💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "Fix create unsigned transaction fee bump":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/812#discussion_r1548912316)
At least on Ubuntu 22.04, now after the fee-bumping unsigned a modal pop-up is displayed:


while before there was a message sent thru the OS system information (?):


I see in the code we usually use `CClientUIInterface::MSG_INFORMATION` (`transactionview.cpp`, `walletview.cpp`) and I'd pre
...

👍 pablomartin4btc approved a pull request: "Fix create unsigned transaction fee bump"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/812#pullrequestreview-1975499213)
tACK 671b7a32516d62e1e79393ded4b45910bd08010a

Tested and verified this PR fixes #810 and now creation of unsigned tx/ PSBT/ during fee-bumping doesn't ask for passphrase/ requires wallet unlock.

👍 pablomartin4btc approved a pull request: "Change example address from legacy (P2PKH) to bech32m (P2TR)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/808#pullrequestreview-1975550497)
tACK c6d1b8de89d87fe4fd171dc85557299e429e6564

<details>
<summary>Tested running <code>bitcoin-qt</code> on <code>signet</code>.</summary>


</details>

<details>
<summary>Also tested the script provided in the <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/808#issue-2202921882">description</a>.</summary>

```
/test/functional$ ./gen_add_type.py
mainnet example address: bc1p35yvje
...

💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "ci: Temporarily disable bpfcc-tools":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29788#issuecomment-2033694468)
I'm missing context for this change. Why no PR description and no commit message body?

⚠️ pinwhell opened an issue: "Concern: Transatlantic Internet Seizure, Impact on Bitcoin Transactions & Blockchain Forks"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29795)
How could a prolonged transatlantic internet disruption, such as one triggered by war or sabotage, impact Bitcoin transactions and user funds? Specifically, what might occur in terms of a potential blockchain split or fork, and how could efforts to reconcile such a situation be affected?

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "Concern: Transatlantic Internet Seizure, Impact on Bitcoin Transactions & Blockchain Forks"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29795)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Concern: Transatlantic Internet Seizure, Impact on Bitcoin Transactions & Blockchain Forks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29795#issuecomment-2033768668)
Usually the issue tracker is used to track technical issues related to the Bitcoin Core code base.

General bitcoin questions and/or support requests are best directed to the [Bitcoin StackExchange](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com) or the `#bitcoin` IRC channel on Libera Chat, or one of the Bitcoin subreddits, or any other place that you feel is well suited.

Network-wide consensus and/or P2P changes first need to be discussed with the greater community, for example https://groups.google.c
...

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "doc: Update the developer mailing list address.":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29782#issuecomment-2033776628)
ACK 0ead466a0c72bef0a8622749b84e9c7c5c37144f

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "test: Run framework unit tests in parallel":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29771#issuecomment-2033781705)
> is the desire here to have the unit tests run by default when running individual tests

No

> (and also by default when running all tests)?

Yes

They are just another test now, so they don't need special treatment via `--skipunit`.

> The user can specify --failfast to end testing early if any test fails (unit tests are no exception)

Yes, that seems good enough.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: Temporarily disable bpfcc-tools":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29788#issuecomment-2033789710)
> It seems unwise to have CI that runs for every PR to be dependent on an unstable OS. From what I can tell, the purpose of using Ubuntu noble is to get access to clang 18. Instead of doing that, could we instead use the LTS release and just use the [llvm package repo](https://apt.llvm.org/) to get the clang versions we want?

I agree, but that is not possible, because the bpfcc-tools on the Ubuntu 22.04 LTS were outdated as well. So they'd require a ppa as well, see https://github.com/bitcoin
...

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "ci: Temporarily disable bpfcc-tools":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29788#issuecomment-2033790711)
> I'm missing context for this change. Why no PR description and no commit message body?

I put it in the first comment. Edited and moved to the description.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: Optimize serialization disk space of dumptxoutset - Reloaded":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29612#issuecomment-2033794015)
> I think it would be better if the new format could include a version number so that this could be properly reported.

This seems useful in general.

> We could detect which format was used for serialization and proceed to deserialize as necessary.

Yes, but I don't think we need to support the format from before this PR - once we have the mainnet params, the instruction could simply be to use v28.0 or newer to generate the snapshot.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Noise Protocol":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29346#issuecomment-2033800494)
(I plan to rebase this after ASan CI is fixed)

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "ci: Temporarily disable bpfcc-tools":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29788#issuecomment-2033808117)
> Personally I think it is fine to disable the bpf tests for a few days, or even weeks, as the code is unlikely to break.

To be on the very safe side, maybe open an issue to undo it and tag that for v28.0.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: opportunistically accept 1-parent-1-child packages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28970#discussion_r1549143563)
done

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: Bump timeouts in feature_index_prune and wallet_importdescriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29791#issuecomment-2033837668)
lgtm ACK 49c0b8b2288e60ae22fcac5d03811cf36ecec058

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#issuecomment-2033839537)
The test passes for me now on macOS.

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "Bitcoin puzzles in lower ranges (starting with 66 as of now) can't be cashed out because of bots and RBF"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29793)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "Bitcoin puzzles in lower ranges (starting with 66 as of now) can't be cashed out because of bots and RBF":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29793#issuecomment-2033843601)
Usually the issue tracker is used to track technical issues related to the Bitcoin Core code base.

General bitcoin questions and/or support requests are best directed to the [Bitcoin StackExchange](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com) or the `#bitcoin` IRC channel on Libera Chat, or one of the Bitcoin subreddits, or any other place that you feel is well suited.

Network-wide consensus and/or P2P changes first need to be discussed with the greater community, for example https://groups.google.c
...

💬 maflcko commented on issue "depens: bdb build fails on Intel macOS 13.6.6 ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29792#issuecomment-2033873359)
Can you build other packages with patches applied?