π¬ asadr42 commented on issue "Transaction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33481#issuecomment-3333999619)
My transaction is 874359
1NvoSy1DKENhRo33aBCv2hnnvEd5arFUmL &
d9ecddec91d10d600d7ffa5460026c5b68d01a1899109c49a1f6c6792ee6a751
On Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 4:40 PM Matthew Zipkin ***@***.***>
wrote:
> *pinheadmz* left a comment (bitcoin/bitcoin#33481)
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33481#issuecomment-3333923185>
>
> The Bitcoin Core issue tracker is reserved for specific software issues
> like bug reports and feature requests. Individual help inquiries or general
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33481#issuecomment-3333999619)
My transaction is 874359
1NvoSy1DKENhRo33aBCv2hnnvEd5arFUmL &
d9ecddec91d10d600d7ffa5460026c5b68d01a1899109c49a1f6c6792ee6a751
On Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 4:40 PM Matthew Zipkin ***@***.***>
wrote:
> *pinheadmz* left a comment (bitcoin/bitcoin#33481)
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33481#issuecomment-3333923185>
>
> The Bitcoin Core issue tracker is reserved for specific software issues
> like bug reports and feature requests. Individual help inquiries or general
...
π¬ maflcko commented on pull request "help: enrich help text for `-loadblock`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33343#issuecomment-3334246182)
> I think we should try it ourselves before recommending it in the documentation
It is already tested in `test/functional/feature_loadblock.py`, no?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33343#issuecomment-3334246182)
> I think we should try it ourselves before recommending it in the documentation
It is already tested in `test/functional/feature_loadblock.py`, no?
π€ janb84 reviewed a pull request: "doc: Add `INSTALL.md` to Linux release tarballs"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33451#pullrequestreview-3267865437)
ACK fc6d41d078656024cf9b3a8ef30b6cd2c79cfcf6
PR adds installation documentation for linux. The installation guide has an easy to copy section for installation of the QT dependencies.
Tested on clean Debian 13 install:
- KDE already has all the dependencies installed, works out of the box. Installing the suggested dependencies results in 0 new installs.
- XFCE is missing `libxcb-cursor` and the guide works as a charm in supplying that dependency.
Tested with binaries version V30.0r
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33451#pullrequestreview-3267865437)
ACK fc6d41d078656024cf9b3a8ef30b6cd2c79cfcf6
PR adds installation documentation for linux. The installation guide has an easy to copy section for installation of the QT dependencies.
Tested on clean Debian 13 install:
- KDE already has all the dependencies installed, works out of the box. Installing the suggested dependencies results in 0 new installs.
- XFCE is missing `libxcb-cursor` and the guide works as a charm in supplying that dependency.
Tested with binaries version V30.0r
...
π¬ vasild commented on pull request "test: fix p2p_leak_tx.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33121#discussion_r2379224161)
In the first commit, it is possible to generate fake time passage without spending wall clock time of the test. That is, fix the problem and make the test faster:
```diff
def test_tx_in_block(self):
self.log.info("Check that a transaction in the last block is uploaded (beneficial for compact block relay)")
+ self.gen_node.setmocktime(int(time.time()) - 120) # pause time based activities
inbound_peer = self.gen_node.add_p2p_connection(P2PNode())
s
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33121#discussion_r2379224161)
In the first commit, it is possible to generate fake time passage without spending wall clock time of the test. That is, fix the problem and make the test faster:
```diff
def test_tx_in_block(self):
self.log.info("Check that a transaction in the last block is uploaded (beneficial for compact block relay)")
+ self.gen_node.setmocktime(int(time.time()) - 120) # pause time based activities
inbound_peer = self.gen_node.add_p2p_connection(P2PNode())
s
...
