💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "Mask values on Transactions View":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/708#discussion_r1122210010)
yeah, I'll do.

💬 mzumsande commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1122020763)
if this is only necessary for windows, would it be possible to hide it behind `#ifdef WIN32` so that the unit tests don't run 3*2=6 seconds longer for everyone else (which is quite a lot)?

💬 fanquake commented on issue "miniscript_stable fuzz timeout":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27147#issuecomment-1450764766)
Verified as fixed: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=56332#c3

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Make miniscript_{stable,smart} fuzzers avoid too large scripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27165#issuecomment-1450765037)
Verified as fixed: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=56332#c3.

💬 sipa commented on issue "miniscript_stable fuzz timeout":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27147#issuecomment-1450771004)
@fanquake Wrong issue, actually; the original was about `miniscript_stable`: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=56270

The one you link to was about `miniscript_smart`, but that is in fact also addressed by #27165.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "miniscript_stable fuzz timeout":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27147#issuecomment-1450773295)
> Wrong issue, actually;

Whoops. Yes, both ended up being addressed here.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: produce a .zip for macOS distribution":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27099#issuecomment-1450801900)
Rebased past #27172.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: LLVM 15 & LLD based macOS toolchain":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21778#issuecomment-1450803042)
Rebased past #27172.

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1122285875)
Thanks, I guarded the sleep for WIN32, cleaned up the lint and mentioned the undo data in OP.

💬 vostrnad commented on pull request "BIP324: Enable v2 P2P encrypted transport":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24545#issuecomment-1450843657)
Is there a reason the `v2transport` option should be off by default? Does it even need to exist at all? I was accidentally running this for a few days with v2 turned off and was confused why nodes advertising `P2P_V2` weren't actually using the v2 protocol. Everything works fine now.

Also, it would be nice to have the `transport_protocol_type` and `v2_session_id` fields displayed in the GUI, although that might possibly belong to a separate PR in the GUI repo (not sure what the development pr
...

💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "guix: pass `--enable-initfini-array` to release GCC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27153#issuecomment-1450910713)
Guix builds [127c637](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27153/commits/127c637cf0a80e0ea68a7c5aaa088e5ccc9d3d13)

```
ae145877193079ceb71b86582b86294efba941d8898480e16920f8588bb25fca guix-build-127c637cf0a8/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
b50822b488f79eba521dca2538b98ced15da3f175deeccce4030a6690bd4b077 guix-build-127c637cf0a8/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-127c637cf0a8-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
a04d495f8338dc30afdc258df91708c20197f74fe7c84070d8e9ebc9d3924780 guix-bui
...

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "Fix BaseIndex::Commit false error":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26903#issuecomment-1450928417)
I agree 1c67b495cb2de76723c404f42d0bee219cc765c3 would fix the problem, but I think it suppresses errors too broadly. The `Commit()` function is called many places, so changing it to silently skip the `CustomCommit()` call and return `true` when it doesn't do anything could make it harder debug other problems in the future, or even know about them.

I think it would be better to apply a more targeted fix of just not calling `Commit()` when there is nothing to commit in the sync thread:

```d
...

💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1122337219)
```suggestion
// Write the first block; dbp=nullptr means this block doesn't already have a disk
// location, so allocate a free location and write it there.
FlatFilePos pos1{blockman.SaveBlockToDisk(block1, /*nHeight=*/1, chain, *params, /*dbp=*/nullptr)};
```
and similar below

💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1122332686)
```suggestion
constexpr int TEST_BLOCK_SIZE{81};
```

💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1122338428)
```suggestion
// Attempt, but fail, to save block 3 to original position of block 2
```

💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1122400769)
Well, on non-windows, it _may_ have been modified, but within the same second. This is kind of a minor point (probably don't need to change anything), but if in the future there's a bug such that `blk00000.dat` was modified, this test might not catch it. I verified this by hacking the test such that the file _is_ modified, and about once in 10 or 20 runs, the timestamp didn't change. (This is on Ubuntu.)

But I guess that's okay, because if there is such a bug, it will likely be caught quickly
...

💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1122413793)
This seems more problematic than what I mentioned above because this can cause false-positive. Is the resolution one second? Could all that happened since `time2` was sampled be in the same second? But I ran the test many times and did not see the problem.

💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1122420915)
as long as you're touching this line
```suggestion
const unsigned int max_size{gArgs.GetBoolArg("-fastprune", false) ? 0x10000 /* 64 KiB */ : MAX_BLOCKFILE_SIZE};
while (m_blockfile_info[nFile].nSize + nAddSize >= max_size) {
```

👍 jarolrod approved a pull request: "doc: Update Transifex links and slug format in Release Process"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27183)
ACK 9c371e50a225e158264b008ba05c9e95055d9800

Verified all links

📝 SombatOeur opened a pull request: "XFj65z15pTke5yJtjDB3Su4BLfKPqTBt81"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27184)
<!--XFj65z15pTke5yJtjDB3Su4BLfKPqTBt81[XFj65z15pTke5yJtjDB3Su4BLfKPqTBt81](XFj65z15pTke5yJtjDB3Su4BLfKPqTBt81)
*** 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 experien
...