📝 ryanofsky opened a pull request: "util: Check bilingual_str format strings at compile time"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31074)
Replace `tinyformat::format` overload that used to accept `bilingual_str` runtime format strings with an overload that only accepts `bilingual_lit` literal format strings that are checked for correctness at compile time.

This PR is alternative to #31061 that has somewhat messier syntax, but a cleaner implementation and a less confusing API. Unlike #31061, the `_` and `Untranslated` functions continue to return `bilingual_str` structs with `original` and `translated` members instead of keeping
...

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "netinfo: add peer services column and outbound-only peers list":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30930#issuecomment-2408020616)
> I think you also should update line 93 (change "4" to "5")

Well spotted 👍 I'm thinking of taking @vasild's outonly suggestion, and will fix that if not.

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1797358825)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1796975768

> Not sure about any of this, though, would need to experiment.

To follow up, I was able to implement an alternate approach in #31074 that lets `_` and `Untranslated` always return `bilingual_str` instances that you can access with `.original` and `.translated` instead of `.lit` and `translate()`. The resulting API seems more clean and consistent, but it does require messier syntax when calling strprintf (implmented)
...

👍 BrandonOdiwuor approved a pull request: "test: Print CompletedProcess object on error"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31067#pullrequestreview-2363531344)
Code Review ACK fa43c4f93ca5b40734ec9b3ff91b74acf3ed7cf2

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "lint: commit-script-check.sh: echo to stderr"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31063#pullrequestreview-2363533818)
ACK fac6cfe5ac06547c90da6f976d7c8bed20da8bac

The change is fine, but what are you going to do with this?

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "test: Assert that when we add the max orphan amount that we cannot add anymore and that a random orphan gets dropped":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31040#discussion_r1797449674)
Thank you for the review! I've updated in [4d59b9a](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31040/commits/4d59b9a517afb5eb661b7bc179c51141769658a3)

the second one looked good to me! I prefer asserting that each individual tx made it into the orphanage

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "test: Assert that when we add the max orphan amount that we cannot add anymore and that a random orphan gets dropped":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31040#discussion_r1797449789)
Thanks! updated in [4d59b9a](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31040/commits/4d59b9a517afb5eb661b7bc179c51141769658a3)

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "test: Assert that when we add the max orphan amount that we cannot add anymore and that a random orphan gets dropped":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31040#discussion_r1797449852)
Thank you! updated in [4d59b9a](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31040/commits/4d59b9a517afb5eb661b7bc179c51141769658a3)

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "test: Assert that when we add the max orphan amount that we cannot add anymore and that a random orphan gets dropped":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31040#discussion_r1797449904)
agreed! Updated in [4d59b9a](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31040/commits/4d59b9a517afb5eb661b7bc179c51141769658a3)

⚠️ DpTheSaint opened an issue: "Please....Big Noob here..(this right place?)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31075)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

Hello, Big noob here. I appreciate you taking the time to read this. I have tried scouring the internet including Github for issues similar to what I am experiencing while Syncing The blockchain on my Host Machine. This is not my first time syncing Core to my Pc, but it is the first time I'm experiencing an issue. The same issue arises both on my Linux OS (same machine) and on my Windows
...

💬 DpTheSaint commented on issue "Please....Big Noob here..(this right place?)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31075#issuecomment-2408235250)
i got another popup when i tried to exit QT.

Microsoft Visual C++ Runtime Library:

Assertion failed!
Program c:\Program Files\Bitcoin\bitcoin-qt.exe
file: txdb.cpp
Line: 105

expression: old_heads[0] == hashBlock

for information on how your program can cause an assertion failure, see the visual c++ docs

not sure if this is relevant but thought i'd share it . it popped up after the original error pop-up.

💬 1440000bytes commented on pull request "rest: Support transaction broadcast in REST interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31065#discussion_r1797504637)
Why `max_tx_fee` zero? `sendrawtransaction` RPC has a different default

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#issuecomment-2408260421)
Rebased and updated the libsecp subtree to its master

Still need to work on the location of musig specific functions as currently it requires linking secp256k1 directly for a bunch of targets.

👍 tdb3 approved a pull request: "doc: cmake: prepend "build" to functional/test_runner.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30859#pullrequestreview-2363689558)
re ACK e64b2f1a16e8d0ad2cd181d84e3b70312e3cdf33

💬 DpTheSaint commented on issue "Please....Big Noob here..(this right place?)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31075#issuecomment-2408267000)
Tried again, This time when i exited i didn't get the Microsoft Visual C++ Error but it still gave me Fatal leveldb error, but this time instead of 001325, it was 001355, not the same block, why is this happening?

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Clean up messy strformat and bilingual_str usages":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31072#issuecomment-2408293678)
Updated 9a101d2928d14e39365064dc976615b4b9674ca5 -> 022ffd149a64f944d1ade75664e8dc19d04bcda7 ([`pr/bfmt.1`](https://github.com/ryanofsky/bitcoin/commits/pr/bfmt.1) -> [`pr/bfmt.2`](https://github.com/ryanofsky/bitcoin/commits/pr/bfmt.2), [compare](https://github.com/ryanofsky/bitcoin/compare/pr/bfmt.1-rebase..pr/bfmt.2)) to include more cleanups and help simplify implementation of compile-time translated string format checking in #31061 or #31074

---

re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/
...

✅ ryanofsky closed a pull request: "util: Check bilingual_str format strings at compile time"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31074)

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "util: Check bilingual_str format strings at compile time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31074#issuecomment-2408295163)
Will close this. There may be some useful ideas here but I don't think this is a clear win over #31061

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1797526070)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793837788

Opened #31072 to implement suggested simplification. Marking this thread resolved since it it's not meant to block this PR in any case.

💬 ryanofsky commented on pull request "refactor: Check translatable format strings at compile-time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1797526861)
re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31061#discussion_r1793707636

Simplified this further in 6fb39655c5cd2bebad902d271d1edae64b817d2b from #31072. It might just be a bug that this string is not translated, and there also seems to be trailing whitespace in the string. Current commit just simplifies code and keeps existing behavior though.