β
maflcko closed a pull request: "rpc: Add validation for invalid taproot signatures in analyzepsbt"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33360)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33360)
π¬ maflcko commented on pull request "rpc: Add validation for invalid taproot signatures in analyzepsbt":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33360#issuecomment-3334326637)
Closing for now. This is LLM generated and obviously wrong (the tests fail), and the author does not seem to be working on it (no activity since this was opened 2 weeks ago)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33360#issuecomment-3334326637)
Closing for now. This is LLM generated and obviously wrong (the tests fail), and the author does not seem to be working on it (no activity since this was opened 2 weeks ago)
β
maflcko closed a pull request: "Fix #25980: Validate transactions in combinerawtransaction"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33361)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33361)
π¬ maflcko commented on pull request "Fix #25980: Validate transactions in combinerawtransaction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33361#issuecomment-3334330381)
Closing for now. This is LLM generated and obviously wrong (the tests fail), and the author does not seem to be working on it (no activity since this was opened 2 weeks ago)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33361#issuecomment-3334330381)
Closing for now. This is LLM generated and obviously wrong (the tests fail), and the author does not seem to be working on it (no activity since this was opened 2 weeks ago)
π¬ maflcko commented on pull request "Fix #25980: Validate transactions in combinerawtransaction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33361#issuecomment-3334346015)
In the future, instead of creating competing pull requests, it would be better to just review the existing pull request with any feedback you may have.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33361#issuecomment-3334346015)
In the future, instead of creating competing pull requests, it would be better to just review the existing pull request with any feedback you may have.
π¬ maflcko commented on pull request "ci: Turn CentOS config into Alpine musl config":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33480#issuecomment-3334435069)
Interesting side note: Looks like most unit tests are minimally faster on Alpine, except for the secp tests:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/18007497948/job/51231174310?pr=33480#step:9:3415:
```
148/150 Test #4: secp256k1_noverify_tests ............. Passed 38.88 sec
149/150 Test #5: secp256k1_tests ...................... Passed 57.62 sec
```
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/18007193787/job/51230198016#step:9:2625 :
```
145/150 Test #
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33480#issuecomment-3334435069)
Interesting side note: Looks like most unit tests are minimally faster on Alpine, except for the secp tests:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/18007497948/job/51231174310?pr=33480#step:9:3415:
```
148/150 Test #4: secp256k1_noverify_tests ............. Passed 38.88 sec
149/150 Test #5: secp256k1_tests ...................... Passed 57.62 sec
```
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/18007193787/job/51230198016#step:9:2625 :
```
145/150 Test #
...
π¬ RandyMcMillan commented on pull request "rpcconsole: display signet challenge":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/896#discussion_r2379384218)
I was think of renaming this to challengeToStdString - that seems to be closer to established convention in the code base. Thoughts?
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/896#discussion_r2379384218)
I was think of renaming this to challengeToStdString - that seems to be closer to established convention in the code base. Thoughts?
π ryanofsky approved a pull request: "ci: Update Clang in "tidy" job"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#pullrequestreview-3268088341)
Code review ACK 5b20d172ca2a46a2b525201b4ff2444f9d415d8c. Just added link to upstream modernize-use-default-member-init bug (thanks for looking into that and reporting) and added new suppressions for capnproto clang-tidy errors since last review
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#pullrequestreview-3268088341)
Code review ACK 5b20d172ca2a46a2b525201b4ff2444f9d415d8c. Just added link to upstream modernize-use-default-member-init bug (thanks for looking into that and reporting) and added new suppressions for capnproto clang-tidy errors since last review
π¬ ryanofsky commented on pull request "ci: Update Clang in "tidy" job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#discussion_r2379380656)
In commit "clang-tidy: Disable `ArrayBound` check in src/ipc and src/test" (5b20d172ca2a46a2b525201b4ff2444f9d415d8c)
Kind of a shame to need this outside of the IPC directory. Maybe there should be a `src/ipc/test` subdirectory like `src/wallet/test` to keep IPC stuff grouped together.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#discussion_r2379380656)
In commit "clang-tidy: Disable `ArrayBound` check in src/ipc and src/test" (5b20d172ca2a46a2b525201b4ff2444f9d415d8c)
Kind of a shame to need this outside of the IPC directory. Maybe there should be a `src/ipc/test` subdirectory like `src/wallet/test` to keep IPC stuff grouped together.
