💬 alpeshvas commented on pull request "datacarriersize: Match more datacarrying":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408#issuecomment-1866760674)
> Just wanted to add my 2 cents here as a layman using and holding bitcoin. If the transaction fee rates remain this high for someone using bitcoin to transfer money from wallet A to wallet B then I don't see a future for bitcoin.
>
> The original goal of bitcoin is to make it a currency and a valued asset, if you sacrifice doing this in order to have secondary features then you will fail at both.
>
> If this PR will fix the fee rates back to normal I am on board.
Fee rates will anyway
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408#issuecomment-1866760674)
> Just wanted to add my 2 cents here as a layman using and holding bitcoin. If the transaction fee rates remain this high for someone using bitcoin to transfer money from wallet A to wallet B then I don't see a future for bitcoin.
>
> The original goal of bitcoin is to make it a currency and a valued asset, if you sacrifice doing this in order to have secondary features then you will fail at both.
>
> If this PR will fix the fee rates back to normal I am on board.
Fee rates will anyway
...
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "wallet: Have the wallet store the key for automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728#issuecomment-1866775284)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728#issuecomment-1866636473
> If you have a blank wallet, why would you want creating a multisig desriptor and creating the hd key to be two separate steps, and require a separate `sethdseed` call before whatever call is used to add the multisig descriptor? Wouldn't the flow be simpler if you just made one call to `createwalletdescriptor` or `importdescriptor` and it did both things? (**EDIT**: Actually rereading this, I can see why this wouldn't
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728#issuecomment-1866775284)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728#issuecomment-1866636473
> If you have a blank wallet, why would you want creating a multisig desriptor and creating the hd key to be two separate steps, and require a separate `sethdseed` call before whatever call is used to add the multisig descriptor? Wouldn't the flow be simpler if you just made one call to `createwalletdescriptor` or `importdescriptor` and it did both things? (**EDIT**: Actually rereading this, I can see why this wouldn't
...
👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "build: switch to using LLVM 17.x for macOS builds"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28880#pullrequestreview-1793505067)
ACK b335710782c2545e6eeed67b5e1763c07eab26b0
Guix builds (aarch64 & x86_64)
```
65981453fcb83338ed76435dc8fed06e9903441731b461e4f2c8a04ad102043c guix-build-b335710782c2/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
3127d18bc55a7a207eb7e1252feaf24f767d5983e5d064323671139659c4f3d7 guix-build-b335710782c2/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-b335710782c2-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
0a67737c010e742249f07dd3ca3ae289df02edf2dedd8d6a5a07b291921bab47 guix-build-b335710782c2/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28880#pullrequestreview-1793505067)
ACK b335710782c2545e6eeed67b5e1763c07eab26b0
Guix builds (aarch64 & x86_64)
```
65981453fcb83338ed76435dc8fed06e9903441731b461e4f2c8a04ad102043c guix-build-b335710782c2/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
3127d18bc55a7a207eb7e1252feaf24f767d5983e5d064323671139659c4f3d7 guix-build-b335710782c2/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-b335710782c2-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
0a67737c010e742249f07dd3ca3ae289df02edf2dedd8d6a5a07b291921bab47 guix-build-b335710782c2/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/
...
💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "build: switch to using LLVM 17.x for macOS builds":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28880#discussion_r1434399894)
Nit: I guess this should mention `std::sort` too? Or maybe even put that into a separate patch?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28880#discussion_r1434399894)
Nit: I guess this should mention `std::sort` too? Or maybe even put that into a separate patch?
💬 petertodd commented on pull request "datacarriersize: Match more datacarrying":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408#issuecomment-1866795214)
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 07:47:05AM -0800, farahats9 wrote:
> Just wanted to add my 2 cents here as a layman using and holding bitcoin. If the transaction fee rates remain this high for someone using bitcoin to transfer money from wallet A to wallet B then I don't see a future for bitcoin.
>
> The original goal of bitcoin is to make it a currency and a valued asset, if you sacrifice doing this in order to have secondary features then you will fail at both.
>
> If this PR will fix the fee rates
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408#issuecomment-1866795214)
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 07:47:05AM -0800, farahats9 wrote:
> Just wanted to add my 2 cents here as a layman using and holding bitcoin. If the transaction fee rates remain this high for someone using bitcoin to transfer money from wallet A to wallet B then I don't see a future for bitcoin.
>
> The original goal of bitcoin is to make it a currency and a valued asset, if you sacrifice doing this in order to have secondary features then you will fail at both.
>
> If this PR will fix the fee rates
...
