π¬ jonatack commented on pull request "cli: rework -addrinfo cli to use addresses which arenβt filtered for quality/recency":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26988#discussion_r1174004892)
(See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27511#issuecomment-1518117272 for a current example on mainnet of how different the data can be.)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26988#discussion_r1174004892)
(See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27511#issuecomment-1518117272 for a current example on mainnet of how different the data can be.)
π¬ jonatack commented on pull request "rpc: Add test-only RPC getaddrmaninfo for new/tried table address count":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27511#discussion_r1174005736)
Maybe a final "totals" field with the totals for each?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27511#discussion_r1174005736)
Maybe a final "totals" field with the totals for each?
π¬ jonatack commented on pull request "net, refactor: extract Network and BIP155Network logic to node/network":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27385#issuecomment-1518138160)
Rebased!
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27385#issuecomment-1518138160)
Rebased!
π¬ jonatack commented on pull request "Move IsDeprecatedRPCEnabled to rpc/util, rm redundant rpcEnableDeprecated":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27322#issuecomment-1518166453)
Rebased π
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27322#issuecomment-1518166453)
Rebased π
π achow101 merged a pull request: "rpc: In `utxoupdatepsbt` also look for the tx in the txindex"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25939)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25939)
π€ mzumsande reviewed a pull request: "test: prevent intermittent failures"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27506#pullrequestreview-1396226339)
Code review ACK 10a354f1740a5c1b913d0b6951e80fb5401ab43a - the fix is what I suggested [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27214#discussion_r1169169601) and should make these intermittent failures impossible.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27506#pullrequestreview-1396226339)
Code review ACK 10a354f1740a5c1b913d0b6951e80fb5401ab43a - the fix is what I suggested [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27214#discussion_r1169169601) and should make these intermittent failures impossible.
π¬ fanquake commented on pull request "ci: use LLVM/clang-16 in native_asan job":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27360#issuecomment-1518195345)
```bash
οΏ½[0;34m node0 2023-04-21T16:34:04.866961Z [http] [httpserver.cpp:308] [ThreadHTTP] [http] Exited http event loop οΏ½[0m
οΏ½[0;34m node0 2023-04-21T16:34:04.867449Z [shutoff] [httpserver.cpp:505] [StopHTTPServer] [http] Stopped HTTP server οΏ½[0m
οΏ½[0;34m node0 2023-04-21T16:34:04.868612Z [msghand] [logging.h:263] [error] ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (AcceptBlock: Failed to find position to write new block to disk) οΏ½[0m
οΏ½[0;34m node0 2023-04-21T16:34:04.869269Z [msghand] [util/
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27360#issuecomment-1518195345)
```bash
οΏ½[0;34m node0 2023-04-21T16:34:04.866961Z [http] [httpserver.cpp:308] [ThreadHTTP] [http] Exited http event loop οΏ½[0m
οΏ½[0;34m node0 2023-04-21T16:34:04.867449Z [shutoff] [httpserver.cpp:505] [StopHTTPServer] [http] Stopped HTTP server οΏ½[0m
οΏ½[0;34m node0 2023-04-21T16:34:04.868612Z [msghand] [logging.h:263] [error] ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED (AcceptBlock: Failed to find position to write new block to disk) οΏ½[0m
οΏ½[0;34m node0 2023-04-21T16:34:04.869269Z [msghand] [util/
...
π fanquake merged a pull request: "test: prevent intermittent failures"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27506)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27506)
π¬ achow101 commented on pull request "util: improve FindByte() performance":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19690#issuecomment-1518201999)
ACK 0fe832c4a4b2049fdf967bca375468d5ac285563
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19690#issuecomment-1518201999)
ACK 0fe832c4a4b2049fdf967bca375468d5ac285563
π john-moffett approved a pull request: "util: improve FindByte() performance"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19690#pullrequestreview-1396277513)
ACK 0fe832c4a4b2049fdf967bca375468d5ac285563
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19690#pullrequestreview-1396277513)
ACK 0fe832c4a4b2049fdf967bca375468d5ac285563
π¬ achow101 commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1174134793)
> The only way I could think of to do that is to read and checksum the file, and compare the checksums instead of the timestamps.
Isn't the point that the file contents aren't changing? So checksum wouldn't work because the files will be the same whether it's rewritten or not. The only things that can be different are the filesystem's metadata on the modification time.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1174134793)
> The only way I could think of to do that is to read and checksum the file, and compare the checksums instead of the timestamps.