π¬ hebasto commented on pull request "ci: Update Clang in "tidy" job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#discussion_r2379404041)
The same thought occurred to me while working on this PR, but I thought it might be better to defer it to a separate PR. Do you think itβs worth adding another commit to move the tests here?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#discussion_r2379404041)
The same thought occurred to me while working on this PR, but I thought it might be better to defer it to a separate PR. Do you think itβs worth adding another commit to move the tests here?
π¬ ryanofsky commented on issue "`bitcoin-node` is unkillable after mining IPC connection is established":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33463#issuecomment-3334508468)
> can also share stack trace later in case you feel it's still valuable
Would appreciate that if you get a chance. I do suspect this is related to #33387 but would be nice to have some confirmation or ideally a reliable way to reproduce.
Thanks for reporting the bug in any case, and if doesn't seem worth collecting more debug information, it would be ok to close this
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33463#issuecomment-3334508468)
> can also share stack trace later in case you feel it's still valuable
Would appreciate that if you get a chance. I do suspect this is related to #33387 but would be nice to have some confirmation or ideally a reliable way to reproduce.
Thanks for reporting the bug in any case, and if doesn't seem worth collecting more debug information, it would be ok to close this
π¬ janb84 commented on pull request "ci: Turn CentOS config into Alpine musl config":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33480#issuecomment-3334556327)
So Centos as CI task was not added to give good RHEL distro / Enterprise Linux support ?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33480#issuecomment-3334556327)
So Centos as CI task was not added to give good RHEL distro / Enterprise Linux support ?
π ryanofsky approved a pull request: "rpc: Handle -named argument parsing where '=' character is used"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32821#pullrequestreview-3268185464)
Code review ACK 7dd85d13e22f14940cce9ed9a5bbc2afc5c5c2f4. Only change since last review is applying int->size_t and documentation tweaks. Thanks for the update!
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32821#pullrequestreview-3268185464)
Code review ACK 7dd85d13e22f14940cce9ed9a5bbc2afc5c5c2f4. Only change since last review is applying int->size_t and documentation tweaks. Thanks for the update!
π¬ ryanofsky commented on pull request "ci: Update Clang in "tidy" job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#discussion_r2379461800)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#discussion_r2379404041
> The same thought occurred to me while working on this PR, but I thought it might be better to defer it to a separate PR. Do you think itβs worth adding another commit to move the tests here?
I was thinking of it as a followup for a future PR, but I'm actually not sure how big the change would be and whether it might require code changes. Maybe if it's a small change it would be easy to make here. Whatever your prefe
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#discussion_r2379461800)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33445#discussion_r2379404041
> The same thought occurred to me while working on this PR, but I thought it might be better to defer it to a separate PR. Do you think itβs worth adding another commit to move the tests here?
I was thinking of it as a followup for a future PR, but I'm actually not sure how big the change would be and whether it might require code changes. Maybe if it's a small change it would be easy to make here. Whatever your prefe
...
π¬ Crypt-iQ commented on pull request "log: reduce excessive "rolling back/forward" messages during block replay":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33443#issuecomment-3334611538)
crACK 1fc7a81f1f5f30ba3ebe305ac2a520c7b4afb596
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33443#issuecomment-3334611538)
crACK 1fc7a81f1f5f30ba3ebe305ac2a520c7b4afb596
π¬ maflcko commented on pull request "ci: Turn CentOS config into Alpine musl config":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33480#issuecomment-3334691377)
> So Centos as CI task was not added to give good RHEL distro / Enterprise Linux support ?
No, as mentioned in the pull description. For reference, the history was:
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17635: Add centos 7 CI to check "old packages".
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17900: Drop the "old packages" and use depends (32-bit).
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31651: Use native depends instead of 32-bit.
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31593: B
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33480#issuecomment-3334691377)
> So Centos as CI task was not added to give good RHEL distro / Enterprise Linux support ?
No, as mentioned in the pull description. For reference, the history was:
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17635: Add centos 7 CI to check "old packages".
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17900: Drop the "old packages" and use depends (32-bit).
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31651: Use native depends instead of 32-bit.
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31593: B
...