💬 PerpetualWar commented on pull request "datacarriersize: Match more datacarrying":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408#issuecomment-1866837996)
> > Just wanted to add my 2 cents here as a layman using and holding bitcoin. If the transaction fee rates remain this high for someone using bitcoin to transfer money from wallet A to wallet B then I don't see a future for bitcoin.
> > The original goal of bitcoin is to make it a currency and a valued asset, if you sacrifice doing this in order to have secondary features then you will fail at both.
> > If this PR will fix the fee rates back to normal I am on board.
>
> Fee rates will anywa
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408#issuecomment-1866837996)
> > Just wanted to add my 2 cents here as a layman using and holding bitcoin. If the transaction fee rates remain this high for someone using bitcoin to transfer money from wallet A to wallet B then I don't see a future for bitcoin.
> > The original goal of bitcoin is to make it a currency and a valued asset, if you sacrifice doing this in order to have secondary features then you will fail at both.
> > If this PR will fix the fee rates back to normal I am on board.
>
> Fee rates will anywa
...
💬 GregTonoski commented on issue "signrawtransactionwithkey command shouldn't output the "Witness program was passed an empty witness" error for a TapRoot transaction":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27017#issuecomment-1866890269)
Seems to be fixed in 26.0. Thanks.
Example:
```
./bitcoin-cli.exe -testnet signrawtransactionwithkey 020000000165ef750aac862b0177cadb77961bf1a936e2bec0376b286f5b4e1b6255cf3a960000000000fdffffff012c1a0000000000002251203b82b2b2a9185315da6f80da5f06d0440d8a5e1457fa93387c2d919c86ec878600000000 '["cV628xvqToz45dwdPmTcJ9RgEVnWMwP8dpZBGzb9LfTk3sBHFNwc"]' '[{"txid":"963acf55621b4e5b6f286b37c0bee236a9f11b9677dbca77012b86ac0a75ef65","vout":0,"scriptPubKey":"512055355ca83c973f1d97ce0e3843c85d78905af16b
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27017#issuecomment-1866890269)
Seems to be fixed in 26.0. Thanks.
Example:
```
./bitcoin-cli.exe -testnet signrawtransactionwithkey 020000000165ef750aac862b0177cadb77961bf1a936e2bec0376b286f5b4e1b6255cf3a960000000000fdffffff012c1a0000000000002251203b82b2b2a9185315da6f80da5f06d0440d8a5e1457fa93387c2d919c86ec878600000000 '["cV628xvqToz45dwdPmTcJ9RgEVnWMwP8dpZBGzb9LfTk3sBHFNwc"]' '[{"txid":"963acf55621b4e5b6f286b37c0bee236a9f11b9677dbca77012b86ac0a75ef65","vout":0,"scriptPubKey":"512055355ca83c973f1d97ce0e3843c85d78905af16b
...
💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "test: test_bitcoin: allow -testdatadir=<datadir>":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26564#issuecomment-1866934995)
Force pushed twice to rebase and fix the CI problem, ready for review, thanks, @furszy!
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26564#issuecomment-1866934995)
Force pushed twice to rebase and fix the CI problem, ready for review, thanks, @furszy!
💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "wallet: Have the wallet store the key for automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728#issuecomment-1866961865)
achow101, S3RK, Sjors, and me talked about this on a call. I think the plan for now is that achow will make 2 independent PRs targeted at different use-cases:
- First PR would add a `gethdkey` method like the one in this PR and a `createwalletdescriptor` method like the one in [#25907](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25907) that should both make reusing existing hd keys easier. Specifically these methods should be useful for adding new types of descriptors to existing wallets and upgr
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728#issuecomment-1866961865)
achow101, S3RK, Sjors, and me talked about this on a call. I think the plan for now is that achow will make 2 independent PRs targeted at different use-cases:
- First PR would add a `gethdkey` method like the one in this PR and a `createwalletdescriptor` method like the one in [#25907](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25907) that should both make reusing existing hd keys easier. Specifically these methods should be useful for adding new types of descriptors to existing wallets and upgr
...
