💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: always print initial signature verification state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2349727601)
Added one above + explained lightly in commit message
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2349727601)
Added one above + explained lightly in commit message
💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "log: always print initial signature verification state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2349693427)
Done, thanks
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2349693427)
Done, thanks
💬 Rev-9T commented on issue "v30 Testing (BUG)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33393#issuecomment-3293334447)
Knots do not have this bug.
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33393#issuecomment-3293334447)
Knots do not have this bug.
💬 ryanofsky commented on issue "RFC: Bitcoin Core Node `BlockTemplateManager`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33389#issuecomment-3293358522)
Another link to the POC branch: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/master...ismaelsadeeq:bitcoin:09-2025-minerman
This seems like a good idea. The actual change here doesn't seem very big and it seems like it could avoid some wasted memory and wasted work. It does seem like `BlockTemplateManager` is currently duplicating some logic in `WaitAndCreateNewBlock`, but I think the idea would be to replace it?
This idea also seems like it might relate to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/iss
...
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33389#issuecomment-3293358522)
Another link to the POC branch: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/master...ismaelsadeeq:bitcoin:09-2025-minerman
This seems like a good idea. The actual change here doesn't seem very big and it seems like it could avoid some wasted memory and wasted work. It does seem like `BlockTemplateManager` is currently duplicating some logic in `WaitAndCreateNewBlock`, but I think the idea would be to replace it?
This idea also seems like it might relate to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/iss
...
💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "coins: warn on oversized `-dbcache`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33333#discussion_r2349768694)
Excellent, added @w0xlt as a coauthor.
I kept `ShouldWarnOversizedDbCache` since this makes it unit-testable.
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33333#discussion_r2349768694)
Excellent, added @w0xlt as a coauthor.
I kept `ShouldWarnOversizedDbCache` since this makes it unit-testable.
💬 polespinasa commented on pull request "rpc: print P2WSH and P2SH redem Script in getrawtransaction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31252#discussion_r2349780315)
Nice catch!
You're right, solved in 1d156fce6f1634ca796e4e1ecf1763494f7d4fb2.
Now non-P2SH and non-segwit inputs return -2 and don't show any script as it's out the scope of the PR.
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31252#discussion_r2349780315)
Nice catch!
You're right, solved in 1d156fce6f1634ca796e4e1ecf1763494f7d4fb2.
Now non-P2SH and non-segwit inputs return -2 and don't show any script as it's out the scope of the PR.
💬 pythcoiner commented on pull request "wallet: warn against accidental unsafe older() import":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33135#discussion_r2349781938)
build success even w/o those 2 (added) includes on my side
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33135#discussion_r2349781938)
build success even w/o those 2 (added) includes on my side
💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "fuzz: enhance wallet_fees by mocking mempool stuff":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33210#discussion_r2349789326)
The idea of `FuzzedBlockPolicyEstimator` is to have a way of using the buffer to determine the returned value of some functions. `Mocked` (e.g. in unit tests) is more common when we leave the values fixed.
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33210#discussion_r2349789326)
The idea of `FuzzedBlockPolicyEstimator` is to have a way of using the buffer to determine the returned value of some functions. `Mocked` (e.g. in unit tests) is more common when we leave the values fixed.
🤔 l0rinc requested changes to a pull request: "help: enrich help text for `-loadblock`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33343#pullrequestreview-3225825955)
@HowHsu Did you try contrib/linearize to export the blk files for -loadblock? Did it solve your issue? I have suggested a simpler documentation, do you think that help others to use the linearize tool when they're in your situation?
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33343#pullrequestreview-3225825955)
@HowHsu Did you try contrib/linearize to export the blk files for -loadblock? Did it solve your issue? I have suggested a simpler documentation, do you think that help others to use the linearize tool when they're in your situation?
💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "help: enrich help text for `-loadblock`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33343#discussion_r2349795518)
```suggestion
argsman.AddArg("-loadblock=<file>", "Imports blocks from external file on startup (obfuscated block files are not supported; use contrib/linearize to export blocks to a plain, loadable format)", ArgsManager::ALLOW_ANY, OptionsCategory::OPTIONS);
```
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33343#discussion_r2349795518)
```suggestion
argsman.AddArg("-loadblock=<file>", "Imports blocks from external file on startup (obfuscated block files are not supported; use contrib/linearize to export blocks to a plain, loadable format)", ArgsManager::ALLOW_ANY, OptionsCategory::OPTIONS);
```
🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "test: Prevent disk space warning during node_init_tests"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33391#pullrequestreview-3225849802)
ACK bdf01c6f61262cd6e211ead3c0dbc66ccb48b32f
Tested, warning does not appear anymore. ✅
(Also had run into this problem on master, though it was related to my setup) Thanks for fixing this !
