425715f5fdc3a4/depends/packages/qt.mk#L103

and when that feature is disabled, `QTextEditMimeData` won't try to convert the selection to markdown, avoiding the problematic function:

https://github.com/qt/qtbase/blob/b617d1176593963a2a9ed21dd5d9a63e84a09400/
...

💬 w0xlt commented on pull request "Avoid pathological QT text/markdown behavior...":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/886#issuecomment-3271874773)
I wasn’t able to detect any memory increase on macOS when running getblocktemplate '{"rules": ["segwit"]}' in the GUI.
Is this issue specific to Linux?

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "Avoid pathological QT text/markdown behavior...":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/886#issuecomment-3271898148)
> I wasn’t able to detect any memory increase on macOS when running getblocktemplate '{"rules": ["segwit"]}' in the GUI. Is this issue specific to Linux?

Are you running from a release or a depends build? This will only occur when linking against a QT with the `textmarkdownwriter` feature enabled, which we disable in our depends build of QT. See discussion here: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/887#issuecomment-3271861101

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334523023)
Used now for `has_internal`.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334523216)
Done

📝 l0rinc opened a pull request: "logs: show reindex progress in `ImportBlocks`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33353)
### Summary

When triggering a reindex, users had no indication of how many files remained or how far along the process was.

### Fix

This patch prefetches the target file block file count to be able to show progress information. Instead of just displaying which block file is being processed, it now indicates how many files remain.

### Reproducer + expected results

Running
```bash
cmake -B build && make -C build -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release && ./build/bin/bitcoind -datadir=demo -rei
...

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334524197)
I think it is useful to to exercise the change address of `send`.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334524489)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334525262)
Fixing that is orthogonal to this PR

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334526025)
Updated the name and changed this to use a regex that matches only on a 2 index multipath.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334526200)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334526627)
Updated to `expected_key_leaves`

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334526817)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334527364)
It's not necessary to check for the warning.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334528185)
I don't think refactoring like this is helpful as the resulting functions won't be called by anything else anyways.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334528560)
I don't think this needs to be more verbose.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2334529325)
The behavior is simple enough that I don't think a separate function will make this better.