💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: SecureString to allow null characters":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27068#issuecomment-1439313694)
re-ACK 4bbf5ddd44bde15b328be131922123eaa3212a7e

💬 S3RK commented on pull request "wallet: group outputs only once, decouple it from Coin Selection":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25806#discussion_r1113985558)
I believe the separation between positive and mixed group is an implementation detail of particular coin selection algorithms. We can contrast it with `CoinEligibilityFilter` and `OutputType` grouping which are algorithm independent. Therefore I propose to not separate positive outputs at the grouping stage.

Rather filter negative/positive groups as close to the particular coin selection algo as possible, e.g. in `ChooseSelectionResult`. This will significantly simplify the code by removing
...

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "lint: enable E722 do not use bare except"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25867)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "fuzz: avoid redundant dup key checks when creating Miniscript nodes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27117)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: Raise PRNG seed log to INFO":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27137#issuecomment-1439724461)
cc @prusnak @jonasnick @erikarvstedt

👍 prusnak approved a pull request: "test: Raise PRNG seed log to INFO"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27137)
Concept ACK

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "test: Raise PRNG seed log to INFO":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27137#issuecomment-1439728952)
lgtm ACK 4d84eaec82e7b5a450d47cd30e5936a717035f77

👍 erikarvstedt approved a pull request: "test: Raise PRNG seed log to INFO"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27137)
Concept ACK

💬 stratospher commented on pull request "p2p, rpc: Manual block-relay-only connections with addnode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24170#issuecomment-1439737580)
> For me, the critical question is still if this opt-in feature will find enough users to justify the added complexity in net - I honestly don't know that, and I wouldn't have a problem closing this for now if people think there isn't enough demand for this use case currently.

if it helps, i found some related issues: (but i don’t know this either)

- there’s an [issue in raspiblitz](https://github.com/rootzoll/raspiblitz/issues/3329) where they talk about wanting to connect their tor node
...

💬 stratospher commented on pull request "rpc: Add test-only RPC addrmaninfo for new/tried table address count":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26988#discussion_r1114100137)
true, i've updated the PR to call it `getaddrmaninfo`.

💬 mruddy commented on pull request "prune, import: allow pruning to work during loadblock import":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24957#issuecomment-1439781853)
@achow101 Thanks! I rebased and then resolved the silent merge conflict by changing `fPruneMode` to `m_blockman.IsPruneMode()`.

⚠️ vincenzopalazzo opened an issue: "core stops to run with `Failed to read block` error"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27142)
**Expected behavior**

While my node was running it get an internal failure that force it to stop the running

```
2023-02-21T23:29:22Z Syncing basic block filter index with block chain from height 624447
2023-02-21T23:29:34Z ERROR: SerializeFileDB: Rename-into-place failed
2023-02-21T23:29:52Z Syncing basic block filter index with block chain from height 624889
2023-02-21T23:30:22Z ERROR: ReadBlockFromDisk: Deserialize or I/O error - ReadCompactSize(): size too large: iostream error at
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "contrib: Improve verify-commits.py to work with maintainers leaving":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27058#issuecomment-1439845151)
ACK 14fac808bd6c12bce121011bbf50501960c7326f

💬 willcl-ark commented on issue "core stops to run with `Failed to read block` error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27142#issuecomment-1439872146)
We do not currently propagate the exact error code raised by `fs::rename` so it might be difficult to diagnose precisely... The most usual cases are the filesystem being full or corrupt. Are you sure your filesystem has enough free space?

Seeing as it later hit the ReadCompactSize deserialize error afterwards, it does feel more likely to be a fs corruption issue...

👍 MarcoFalke approved a pull request: "validation: Improve error handling when VerifyDB dosn't finish successfully"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25574)
lgtm re-ACK 0af16e7134459e0820ab95d751093876c1ec4c6d 🎚

<details><summary>Show signature</summary>

Signature:

```
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

lgtm re-ACK 0af16e7134459e0820ab95d751093876c1ec4c6d 🎚
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQGzBAEBCgAdFiEE+rVPoUahrI9sLGYTzit1aX5ppUgFAlwqrYAACgkQzit1aX5p
pUgCEAwAl2HOYuqTfTHatbl1G6IC16Itmtb0chf3GhxESu4SIE7uNvMXIXVK2WG1
k5Sz9TeW2POSCwZnJtxdAzhNKwzN6Q79yJ0KL+6SOMxX7j4CaWun5b1kJf1xOlQx
gHBqBN1zLW65Wfh1L3qa4nzKiWwKdJJ2iUAU
...

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "validation: Improve error handling when VerifyDB dosn't finish successfully":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25574#discussion_r1114212689)
nit in d6f781f1cfcbc2c2ad5ee289a0642ed00386d013 (commit message), only if you retouch:

I think the rpc is called `verifychain` and not `-verifydb`?

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "rpc: Add test-only RPC getaddrmaninfo for new/tried table address count":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26988#discussion_r1114224820)
You could cover this error in the functional test

💬 vincenzopalazzo commented on issue "core stops to run with `Failed to read block` error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27142#issuecomment-1439927671)
>The most usual cases are the filesystem being full or corrupt. Are you sure your filesystem has enough free space?

Yes 100%

```
/dev/sdb1 4883759996 2603409780 2280350216 54% /media/Matrox
```

>Seeing as it later hit the ReadCompactSize deserialize error afterward, it does feel more likely to be an fs corruption issue...

The stage thing is that this is running for days, so I did not get any downside that can end up in something half written or just put the trash inside the .
...

✅ 1440000bytes closed a pull request: "[WIP] doc: add MAINTAINERS.md"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26868)

👍 stickies-v approved a pull request: "docs: add ramdisk guide for running tests on OSX"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27124)
ACK ab6f73a1f65bcfd59fea07f3067312a757dba2f8

I use this command on my M1 too.