💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet: Pass through transaction locktime and preset input sequences and scripts to CreateTransaction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25273#discussion_r1423940397)
nit:
it seems that the version field is not sanitized. The user provided `tx.nVersion` is a int32_t while `coinControl.m_version` is a uint32_t.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25273#discussion_r1423940397)
nit:
it seems that the version field is not sanitized. The user provided `tx.nVersion` is a int32_t while `coinControl.m_version` is a uint32_t.
👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "Revert "ci: Only run functional tests on windows in master""
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29059#pullrequestreview-1777427931)
ACK 7b22cd80e050b903b5765133b8116f4b17ce0296
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29059#pullrequestreview-1777427931)
ACK 7b22cd80e050b903b5765133b8116f4b17ce0296
💬 sdaftuar commented on pull request "Cluster size 2 package rbf":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28984#issuecomment-1852009874)
> size-2 package rbf can have 6 types of conflicts:
>
> 1. parent conflicts with solo
> 2. parent conflicts with child
> 3. parent conflicts with parent
> 4. child conflicts with parent
> 5. child conflicts with solo
> 6. child conflicts with child
I think if you state it this way, then there are more cases to write out (but they all simplify down to the same thing) -- the parent transaction in the incoming package can directly conflict with {solo tx, child tx, parent tx, both child t
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28984#issuecomment-1852009874)
> size-2 package rbf can have 6 types of conflicts:
>
> 1. parent conflicts with solo
> 2. parent conflicts with child
> 3. parent conflicts with parent
> 4. child conflicts with parent
> 5. child conflicts with solo
> 6. child conflicts with child
I think if you state it this way, then there are more cases to write out (but they all simplify down to the same thing) -- the parent transaction in the incoming package can directly conflict with {solo tx, child tx, parent tx, both child t
...
📝 ismaelsadeeq opened a pull request: "Policy: Report reason inputs are non standard"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29060)
This PR is another attempt at #13525.
Transactions that fail `PreChecks` Validation due to non-standard inputs now returns invalid validation state`TxValidationResult::TX_INPUTS_NOT_STANDARD` along with a debug error message.
Previously, the debug error message for non-standard inputs do not specify why the inputs were considered non-standard.
Instead, the same error string, `bad-txns-nonstandard-inputs`, used for all types of non-standard input scriptSigs.
This PR updates the `AreI
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29060)
This PR is another attempt at #13525.
Transactions that fail `PreChecks` Validation due to non-standard inputs now returns invalid validation state`TxValidationResult::TX_INPUTS_NOT_STANDARD` along with a debug error message.
Previously, the debug error message for non-standard inputs do not specify why the inputs were considered non-standard.
Instead, the same error string, `bad-txns-nonstandard-inputs`, used for all types of non-standard input scriptSigs.
This PR updates the `AreI
...
💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423981108)
taken
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423981108)
taken
💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423981481)
Added mention of no topological restrictions to the comment
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423981481)
Added mention of no topological restrictions to the comment
💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423981578)
added
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423981578)
added
💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423982889)
Added a check for in-package + mempool ancestors, and both of your tests.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423982889)
Added a check for in-package + mempool ancestors, and both of your tests.
💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423983165)
removed
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423983165)
removed
💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423983892)
I've changed the `RemovalReasonToString` to be "sizelimit or <=0 fee". Alternatively, we can add another reason?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423983892)
I've changed the `RemovalReasonToString` to be "sizelimit or <=0 fee". Alternatively, we can add another reason?
💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: Enable -Wunreachable-code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28999#issuecomment-1852024695)
> C++20 fixed that, see https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/source_location
Hopefully we'll be able to use this at some point, however Apple Clang does not support this at all yet, and it looks like it will also come with a LLVM 15, if not 16+ requirement as well.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28999#issuecomment-1852024695)
> C++20 fixed that, see https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/source_location
Hopefully we'll be able to use this at some point, however Apple Clang does not support this at all yet, and it looks like it will also come with a LLVM 15, if not 16+ requirement as well.
💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#issuecomment-1852028059)
> As a side effect, I think this will allow users to remove select entries from their non-full mempool by prioritizing to large negative values (so basically a poor man's https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15873).
This was discussed as part of #27018, also see the discussion on irc that day: https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2023-02-01. I think the general idea is "this is good, and will help avoid unspent ephemeral anchors."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#issuecomment-1852028059)
> As a side effect, I think this will allow users to remove select entries from their non-full mempool by prioritizing to large negative values (so basically a poor man's https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15873).
This was discussed as part of #27018, also see the discussion on irc that day: https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2023-02-01. I think the general idea is "this is good, and will help avoid unspent ephemeral anchors."
💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423987772)
added this test
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#discussion_r1423987772)
added this test
💬 glozow commented on pull request "v3 transaction policy for anti-pinning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#issuecomment-1852030780)
Last push fixed issues and addressed most comments, I'm also working on adding more tests.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28948#issuecomment-1852030780)
Last push fixed issues and addressed most comments, I'm also working on adding more tests.
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "build: Enable -Wunreachable-code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28999#issuecomment-1852031885)
Jup, it is GCC libstdc++11, or Clang libc++16, or later
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28999#issuecomment-1852031885)
Jup, it is GCC libstdc++11, or Clang libc++16, or later
💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "wallet: skip BnB when SFFO is enabled":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28994#issuecomment-1852040443)
Yes, ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/576bee88fd36e207b7288077626947a1fce0fc33
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28994#issuecomment-1852040443)
Yes, ACK https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/576bee88fd36e207b7288077626947a1fce0fc33
🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "Revert "ci: Only run functional tests on windows in master""
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29059)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29059)
✅ maflcko closed an issue: "Software wont launch"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29033)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29033)
💬 maflcko commented on issue "Software wont launch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29033#issuecomment-1852075275)
Closing for now, due to lack of more details. Once you find the debug log with more details, feel free to reply below.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29033#issuecomment-1852075275)
Closing for now, due to lack of more details. Once you find the debug log with more details, feel free to reply below.
💬 maflcko commented on issue "bumpfee doc about incrementalfee is incorrect":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29053#issuecomment-1852076174)
Pull requests with improvements are welcome :)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29053#issuecomment-1852076174)
Pull requests with improvements are welcome :)