Isn't the point that the file contents aren't changing? So checksum wouldn't work because the files will be the same whether it's rewritten or not. The only things that can be different are the filesystem's metadata on the modification time.
π¬ hebasto commented on pull request "build: use latest config.{guess,sub} in depends":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27508#issuecomment-1518321534)
My Guix builds:
```
fef9152d593aa1cb3243f37b8c069ef863f4e270962e17918cfa83e18c9eac3a guix-build-4a3f1db4ea5f/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
3fa8236cea2ba1a08d0caf677de80f798f2594cb208f10e5dfe0a9a71de7978d guix-build-4a3f1db4ea5f/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-4a3f1db4ea5f-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
36409f4fa6acfb577d6e6a43c2fda2d81f1fb6fb4e5d90cbaa65a2dbb26d1c23 guix-build-4a3f1db4ea5f/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-4a3f1db4ea5f-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
02a62c4cc2ecb63b
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27508#issuecomment-1518321534)
My Guix builds:
```
fef9152d593aa1cb3243f37b8c069ef863f4e270962e17918cfa83e18c9eac3a guix-build-4a3f1db4ea5f/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
3fa8236cea2ba1a08d0caf677de80f798f2594cb208f10e5dfe0a9a71de7978d guix-build-4a3f1db4ea5f/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-4a3f1db4ea5f-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
36409f4fa6acfb577d6e6a43c2fda2d81f1fb6fb4e5d90cbaa65a2dbb26d1c23 guix-build-4a3f1db4ea5f/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-4a3f1db4ea5f-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
02a62c4cc2ecb63b
...
β οΈ inmortalbobz opened an issue: "I believe #10072 should help with bip9-softforks."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27514)
I believe #10072 should help with bip9-softforks.
_Originally posted by @jnewbery in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10052#issuecomment-289143384_
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27514)
I believe #10072 should help with bip9-softforks.
_Originally posted by @jnewbery in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10052#issuecomment-289143384_
β
fanquake closed an issue: "I believe #10072 should help with bip9-softforks."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27514)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27514)
:lock: fanquake locked an issue: "I believe #10072 should help with bip9-softforks."
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27514)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27514)
π¬ pinheadmz commented on pull request "blockstorage: do not flush block to disk if it is already there":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1174158220)
> The only things that can be different are the filesystem's metadata on the modification time, and these are not covered by a checksum.
It might be the same usefulness actually, I seem to remember that if file contents aren't changed, when you call `fwrite()` or `fflush()`, the modification timestamp won't be updated. I researched different ways to detect a `fflush()` and this unit test was the closest. Most systems flush when `fwrite()` is called, and then a subsequent `fflush()` doesn't do
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1174158220)
> The only things that can be different are the filesystem's metadata on the modification time, and these are not covered by a checksum.
It might be the same usefulness actually, I seem to remember that if file contents aren't changed, when you call `fwrite()` or `fflush()`, the modification timestamp won't be updated. I researched different ways to detect a `fflush()` and this unit test was the closest. Most systems flush when `fwrite()` is called, and then a subsequent `fflush()` doesn't do
...
π hebasto approved a pull request: "build: use latest config.{guess,sub} in depends"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27508#pullrequestreview-1396401127)
ACK 4a3f1db4ea5f90277cf7f57c051a2285e8b42468, I've got zero diff with files from the [upstream](https://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=config.git;a=tree).
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27508#pullrequestreview-1396401127)
ACK 4a3f1db4ea5f90277cf7f57c051a2285e8b42468, I've got zero diff with files from the [upstream](https://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=config.git;a=tree).
π¬ achow101 commented on pull request "util: improve FindByte() performance":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19690#issuecomment-1518398802)
Silent merge conflict with master:
```
../../../src/bench/streams_findbyte.cpp:7:10: fatal error: fs.h: No such file or directory
7 | #include <fs.h>
| ^~~~~~
compilation terminated.
```
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19690#issuecomment-1518398802)
Silent merge conflict with master:
```
../../../src/bench/streams_findbyte.cpp:7:10: fatal error: fs.h: No such file or directory
7 | #include <fs.h>
| ^~~~~~
compilation terminated.
```
π ishaanam's pull request is ready for review: "rpc: add `descriptorprocesspsbt` rpc"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25796)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25796)
π¬ ishaanam commented on pull request "rpc: add `descriptorprocesspsbt` rpc":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25796#issuecomment-1518475401)
Now that #25939 has been merged, this is now ready for review.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25796#issuecomment-1518475401)
Now that #25939 has been merged, this is now ready for review.