💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: improve initialization and pruning violation check":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27607#discussion_r1240788990)
Ok done, renamed the thread to `initload`.

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "index: improve initialization and pruning violation check"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27607#pullrequestreview-1496630212)
Updated per feedback, thanks ryanofsky.

Changes:

* Renamed `post_load_init` thread to `initload`.
* Changed `BaseIndex::Start()` to throw `std::logic_error` if the index is not initialized.
* Added coverage for the bugfix commit within the bugfix commit and not later (2e1bb3b).
* Expanded the last commit description explaining the pruning violation check movement from the main init thread to the 'loadinit' thread (per [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27607#discussion_r1
...

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "build: make sure we can overwrite config.{guess,sub} before doing so":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27875#issuecomment-1605521570)
late nits:
*it may be a security issue to grant access to the group
*if autoreconf uses symlinks, chmod will fail too

Better would be to just delete the current files first.

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "A more efficient descriptor parsing target":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27888#issuecomment-1605526732)
Suggest putting "Fuzz" in title, and labelling.

👍 luke-jr approved a pull request: "feerate: For GetFeePerK() return nSatoshisPerK instead of round trip through GetFee"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27914#pullrequestreview-1496658921)
utACK

💬 luke-jr commented on issue "wallets created on master get corrupted when processed with v25":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27915#issuecomment-1605556090)
Maybe we should consider it an error to load a wallet if the descriptors can't all be round-tripped? (and consider it a bugfix for 25.x, while also trying to avoid triggering it for a while)

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "policy: make unstructured annex standard":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27926#issuecomment-1605556983)
Use case?

💬 furszy commented on issue "wallets created on master get corrupted when processed with v25":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27915#issuecomment-1605559145)
> Maybe we should consider it an error to load a wallet if the descriptors can't all be round-tripped? (and consider it a bugfix for 25.x, while also trying to avoid triggering it for a while)

Yeah, that is already done in #27920 (fc5565eb). It will prevent ugly stuff from happening from now on.

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "test: Fix intermittent issue in mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27941#issuecomment-1605565551)
The longpoll request is supposed to return immediately if the conditions have been met. The token includes a reference to the transaction update state as a counter.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: produce a .zip for macOS distribution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27099#discussion_r1240844088)
8d8d4325fedad5c140ea1ad4568f19609c431e2e

The following diff is intended to fix the [reproducibility](reproducible) issue:
```suggestion
if [ -n "$(SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH)" ]; then find $(APP_DIST_DIR) -exec touch -d @$(SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH) {} +; fi
zip -X -r $@ $(APP_DIST_DIR)
```

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "MSan CI failure in psbt_wallet_tests and feebumper_tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27001#issuecomment-1605791170)
Testing webhooks don't mind me

💬 amitiuttarwar commented on pull request "p2p: Diversify automatic outbound connections with respect to networks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27213#discussion_r1241000169)
my latest thinking was to change this data struct to an array, add explicit numeric values to the `Network` enum (for index values) & then protect the array with `m_nodes_mutex` to keep the values consistent between the relevant data structures tracking node data. what do you think of this approach?

(I had coded it up, but then managed to spill liquid on my laptop which fried it as I was trying to push the changes. still working to get my current setup back to functional to make the changes
...

💬 besoeasy commented on pull request "Sanitizing ports of -rpcconnect and -rpcport.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27820#issuecomment-1605833739)
@Brotcrunsher

Instead of checking if desiredRpcPort is less than or equal to zero and greater than 0xFFFF, you can use a single condition to check if it's outside the valid port range.

📝 Swallow094 opened a pull request: "Create FEWFEWF"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27960)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...

💬 Swallow094 commented on pull request "Create FEWFEWF":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27960#issuecomment-1605860760)
GẺGRE

💬 Swallow094 commented on pull request "Create FEWFEWF":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27960#issuecomment-1605860773)
GFRGFG

✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "Create FEWFEWF"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27960)

📝 achow101 locked a pull request: "Create FEWFEWF"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27960)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...

⚠️ FelixWeis opened an issue: "Assertion failed: (data.size() > node.nSendOffset), function SocketSendData, file net.cpp, line 837"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27963)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

crashed

### Expected behaviour

not crash

### Steps to reproduce

compiled master at d1ae96755a0f9d7e12c3f6741c030d8ea6d0416f, did mainnet IBD,
around 40 hours after IBD crashed with the asseration fail.

### Relevant log output

unclear if relevant but these are the final lines
```
2023-06-24T06:15:52Z Saw new header hash=00000000000000000000f72e1a37859593a848a2f9b88eb9e5c3f0d8c971d
...

💬 FelixWeis commented on issue "Assertion failed: (data.size() > node.nSendOffset), function SocketSendData, file net.cpp, line 837":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27963#issuecomment-1605906878)
```Build Options:
with external callbacks = no
with benchmarks = no
with tests = yes
with ctime tests = no
with coverage = no
with examples = no
module ecdh = no
module recovery = yes
module extrakeys = yes
module schnorrsig = yes

asm = no
ecmult window size = 15
ecmult gen prec. bits = 4

valgrind = no
CC
...