👋 luke-jr's pull request is ready for review: "Prune locks"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19463)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19463)
💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "Prune locks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19463#issuecomment-1867040193)
Rebased
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19463#issuecomment-1867040193)
Rebased
💬 panicfarm commented on pull request "lib: add taproot support to libconsensus":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28539#issuecomment-1867046644)
A naive question (I am a Rust developer, not a C++ Core dev): taproot soft fork has been in the bitcoin core code since 0.22. But even at the 0.25 release, libconsensus still does not have taproot support. Isn't libconsensus compiled from the same source as the core binary itself, albeit as a shared library? If this is so, I am confused why it has not had taproot support since 0.22?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28539#issuecomment-1867046644)
A naive question (I am a Rust developer, not a C++ Core dev): taproot soft fork has been in the bitcoin core code since 0.22. But even at the 0.25 release, libconsensus still does not have taproot support. Isn't libconsensus compiled from the same source as the core binary itself, albeit as a shared library? If this is so, I am confused why it has not had taproot support since 0.22?
📝 achow101 opened a pull request: "wallet: Add `createwalletdescriptor` and `gethdkeys` RPCs for adding new automatically generated descriptors"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29130)
This PR adds a `createwalletdescriptor` RPC which allows users to add new automatically generated descriptors to their wallet, e.g. to upgrade a 0.21.x wallet to contain a taproot descriptor. This RPC takes 3 arguments: the output type to create a descriptor for, whether the descriptor will be internal or external, and the HD key to use if the user wishes to use a specific key. The HD key is an optional parameter. If it is not specified, the wallet will use the key shared by the active descripto
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29130)
This PR adds a `createwalletdescriptor` RPC which allows users to add new automatically generated descriptors to their wallet, e.g. to upgrade a 0.21.x wallet to contain a taproot descriptor. This RPC takes 3 arguments: the output type to create a descriptor for, whether the descriptor will be internal or external, and the HD key to use if the user wishes to use a specific key. The HD key is an optional parameter. If it is not specified, the wallet will use the key shared by the active descripto
...
📝 Laughter79 opened a pull request: "hi there"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29131)
<!--
*** 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
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29131)
<!--
*** 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
...
✅ achow101 closed a pull request: "hi there"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29131)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29131)
📝 achow101 locked a pull request: "."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29131)
<!--
*** 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
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29131)
<!--
*** 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
...
🤔 BrandonOdiwuor reviewed a pull request: "wallet, rpc: add BIP44 `account` in `createwallet`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29129#pullrequestreview-1793977794)
Concept ACK
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29129#pullrequestreview-1793977794)
Concept ACK
⚠️ YezikTech opened an issue: "Operation Sweep"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29132)
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.
an L1 upgrade proposition
### Is your feature related to a problem, if so please describe it.
The Bitcoin blockchain is designed primarily for storing transaction data, though it has also accommodated other types of data, including non-transaction elements like images (JPGs) and malicious uploads. While these elements may not directly impact the functionality of the blockchain, they pose security risks and clutter the network.
### Desc
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29132)
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.
an L1 upgrade proposition
### Is your feature related to a problem, if so please describe it.
The Bitcoin blockchain is designed primarily for storing transaction data, though it has also accommodated other types of data, including non-transaction elements like images (JPGs) and malicious uploads. While these elements may not directly impact the functionality of the blockchain, they pose security risks and clutter the network.
### Desc
...
💬 stratospher commented on pull request "test: create deterministic addrman in the functional tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29007#issuecomment-1867294505)
Updated the PR to remove `-addrmantest` ([git diff](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1b49149b3ed7366141f0090692256e82032cb9af..291a1a325db74ca5cd8ae1ca1e488ec62f99bc93)) in 5d27993.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29007#issuecomment-1867294505)
Updated the PR to remove `-addrmantest` ([git diff](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1b49149b3ed7366141f0090692256e82032cb9af..291a1a325db74ca5cd8ae1ca1e488ec62f99bc93)) in 5d27993.
💬 alpeshvas commented on pull request "datacarriersize: Match more datacarrying":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408#issuecomment-1867310301)
> > > Just wanted to add my 2 cents here as a layman using and holding bitcoin. If the transaction fee rates remain this high for someone using bitcoin to transfer money from wallet A to wallet B then I don't see a future for bitcoin.
> > > The original goal of bitcoin is to make it a currency and a valued asset, if you sacrifice doing this in order to have secondary features then you will fail at both.
> > > If this PR will fix the fee rates back to normal I am on board.
> >
> >
> > Fee
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408#issuecomment-1867310301)
> > > Just wanted to add my 2 cents here as a layman using and holding bitcoin. If the transaction fee rates remain this high for someone using bitcoin to transfer money from wallet A to wallet B then I don't see a future for bitcoin.
> > > The original goal of bitcoin is to make it a currency and a valued asset, if you sacrifice doing this in order to have secondary features then you will fail at both.
> > > If this PR will fix the fee rates back to normal I am on board.
> >
> >
> > Fee
...