💬 glozow commented on pull request "rpc: improve submitpackage documentation and other improvements":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29292#discussion_r1476310366)
I don't really understand why b2fb55cabc76d842c58b51ff9c64126e6639d1bb is better - I'd interpret this as an array of literal strings "rawtx1", "rawtx2" ?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29292#discussion_r1476310366)
I don't really understand why b2fb55cabc76d842c58b51ff9c64126e6639d1bb is better - I'd interpret this as an array of literal strings "rawtx1", "rawtx2" ?
📝 maflcko converted_to_draft a pull request: "refactor: Allow CScript construction from any std::input_iterator"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29369)
Currently only (pre)vector iterators and raw pointers are accepted. However, this makes it harder to construct from input iterators provided by other classes, such as `std::span`.
Fix that.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29369)
Currently only (pre)vector iterators and raw pointers are accepted. However, this makes it harder to construct from input iterators provided by other classes, such as `std::span`.
Fix that.
💬 glozow commented on pull request "rpc: improve submitpackage documentation and other improvements":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29292#discussion_r1476313442)
thanks for adding a test :+1:
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29292#discussion_r1476313442)
thanks for adding a test :+1:
💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Set descriptors flag after migrating blank wallets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29367#discussion_r1476329208)
I think it should actually unconditionally set the flag, but I haven't fully thought through if that is safe yet. Intuitively, it should be safe since a failed migration would result in the wallet being deleted anyways, but I haven't considered all of the possibilities yet.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29367#discussion_r1476329208)
I think it should actually unconditionally set the flag, but I haven't fully thought through if that is safe yet. Intuitively, it should be safe since a failed migration would result in the wallet being deleted anyways, but I haven't considered all of the possibilities yet.
💬 achow101 commented on pull request "descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#issuecomment-1924278221)
Rebasing for CI
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22838#issuecomment-1924278221)
Rebasing for CI
💬 achow101 commented on pull request "refactor: Fix timedata includes":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29361#issuecomment-1924284209)
ACK fad0fafd5aca699cfab7673f8eb18211139aeb18
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29361#issuecomment-1924284209)
ACK fad0fafd5aca699cfab7673f8eb18211139aeb18
💬 jonatack commented on pull request "fuzz: extend ConsumeNetAddr() to return I2P and CJDNS addresses":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26859#discussion_r1476349061)
Nice, making `BIP155Network` a public enum facilitates updating #27385.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26859#discussion_r1476349061)
Nice, making `BIP155Network` a public enum facilitates updating #27385.
🤔 jonatack reviewed a pull request: "fuzz: extend ConsumeNetAddr() to return I2P and CJDNS addresses"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26859#pullrequestreview-1859765921)
Post-merge ACK b851c5385d0a0acec4493be1561cea285065d5dc
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26859#pullrequestreview-1859765921)
Post-merge ACK b851c5385d0a0acec4493be1561cea285065d5dc
💬 Empact commented on pull request "refactor: Remove excess reserve() call for SecureString":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29364#issuecomment-1924287646)
@knst can you explain or cite a reference as to why this is no longer required? I would expect the implementation of `reserve` to be relative to the supplied allocator. Is it because size change is inexpensive with a reserved page via `LockedPoolManager`?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29364#issuecomment-1924287646)
@knst can you explain or cite a reference as to why this is no longer required? I would expect the implementation of `reserve` to be relative to the supplied allocator. Is it because size change is inexpensive with a reserved page via `LockedPoolManager`?
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Remove nChainTx from consensus":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29349#discussion_r1476372560)
Fixed. (Implemented my suggestion)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29349#discussion_r1476372560)
Fixed. (Implemented my suggestion)
💬 Empact commented on pull request "test: p2p: check disconnect due to lack of desirable service flags":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29279#discussion_r1476384709)
Why not enumerate all combinations of services and connection types here?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29279#discussion_r1476384709)
Why not enumerate all combinations of services and connection types here?
🚀 achow101 merged a pull request: "refactor: Fix timedata includes"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29361)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29361)
💬 Empact commented on pull request "test: Fix CPartialMerkleTree.nTransactions signedness":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29363#issuecomment-1924312018)
ACK
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29363#issuecomment-1924312018)
ACK
💬 jonatack commented on pull request "Wallet: Add `maxfeerate` wallet startup option":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29278#discussion_r1476415646)
Adding a new configuration option would need a release note.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29278#discussion_r1476415646)
Adding a new configuration option would need a release note.
