💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "refactor: prohibit direct flags access in CCoinsCacheEntry and remove invalid tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30906#discussion_r1770598205)
I mean, if you look at the `Write` column, each value is `VALUE3`.

💬 kegdeg commented on issue "rpc auth fails 'Error parsing command line arguments: Invalid parameter -rpcpasssword=password":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30939#issuecomment-2366896618)
steps to reproduce

start bitcoind:
bitcoind -datadir='/path/to/node'

the bitcoin.conf file is located in ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf

server=1
rpcuser=user
rpcpassword=password
rpcport=8332

I try checking rpc connectivity with

'curl --user 'user' --data-binary '{"jsonrpc":"1.0","id":"curltext","method":"getinfo","params":[]}' -H 'content-type:text/plain;' http://127.0.0.1:8332'

there is no response and the node returns:
'2024-09-22T18:01:11Z ThreadRPCServer incorrect password
...

💬 sipa commented on issue "rpc auth fails 'Error parsing command line arguments: Invalid parameter -rpcpasssword=password":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30939#issuecomment-2366897566)
If you specify `-datadir`, Bitcoin Core will use the bitcoin.conf file located there, not the default location one's in ~/.bitcoin.

💬 garlonicon commented on pull request "Testnet4 including PoW difficulty adjustment fix":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29775#issuecomment-2366902493)
> difficulty appears to be rising exponentially

Not necessarily. There are many CPU-mined blocks, but the chainwork is not rising by that much. And CPU miners are not only producing more blocks than needed: they are also pushing timestamps forward. Which means, that if it will be too hard to mine, then:

1. More people will be mining with CPU difficulty (which is good, because then, everything is left to lottery-based network propagation).
2. The difficulty will stop rising, because if you
...

📝 tdb3 opened a pull request: "doc: correct the zmq automatic build info"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30946)
The current documentation states that ZMQ feature is automatically included when building.
Noticed this was not the case when building to review PR #30942.

👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "test: Remove dead code from interface_zmq test"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30942#pullrequestreview-2320908742)
CR and light test ACK ed1af8386b34eafed7a2d634ab96d23d6732e5bf

Thanks for simplifying the test.

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "test: Remove dead code from interface_zmq test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30942#discussion_r1770618663)
Thought about this assert being turned into a loop (retrying until `get_raw_seq` is 6), but it doesn't seem to fail currently, and the `sync_all()` call above might be helping to ensure this.

💬 tdb3 commented on pull request "doc: correct the zmq automatic build info":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30946#issuecomment-2366936335)
CI failure seems to be another instance of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30922

```
test 2024-09-22T19:16:03.915000Z TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/runner/work/bitcoin/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 132, in main
self.run_test()
File "/Users/
...

💬 tdb3 commented on issue "Intermittent failure in p2p_1p1c_network.py", line 58, in raise_network_minfee assert_greater_than(node.getmempoolinfo()['mempoolminfee'], FEERATE_1SAT_VB) ; AssertionError: 0.00001000 <= 0.00001000":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30922#issuecomment-2366936790)
Encountered this in PR #30946 as well.

```
test 2024-09-22T19:16:03.915000Z TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/runner/work/bitcoin/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 132, in main
self.run_test()
File "/Users/runner/work/bitcoin/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build-aarch64
...

💬 fjahr commented on pull request "doc: correct the zmq automatic build info":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30946#issuecomment-2366958861)
ACK 858bb0c5285cb713bb1de056135d1331c17c35a9

💬 beage666 commented on pull request "test: Remove dead code from interface_zmq test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30942#discussion_r1770637021)
Next update

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "refactor: TxDownloadManager + fuzzing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30110#discussion_r1770637906)
> I don't understand how 0 tests failed, though 😬 gotta look into that

yeah was a bit worrying to me too... glad we can add unit tests in this PR!

💬 kegdeg commented on issue "rpc auth fails 'Error parsing command line arguments: Invalid parameter -rpcpasssword=password":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30939#issuecomment-2366973982)
yes, that solved it, thanks!

✅ kegdeg closed an issue: "rpc auth fails 'Error parsing command line arguments: Invalid parameter -rpcpasssword=password"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30939)

💬 kegdeg commented on issue "rpc auth fails 'Error parsing command line arguments: Invalid parameter -rpcpasssword=password":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30939#issuecomment-2366974641)
-datadir specified, must use bitcoin.conf in datadir

💬 paulmaleauxney commented on issue "Improve description of the `filename` parameter of `loadwallet` RPC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30269#issuecomment-2367076019)
@murchandamus if this is still open I can work in it. Please let me know.

💬 BenWestgate commented on pull request "Drop -dbcache limit":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28358#issuecomment-2367264753)
Didn’t #28280 resolve this?

On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 05:16, l0rinc ***@***.***(mailto:On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 05:16, l0rinc <<a href=)> wrote:

> Unsurprisingly (should we document this?), setting -prune makes the -dbcache value less important:
>
> benchmark
>
> // 6d7f24595b08b8d1eba53e648533bcf87c30b48f
> hyperfine \
> --runs 2 \
> --export-json /mnt/ibd_dbcache_prune.json \
> --parameter-list DBCACHE 10240,16384,20480,30720,40960 \
> --prepare
>
> '
>
> rm -rf /mnt/BitcoinData/*
>
> '
>
> \
>
...

⚠️ Sjors opened an issue: "Warn about / refuse unsupported clang version"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30947)
On an older Intel macOS 13.7 machine:

```
cmake -B build
-- The CXX compiler identification is AppleClang 14.0.3.14030022

...

cmake --build build -j7

...

In file included from /Users/sjors/dev/bitcoin/src/crypto/muhash.h:9:
/Users/sjors/dev/bitcoin/src/uint256.h:133:19: error: call to consteval function 'util::ConstevalHexDigit' is not a constant expression
auto lo = util::ConstevalHexDigit(*(str_it++));
^

(etc)
```

Our minimum required clang
...

💬 Sjors commented on issue "Warn about / refuse unsupported clang version":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30947#issuecomment-2367467444)
The documentation says "For macOS 11 (Big Sur) and 12 (Monterey) you need to install a more recent version of llvm". That should include macOS 13 and 14 now as well, see https://trac.macports.org/wiki/XcodeVersionInfo#macOS14

But I think as long as cmake warns about llvm being too old, anyone reading `build-osx.md` will probably figure out that they need to install a newer version via llvm.

📝 maflcko opened a pull request: "test: Add missing sync_mempools() to fill_mempool()"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30948)
Not doing the sync will lead to (intermittent) issues, as explained in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30922#issuecomment-2364529013.

Fix all issues by doing the sync by default.

However, the sync isn't needed in all places, or it could slow down the test. So disable it, or set `noban_tx_relay` to offset the added cost.