💬 fanquake commented on pull request "valgrind: remove libsecp256k1 suppression":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27173#issuecomment-1448109053)
> Which OS did you try on?

x86_64 (Ubuntu 22.04

💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: blockfilter initial sync speedup, parallelize process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#issuecomment-1448113513)
PR updated, most of it implementation has changed.

The news are:
1) Decreased ThreadSync `cs_main` lock contention.
2) Removed `CBlockIndex` access from the child indexes internals.
3) Implemented generic workers pool.
4) Introduced a last header cache for the Block Filter index. Avoiding disk reads on every new processed block.
5) Enabled parallel sync on the tx index.

Important Note:
The introduced workers pool spawned by the `-indexworkers` init arg is shared among all the enabled
...

📝 stickies-v opened a pull request: "docs: GetDataDirNet and GetDataDirBase don't create datadir"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27176)
Since #27073, the behaviour of GetDataDir changed to only return the datadir path, but not create it. This also changed the behaviour of GetDataDirNet and GetDataDirBase but the docs do not yet reflect that.

📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "test: fix intermittent issue in `feature_bip68_sequence`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27177)
Fixes #27129

Call `send_self_transfer` passing, in case of coinbase tx, a surely mature one to avoid `bad-txns-premature-spend-of-coinbase`.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "test: fix intermittent issue in `feature_bip68_sequence`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27177#discussion_r1120032517)
I wonder if this can instead be fixed by making `get_utxo` not return immature coinbases by default?

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "test: fix intermittent issue in `feature_bip68_sequence`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27177#discussion_r1120034162)
It's a good idea, going to do it.

💬 furszy commented on pull request "net: don't lock cs_main while reading blocks in net processing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26326#discussion_r1120049535)
What about this assertion? Couldn't `ReadBlockFromDisk` return false if the block is not on disk anymore?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Deduplicate bitcoind and bitcoin-qt init code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27150#discussion_r1120039071)
```suggestion
#include <functional>
#include <optional>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
```

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "Deduplicate bitcoind and bitcoin-qt init code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27150#discussion_r1120047778)
```suggestion
#include <common/init.h>
#include <chainparams.h>
#include <fs.h>
#include <tinyformat.h>
#include <util/system.h>
#include <util/translation.h>

#include <algorithm>
#include <exception>
#include <optional>
```

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "test: fix intermittent issue in `feature_bip68_sequence`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27177#issuecomment-1448195567)
Force-pushed addressing @MarcoFalke's suggestion. Also, just updated the description.

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "guix: switch to some `minimal` versions of packages in our manifest"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27172)
ACK 2c9eb4afe1f583aafa552b2711b149f17ef8320f,

Guix builds:
```
220003bd9c9cb840444494232b01b3d9e17ddda007abfd1b3a1001662b5f24c6 guix-build-2c9eb4afe1f5/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
cc7f6e969a37d66164aad138635ea4ca1bb30eff2ed59a16c6b4af716824e4f1 guix-build-2c9eb4afe1f5/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-2c9eb4afe1f5-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
6f1afad24db86220a29f8e3ee9170201b5ece045e00ce94d1000f0541a111a4d guix-build-2c9eb4afe1f5/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-2c9eb4afe
...

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "docs: GetDataDirNet and GetDataDirBase don't create datadir"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27176)
ACK fb0dbe94233ec509570cbba3118cf62d8e60842b

👍 theStack approved a pull request: "docs: GetDataDirNet and GetDataDirBase don't create datadir"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27176)
ACK fb0dbe94233ec509570cbba3118cf62d8e60842b

💬 glozow commented on pull request "[ci] bump lint task to lunar for git v2.38":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27174#discussion_r1120141279)
makes sense to me if bookworm is stable

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Make miniscript_{stable,smart} fuzzers avoid too large scripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27165#discussion_r1120151237)
Done.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Make miniscript_{stable,smart} fuzzers avoid too large scripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27165#discussion_r1120151749)
I've expanded the comment slightly, mentioning the `FromScript` logic.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "prune: scan and unlink already pruned block files on startup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26533#issuecomment-1448289832)
ACK 3141eab9c669488a2e7fef5f60d356ac92294922

💬 darosior commented on pull request "Make miniscript_{stable,smart} fuzzers avoid too large scripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27165#discussion_r1120162512)
Sorry to block just for a code comment.. But it's in `Parse()` (called by `FromString()`) that we have this logic, not `FromScript` (where we can just check the script size isn't larger than `3600`).

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "Mask values on Transactions View":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/708#issuecomment-1448306040)
> Need to adapt `BitcoinUnits::formatWithPrivacy` function to accept negative amounts. Otherwise, when the wallet make a send, the assertion crashes the software.

Fixed it, thanks.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Make miniscript_{stable,smart} fuzzers avoid too large scripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27165#discussion_r1120176857)
Fixed.