💬 knst commented on pull request "refactor: Remove excess reserve() call for SecureString":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29364#issuecomment-1924351566)
@Empact
In the original 2011 implementation, a regular std::string was used for the passphrase:
```
commit b7bcaf940d27fa8cfe89422943fbeaab7a350930
Author: Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com>
Date: Wed Aug 24 22:07:26 2011 +0200
Wallet encryption part 2: ask passphrase when needed, add menu options
diff --git a/src/qt/askpassphrasedialog.cpp b/src/qt/askpassphrasedialog.cpp
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..a297513a62
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/qt/askpassphrasedia
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29364#issuecomment-1924351566)
@Empact
In the original 2011 implementation, a regular std::string was used for the passphrase:
```
commit b7bcaf940d27fa8cfe89422943fbeaab7a350930
Author: Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com>
Date: Wed Aug 24 22:07:26 2011 +0200
Wallet encryption part 2: ask passphrase when needed, add menu options
diff --git a/src/qt/askpassphrasedialog.cpp b/src/qt/askpassphrasedialog.cpp
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..a297513a62
--- /dev/null
+++ b/src/qt/askpassphrasedia
...
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 2)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28983#issuecomment-1924360021)
Added two commits to stay in sync with SRI: https://github.com/stratum-mining/stratum/pull/742
Next week I'll try to rebase this on the latest #29346, which has diverged a bit.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28983#issuecomment-1924360021)
Added two commits to stay in sync with SRI: https://github.com/stratum-mining/stratum/pull/742
Next week I'll try to rebase this on the latest #29346, which has diverged a bit.
💬 jonatack commented on pull request "RPC: Add maxfeerate and maxburnamount args to submitpackage":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28950#discussion_r1476464485)
Default value provided twice, can omit second one.
`3. maxburnamount (numeric or string, optional, default="0.00") Reject transactions with provably unspendable outputs (e.g. 'datacarrier' outputs that use the OP_RETURN opcode) greater than the specified value(default of 0), expressed in BTC.`
```suggestion
"Reject transactions with provably unspendable outputs (e.g. 'datacarrier' outputs that use the OP_RETURN opcode) greater than the specified value, expressed in " + C
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28950#discussion_r1476464485)
Default value provided twice, can omit second one.
`3. maxburnamount (numeric or string, optional, default="0.00") Reject transactions with provably unspendable outputs (e.g. 'datacarrier' outputs that use the OP_RETURN opcode) greater than the specified value(default of 0), expressed in BTC.`
```suggestion
"Reject transactions with provably unspendable outputs (e.g. 'datacarrier' outputs that use the OP_RETURN opcode) greater than the specified value, expressed in " + C
...
🤔 stratospher reviewed a pull request: "test: use v2 everywhere for P2PConnection if --v2transport is enabled"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29358#pullrequestreview-1859682894)
tested ACK d8165db.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29358#pullrequestreview-1859682894)
tested ACK d8165db.
💬 stratospher commented on pull request "test: use v2 everywhere for P2PConnection if --v2transport is enabled":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29358#discussion_r1476463624)
d065b33: maybe say only for `LARGE_REORG_SIZE` tests? because the last 2 tests have v2 peers after [reconnection](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/d8165db8e889f423351ae35fd375c982e793d136/test/functional/feature_block.py#L1312-L1320) due to block height mismatch/invalid block header version.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29358#discussion_r1476463624)
d065b33: maybe say only for `LARGE_REORG_SIZE` tests? because the last 2 tests have v2 peers after [reconnection](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/d8165db8e889f423351ae35fd375c982e793d136/test/functional/feature_block.py#L1312-L1320) due to block height mismatch/invalid block header version.
💬 stratospher commented on pull request "test: use v2 everywhere for P2PConnection if --v2transport is enabled":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29358#discussion_r1476295813)
d065b33: nit: ChaCha20 typo here and in feature_block.py
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29358#discussion_r1476295813)
d065b33: nit: ChaCha20 typo here and in feature_block.py