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33391#pullrequestreview-3225849802)
ACK bdf01c6f61262cd6e211ead3c0dbc66ccb48b32f
Tested, warning does not appear anymore. ✅
(Also had run into this problem on master, though it was related to my setup) Thanks for fixing this !
👍 l0rinc approved a pull request: "test: Prevent disk space warning during node_init_tests"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33391#pullrequestreview-3225850554)
tested ACK bdf01c6f61262cd6e211ead3c0dbc66ccb48b32f
It prints the warning without the change, no warning after the change
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33391#pullrequestreview-3225850554)
tested ACK bdf01c6f61262cd6e211ead3c0dbc66ccb48b32f
It prints the warning without the change, no warning after the change
💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "log: always print initial signature verification state":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2349859713)
Please consider triggering a compiler warning instead.
```
₿ git grep "// no default case, so the compiler can warn about missing cases" |wc -l
70
```
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/9b04e4f96200daf7516d1b8b6b0dfc4c077837e8/src/deploymentinfo.cpp#L36-L37
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#discussion_r2349859713)
Please consider triggering a compiler warning instead.
```
₿ git grep "// no default case, so the compiler can warn about missing cases" |wc -l
70
```
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/9b04e4f96200daf7516d1b8b6b0dfc4c077837e8/src/deploymentinfo.cpp#L36-L37
🤔 mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "test: Prevent disk space warning during node_init_tests"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33391#pullrequestreview-3225928315)
utACK bdf01c6f61262cd6e211ead3c0dbc66ccb48b32f
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33391#pullrequestreview-3225928315)
utACK bdf01c6f61262cd6e211ead3c0dbc66ccb48b32f
💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "Remove unnecessary casts when calling socket operations":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33378#discussion_r2349889597)
Agree that we can get rid of the `typedef` that is so rarely used.
Should probably use another kind of cast here and in *sock_tests.cpp*?
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/da23e2e2e104fc9d8e210c3989f2ae4945c072fa/doc/developer-notes.md?plain=1#L60-L63
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33378#discussion_r2349889597)
Agree that we can get rid of the `typedef` that is so rarely used.
Should probably use another kind of cast here and in *sock_tests.cpp*?
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/da23e2e2e104fc9d8e210c3989f2ae4945c072fa/doc/developer-notes.md?plain=1#L60-L63
🤔 pinheadmz reviewed a pull request: "Introduce SockMan ("lite"): low-level socket handling for HTTP"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#pullrequestreview-3217223929)
Rebase to e007e1b57d addresses excellent thorough review from @hodlinator (THANKS!). Most significant changes involve casting arguments to socket functions (see #33378) and cleaning up protected/private membership of `SockMan`. I have locally rebased #32061 on these changes and everything still passes ;-) I will update that PR soon based on these changes.
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#pullrequestreview-3217223929)
Rebase to e007e1b57d addresses excellent thorough review from @hodlinator (THANKS!). Most significant changes involve casting arguments to socket functions (see #33378) and cleaning up protected/private membership of `SockMan`. I have locally rebased #32061 on these changes and everything still passes ;-) I will update that PR soon based on these changes.
💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "Introduce SockMan ("lite"): low-level socket handling for HTTP":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#discussion_r2345103522)
👍
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#discussion_r2345103522)
👍
💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "Introduce SockMan ("lite"): low-level socket handling for HTTP":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#discussion_r2344946486)
Yes will make these data private/protected and add public helpers.
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#discussion_r2344946486)
Yes will make these data private/protected and add public helpers.
💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "Introduce SockMan ("lite"): low-level socket handling for HTTP":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#discussion_r2345329538)
you're right thanks
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#discussion_r2345329538)
you're right thanks
💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "Introduce SockMan ("lite"): low-level socket handling for HTTP":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#discussion_r2345201886)
i like it thanks
  (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32747#discussion_r2345201886)
i like it thanks