💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: wallet_listtransactions.py --legacy-wallet failure":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28411#issuecomment-2208414978)
Duplicate of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090?

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "ci: wallet_listtransactions.py --legacy-wallet failure"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28411)

💬 dergoegge commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432#discussion_r1665352969)
> How is this not polling?

I was reading it as "check every 50ms" but I just noticed that it is also using a condvar, so it'll get notified when `g_best_block` changes.

⚠️ maflcko opened an issue: "ci: ConnectionRefusedError: [WinError 10061] No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30390)
Usually they come with a follow-up error of `Unable to connect to bitcoind after 2400s` (or similar).

This is a tracking issue, because all tests are affected.

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-2208428249)
Not a feature_proxy issue, so closing as duplicate of the tracking issue https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30390 for now

💬 maflcko commented on issue "test: failure in rpc_getdescriptorinfo.py (OSError: [WinError 10048] Only one usage of each socket address (protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25765#issuecomment-2208431158)
Is this still an issue? Haven't seen this in a while, I think.

✅ maflcko closed an issue: "test: failure in rpc_getdescriptorinfo.py (OSError: [WinError 10048] Only one usage of each socket address (protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25765)

💬 maflcko commented on issue "test: failure in rpc_getdescriptorinfo.py (OSError: [WinError 10048] Only one usage of each socket address (protocol/network address/port) is normally permitted)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25765#issuecomment-2208432085)
Closing for now.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-2208441849)
Why didn't you just rename this, rather than opening a new issue with none of the relevant information?

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "build: configure using depends by default if config.site exists "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16692)

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Stratum v2 Template Provider (take 3)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29432#issuecomment-2208466255)
> * We add a new zmq publisher, e.g. `-zmqpubtemplate`, which publishes block templates as soon as they become available.
> * We add a new rpc `updatetemplatepub` to configure the template publisher, e.g. for setting the coinbase output data size.

This approach would mostly work. Two downsides that come to mind:

1. it limits the number of connected stratum clients to 1, since there's only one ZMQ template feed.
2. it also precludes the ability to make the template provider public facing
...

💬 fanquake commented on issue "Bitcoin Core on mainnet shows testnet3 dir as a wallet to open and allows opening it":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16107#issuecomment-2208479289)
Is this fixed after #18554?

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "contrib: use c++ compiler rather than c compiler for binary checks":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30387#issuecomment-2208481950)
> Use CXX/CXXFLAGS rather than CC/CFLAGS to test our actual compiler for binary checks rather than the one we only forward to secp256k1.

Concept ACK on that.

> From hebasto's CMake repo. See discussion here: [hebasto#252 (comment)](https://github.com/hebasto/bitcoin/pull/252#discussion_r1664657488)

While the discussion was raised in the CMake project, I'd like to note that this change is _not required_ for it.

💬 fanquake commented on issue "RPC `getblock` resulted in 500 and ReadBlockFromDisk: OpenBlockFile failed for FlatFilePos(nFile=-1, nPos=0)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20978#issuecomment-2208517806)
@willcl-ark was this fixed by #27101 ?

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-2208567773)
For a few reasons:

* There is nothing relevant in the discussion. Some comment, such as https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-1907735929 are about other (real, fixed) bugs.
* Actually the comment about not being able to reproduce: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-1968819534. Seems relevant, but this is the only one in a total of 14.
* Most of the GHA links are stale, as the cache is cleared by Microsoft
* I don't have the edit permission o
...

💬 fanquake commented on issue "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-2208584721)
Ok, we'll continue to keep track of the (sporadic) failures in the new issue. I guess the issue mostly remains a GH/infra one?

👍 dergoegge approved a pull request: "Several randomness improvements"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29625#pullrequestreview-2158527393)
utACK ce8094246ee95232e9d84f7e37f3c0a43ef587ce

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: feature_proxy failing in MSVC job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29090#issuecomment-2208586729)
Yes, this is my understanding as well.

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: ConnectionRefusedError: [WinError 10061] No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30390#issuecomment-2208589062)
Given that no one has reproduced this locally yet, this may be an issue limited to GHA.