💬 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_r2353725515)
The callers all pass a `script_pubkey`. It is also more descriptive because it is actually the pubkey that appears in the script, which is not necessarily the same as the aggregate.

💬 enirox001 commented on pull request "test: don't throw from the destructor of DebugLogHelper":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33388#discussion_r2353727844)
Good point. Using pass-by-value + move for both parameters would indeed solve the consistency issue while being optimal for the common case of string literals. That approach makes both parameters follow the same pattern.

💬 vostrnad commented on issue "Default ASmap file path is not used unless -asmap is set":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33386#issuecomment-3300460071)
To clarify, the docs that confused me was the CLI help text:
```
-asmap=<file>
Specify asn mapping used for bucketing of the peers (default:
ip_asn.map). Relative paths will be prefixed by the net-specific
datadir location.
```
As ryanofsky said, this seems to imply that the default value is used when the option is not specified. I would personally be fine with that behavior (it certainly didn't raise any eyebrows when I thought that was how it worked), but maybe you're ri
...

💬 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_r2353855601)
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_r2353855886)
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_r2353856020)
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_r2353856126)
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_r2353856628)
Done with a different approach

💬 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_r2353856957)
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_r2353859271)
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_r2353859448)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "coins: warn on oversized `-dbcache`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33333#issuecomment-3300700773)
> The warning should now be available via RPC as wel, run any of these against the running `bitcoind`:

I don't think this warning belongs in those warnings. The help text for the warnings output states "any network and blockchain warnings", and I don't think this warning about configuration options meets any of these. There are several other similar warnings that we have around configuration options and they do not appear in those warnings fields either, nor should they.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "coins: warn on oversized `-dbcache`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33333#issuecomment-3300709449)
Thanks for the feedback, removed the last commit.

💬 Eunovo 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_r2354508110)
I refactored the code a bit and changed `has_priv_key` to `any_success`.

⚠️ Kri5p3y97 opened an issue: "Create"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33409)

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "Create"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33409)

📝 sashass1315 opened a pull request: "coinstats: avoid unnecessary Coin copy in ApplyHash"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33410)
Replace local Coin coin = it->second; with const Coin& coin = it->second; when iterating outputs in ApplyHash. The hash serialization path only reads from the Coin, and outputs remains valid for the loop’s duration, so copying is unnecessary. This reduces potential allocations (due to CTxOut/CScript) and improves performance without changing behavior.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Backport Cirrus runners to 29.x":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33403#issuecomment-3301993362)
cc @m3dwards

👋 Sjors's pull request is ready for review: "mining: add applySolution() to interface"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33374)

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "mining: add applySolution() to interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33374#issuecomment-3302000477)
Rebased after https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33380 landed.