💬 i-am-yuvi commented on issue "29.0 RC Testing Guide Feedback":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32026#issuecomment-2761045881)
> > I have tested on my local machine and here are some of my observation https://github.com/i-am-yuvi/bitcoin-core-issues-prs-notes/blob/master/29.0rc_testing.md
>
> You might have missed building with 29.0 . I Don't see a `reject-detail` field in the last response you have tested.

Thanks for this @Prabhat1308, for some reason, while testing the updated rp,c I checked out v28.1rc. I have updated the report!

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: create assert_not_equal util":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29500#discussion_r2018497295)
> Don't know if you mean literally `"Both values are (the same)"` or `f"Both values are {thing1}"`. Find the latter clearly more useful; providing clues of cause of the failure, making it easier to reproduce.

Agree. Sorry for being unclear, I meant `f"Both values are {thing1}"` when I said "(the same)".

🤔 polespinasa reviewed a pull request: "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#pullrequestreview-2724722238)
Concept ack
Did a simple test with regtest and the blocks are correctly mined with a coinbase tx setting `nLockTime=heigh-1` and `nSequence=4294967294`.

I agree adding this before the soft-fork is good so we give time to miners.
I have one question although, if I'm not wrong the node miner code is no longer used in mainnet so this PR only affects to test networks?

💬 polespinasa commented on pull request "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#discussion_r2018171982)
Is this Assert necessary? Is it even possible? Genesis block is hardcoded, so this value at list will be 1 right?

💬 laanwj commented on issue "Enable PCP by default?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31663#issuecomment-2761131196)
Oh! Nice detective work. Didn't really consider that, yes it's definitely possible for routing tables to be larger than 4k. There should probably be *some* limit to avoid crash/OOM in case of unexpected OS behavior but it doesn't need to be that low.

> do you have any approach-inclination between either i) querying a dummy route vs ii) the current query (NLM_F_DUMP) with a multi-part response handler + a filter for default routes?

i have a slight preference for getting all information then sif
...

👍 laanwj approved a pull request: "contrib: document asmap-tool commands more thoroughly"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32110#pullrequestreview-2725282806)
re-ACK 6afffba34e086de4cf0bb86729e12d116c1dcc9b

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#issuecomment-2761158943)
> Did a simple test with regtest

> so this PR only affects to test networks

Unfortunately regtest is not representative here. It's the only network for which Bitcoin Core will mine by itself. For all other networks, including testnet (3 and 4), you need to use external software.

💬 polespinasa commented on pull request "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#issuecomment-2761190738)
> Unfortunately regtest is not representative here. It's the only network for which Bitcoin Core will mine by itself. For all other networks, including testnet (3 and 4), you need to use external software.

This is what I though. So how does this change "help" or "put pressure" to add this new rule to miners software? Wouldn't help more implement the code that will check if a block is following it? Obviously code that would never be ran without another change to add an activation date.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2761205057)
The last [feedback](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r2017831104) from @fanquake has been addressed.

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#discussion_r2018562707)
Thanks! [Fixed](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2761205057).

💬 RandyMcMillan commented on pull request "Feature: Use different datadirs for different signets":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29838#issuecomment-2761209767)
👀 going to revisit this PR today...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Switch to Qt 6":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30997#issuecomment-2761243794)
My Guix build:
```
aarch64
6ea4a76be3383337e57d6a12450bd589776ebb3fd0d9161347766ef845241e13 guix-build-c4861570e468/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
3eb7656483dfe47fa6b7cf40bceb3decda73474c813edb224d42840adb8b49d6 guix-build-c4861570e468/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-c4861570e468-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
0aa522010efd138d78eeac0a8ea15df469298c50afaa2451dece78c564546cac guix-build-c4861570e468/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-c4861570e468-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
5e1e8335
...

🤔 janb84 reviewed a pull request: "test: create assert_not_equal util"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29500#pullrequestreview-2725387180)
Concept ACK [be71af3](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/be71af3cc0b0bcb7d917cc6f2e5fda119f1b1bd6)

- Code review ✅
- Build & tested ✅

I agree with @hodlinator on the import order NIT — let's keep it consistent and maintain clean, high-quality code.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#issuecomment-2761301569)
> Wouldn't help more implement the code that will check if a block is following it?

That's what activating the soft-fork does. But there's a chicken-egg problem, because one reason to delay activating a soft fork is because part of the ecosystem isn't ready.

> So how does this change "help" or "put pressure" to add this new rule to miners software?

As I explained in my first comment, for Stratum v2 this just works(tm). For Stratum v1 additional changes are needed in other software. Not
...

💬 furszy commented on pull request "wallet, migration: Fix empty wallet crash":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32149#discussion_r2018614237)
This leaves the db batch object alive and could conflict with the `Flush()` and `DeleteRecords()` internals, as both access the db.

Better to limit the scope of the db batch object only to this function call.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "tests: improves tapscript unit tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31640#issuecomment-2761340139)
could you squash commits?

💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "qa: Verify clean shutdown on startup failure":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30660#discussion_r2018664612)
Was able to easily reproduce the issue.

<details><summary>Log</summary>

C:\Users\hodlinator\bitcoin>py build\test\functional\feature_framework_startup_failures.py
2025-03-28T13:09:19.459000Z TestFramework (INFO): PRNG seed is: 4595347679033165165
2025-03-28T13:09:19.519000Z TestFramework (INFO): Initializing test directory C:\Users\HODLIN~1\AppData\Local\Temp\bitcoin_func_test_4hxul9x2
2025-03-28T13:09:19.519000Z TestFramework (INFO): Verifying timeout in connecting to bitcoind's RPC in
...

💬 darosior commented on issue "Enable PCP by default?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31663#issuecomment-2761393363)
@Lagrang3 thanks for the testing. I assume like other Archer routers it was enabled by default?

📝 maflcko opened a pull request: "fuzz: Make partially_downloaded_block more deterministic"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32158)
This should make the `partially_downloaded_block` fuzz target even more deterministic.

Follow-up to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31841. Tracking issue: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29018.

This bundles several changes:

* First, speed up the `deterministic-fuzz-coverage` helper by introducing parallelism.
* Then, a fix to remove spawned test threads or spawn them deterministically. (While testing this, high parallelism and thread contention may be needed)

### T
...

💬 hodlinator commented on pull request "qa: Verify clean shutdown on startup failure":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30660#discussion_r2018729209)
Thread https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30660/files#r2018221082:
Taken.