💬 hebasto commented on issue "Can't compile v24.0.1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27680#issuecomment-1550432466)
> ### Steps to reproduce
>
> Setup Raspi4 with Raspi OS installed on a bootable SSD
> Install BDB 4.8
> Clone bitcoin repo 24.0.1
> configure

Try to run `./autogen.sh` before `./configure` as it is documented [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/24.x/doc/build-unix.md#to-build).

💬 LarryRuane commented on pull request "net: Allow inbound whitebind connections to more aggressively evict peers when slots are full":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27600#discussion_r1195757487)
Does RVO even apply here? I thought it applies to complex structures, a large vector being the canonical example, where we don't want to copy every element. But here we're just returning a `NodeId` which is a `int64_t`, wrapped by `std::optional`. I don't think there's any savings by moving instead of copying one of these.

💬 theuni commented on pull request "macOS: Bump minimum required runtime version and prepare for building with upstream LLVM":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27676#issuecomment-1550459263)
Pushed a test for `fixup_chains`, but I don't think it ever ran. @fanquake What sets `RUN_SECURITY_TESTS`?

⚠️ ddykeman1 opened an issue: "Mac osx 12.6.5 "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27681)
### Is there an existing issue for this?

- [X] I have searched the existing issues

### Current behaviour

I installed the new program it ran for 3 hrs and then I checked and said fatal error said to check logs there is no logs showing for this problem I uninstalled it and reinstalled a well as redownload it with the same out come no different
Did take a pic as it started and crashed
![IMG_20230516_184337383](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/assets/52932653/7aa98bec-7da5-4bb8-a385-a0794e4
...

💬 theuni commented on pull request "ci: Use `macos-ventura-xcode:14.1` image for "macOS native" task":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26388#issuecomment-1550484640)
As [seen here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27676#issuecomment-1550459263), this seems to have removed `RUN_SECURITY_TESTS`? Ping @hebasto

💬 Xekyo commented on pull request "Implement Mini version of BlockAssembler to calculate mining scores":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27021#issuecomment-1550491250)
Super, thanks for the review, @theStack. As I already have a follow-up PR with #26152, since this PR has three ACKs now, and all the open comments are nits referring to the tests, I would like to include those changes as a new commit in the follow-up #26152.

What do you think, @glozow?

💬 theStack commented on issue "Use muhash for assumeUTXO snapshot ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27669#issuecomment-1550522541)
Had similar thoughts that using muhash instead would be nice in order to avoid the chain rollback for AssumeUTXO hash reviewers. Not sure if this is a huge problem, but one funny side-effect of this would be that for a chainstate with _n_ coins, there are in theory _n!_ different serializations possible that all would pass as valid (compared to just one for `hash_serialized_2`), since the order of coins doesn't matter for muhash.

> For good measure we should also modify `gettxoutsetinfo` so
...

💬 Xekyo commented on pull request "Implement Mini version of BlockAssembler to calculate mining scores":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27021#issuecomment-1550595711)
> ACK [6b605b9](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/6b605b91c1faf2c7f7cc0c9d39b4fcfd66dc2965) modulo `miniminer_overlap` test.
>
> Not really blocking, I'm planning to go deeper later. And probably add some explanatory comments and code simplifications. I think that has a readability barrier that will be a maintenance issue moving forward.

Perhaps we can address that in #26152 as well

💬 Xekyo commented on pull request "Bump unconfirmed ancestor transactions to target feerate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26152#issuecomment-1550602703)
Rebased on #27021, need to rebase on master next, then will incorporate the follow-up nits from #27021

🤔 ishaanam reviewed a pull request: "wallet: improve IBD sync time by skipping block scanning prior birth time"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27469#pullrequestreview-1429618571)
Approach ACK, this looks good so far but I haven't reviewed the first commit yet.

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet: improve IBD sync time by skipping block scanning prior birth time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27469#discussion_r1195808323)
nit:
```suggestion
/** Updates wallet birth time if 'new_birth_time' is lower than m_birth_time*/
```

💬 ishaanam commented on pull request "wallet: improve IBD sync time by skipping block scanning prior birth time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27469#discussion_r1195809999)
Why is this check also done here if it is already done in `FirstKeyTimeChanged`?

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "net_processing: Drop m_recently_announced_invs bloom filter":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27675#discussion_r1195879972)
I mostly renamed it to make sure there'd be compiler errors anywhere that it didn't get updated, just in case some type conversion happened automatically.

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "net_processing: Drop m_recently_announced_invs bloom filter":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27675#discussion_r1195881028)
Yeah, this is broken as-is. My original idea was to add a timestamp to the `mapRelay` entries too, then it was to drop `mapRelay` and add `vExtraTxnForCompact`-relay, then I compromised by just doing it wrong...

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "Descriptor unit tests and simplifications":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24361#issuecomment-1550798295)
> Drafted for now given it's (maybe) waiting on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26076.

That one was merged last week.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "Mac osx 12.6.5 ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27681#issuecomment-1550799971)
Please check your debug.log for possible causes; Alternatively you can upload it here.

You can find the debug.log in your [data dir](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/files.md#data-directory-location).

Please be aware that the debug log might contain personally identifying information.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "Can't compile v24.0.1":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27680#issuecomment-1550801604)
Closing for now. Let us know if you have any other questions.

✅ MarcoFalke closed an issue: "Can't compile v24.0.1"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27680)

💬 S3RK commented on pull request "wallet: Have the wallet store the key for automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728#discussion_r1196058973)
nit: for the next ~~node~~test

💬 S3RK commented on pull request "wallet: Have the wallet store the key for automatically generated descriptors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26728#issuecomment-1550888614)
Code review ACK c79539fc20d902b5f9e098cc996c4e27c8e5b8c5

I plan to test this manually a bit later