💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2932802336)
reACK a189d636184b1c28fa4a325b56c1fab8f44527b1
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2932802336)
reACK a189d636184b1c28fa4a325b56c1fab8f44527b1
💬 achow101 commented on issue "Unusual "Wallet requires newer version" Error with wallet.dat on macOS, Even with Older Client":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2932808428)
@l3x3l I started writing an alternative to pywallet that should be able to achieve what you want to do: https://github.com/achow101/wallet-manipulator
You can install it by using `pip install .` and then the command `wallet-manipulator <path to file> export --importable privkeys` should give you the private keys in the wallet that can be imported into a new wallet with `importdescriptors`.
It would also be useful to know what the version of the wallet is. You can get that with `wallet-manipula
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2932808428)
@l3x3l I started writing an alternative to pywallet that should be able to achieve what you want to do: https://github.com/achow101/wallet-manipulator
You can install it by using `pip install .` and then the command `wallet-manipulator <path to file> export --importable privkeys` should give you the private keys in the wallet that can be imported into a new wallet with `importdescriptors`.
It would also be useful to know what the version of the wallet is. You can get that with `wallet-manipula
...
💬 theuni commented on pull request "depends: Bump boost to 1.88.0 and use new CMake buildsystem":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32665#discussion_r2122308373)
`multi_index` drags in a ton of header-only libs, CMake takes care of installing its dependencies. Is tuple a problem for some reason?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32665#discussion_r2122308373)
`multi_index` drags in a ton of header-only libs, CMake takes care of installing its dependencies. Is tuple a problem for some reason?
💬 theuni commented on pull request "depends: Bump boost to 1.88.0 and use new CMake buildsystem":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32665#discussion_r2122313091)
That include should be perfectly safe to remove, btw. It's included by (at least) `boost/multi_index/sequenced_index.hpp`.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32665#discussion_r2122313091)
That include should be perfectly safe to remove, btw. It's included by (at least) `boost/multi_index/sequenced_index.hpp`.
💬 l3x3l commented on issue "Unusual "Wallet requires newer version" Error with wallet.dat on macOS, Even with Older Client":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2932876340)
Wow! Thank you. I’ll start reading your application and follow up with
what happens next.
l3x3l
>--o--<
On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 5:01 PM Ava Chow ***@***.***> wrote:
> *achow101* left a comment (bitcoin/bitcoin#32548)
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2932808428>
>
> @l3x3l <https://github.com/l3x3l> I started writing an alternative to
> pywallet that should be able to achieve what you want to do:
> https://github.com/achow101/wallet-manipulator
>
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2932876340)
Wow! Thank you. I’ll start reading your application and follow up with
what happens next.
l3x3l
>--o--<
On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 5:01 PM Ava Chow ***@***.***> wrote:
> *achow101* left a comment (bitcoin/bitcoin#32548)
> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2932808428>
>
> @l3x3l <https://github.com/l3x3l> I started writing an alternative to
> pywallet that should be able to achieve what you want to do:
> https://github.com/achow101/wallet-manipulator
>
...
💬 BitcoinMechanic commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933103177)
reNACK. 100 kilobyte OP RETURNS add absolutely nothing to Bitcoin.
They'd have to actually be happening out of band currently for the concerns about fee estimation/block propagation/mining centralization to actually be relevant here, even then they'd be massively overblown.
There are currently almost no OP RETURNs greater than 80 bytes. All this PR will do is open up another spam-highway along a route that is thankfully not practical with this filter left alone like it should be.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933103177)
reNACK. 100 kilobyte OP RETURNS add absolutely nothing to Bitcoin.
They'd have to actually be happening out of band currently for the concerns about fee estimation/block propagation/mining centralization to actually be relevant here, even then they'd be massively overblown.
There are currently almost no OP RETURNs greater than 80 bytes. All this PR will do is open up another spam-highway along a route that is thankfully not practical with this filter left alone like it should be.
💬 1440000bytes commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933108201)
> reNACK. 100 kilobyte OP RETURNS add absolutely nothing to Bitcoin.
NACK doesn't need to be reposted if there is no new information added in the rationale. ACKs are reposted because they are linked with commits and become stale after rebase or update.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933108201)
> reNACK. 100 kilobyte OP RETURNS add absolutely nothing to Bitcoin.
NACK doesn't need to be reposted if there is no new information added in the rationale. ACKs are reposted because they are linked with commits and become stale after rebase or update.
💬 l3x3l commented on issue "Unusual "Wallet requires newer version" Error with wallet.dat on macOS, Even with Older Client":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2933149392)
OK @achow101
This is the error i got:
pipx install .
Fatal error from pip prevented installation. Full pip output in file:
/Users/mac/.local/pipx/logs/cmd_2025-06-02_20.21.39_pip_errors.log
pip seemed to fail to build package:
secp256k1<0.15.0,>=0.14.0
Some possibly relevant errors from pip install:
error: subprocess-exited-with-error
Error installing wallet-manipulator from spec
'/Users/mac/walletman/wallet-manipulator-main'.
I also tried to install your application using a vir
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2933149392)
OK @achow101
This is the error i got:
pipx install .
Fatal error from pip prevented installation. Full pip output in file:
/Users/mac/.local/pipx/logs/cmd_2025-06-02_20.21.39_pip_errors.log
pip seemed to fail to build package:
secp256k1<0.15.0,>=0.14.0
Some possibly relevant errors from pip install:
error: subprocess-exited-with-error
Error installing wallet-manipulator from spec
'/Users/mac/walletman/wallet-manipulator-main'.
I also tried to install your application using a vir
...
💬 achow101 commented on issue "Unusual "Wallet requires newer version" Error with wallet.dat on macOS, Even with Older Client":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2933241022)
> pip seemed to fail to build package: secp256k1<0.15.0,>=0.14.0
>
> [...]
>
> × Getting requirements to build wheel did not run successfully. │ exit code: 1 ╰─> [1 lines of output] 'pkg-config' is required to install this package. Please see the README for details. [end of output]
It looks like there was an issue installing the secp256k1 bindings. You'll need to make sure the packages listed at https://github.com/rustyrussell/secp256k1-py?tab=readme-ov-file#installation-with-compilation are
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32548#issuecomment-2933241022)
> pip seemed to fail to build package: secp256k1<0.15.0,>=0.14.0
>
> [...]
>
> × Getting requirements to build wheel did not run successfully. │ exit code: 1 ╰─> [1 lines of output] 'pkg-config' is required to install this package. Please see the README for details. [end of output]
It looks like there was an issue installing the secp256k1 bindings. You'll need to make sure the packages listed at https://github.com/rustyrussell/secp256k1-py?tab=readme-ov-file#installation-with-compilation are
...
💬 BitcoinMechanic commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933337911)
Sure, but I'm still marked as "Concept ACK" here for some reason?
> > reNACK. 100 kilobyte OP RETURNS add absolutely nothing to Bitcoin.
>
> NACK doesn't need to be reposted if there is no new information added in the rationale. ACKs are reposted because they are linked with commits and become stale after rebase or update.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933337911)
Sure, but I'm still marked as "Concept ACK" here for some reason?
> > reNACK. 100 kilobyte OP RETURNS add absolutely nothing to Bitcoin.
>
> NACK doesn't need to be reposted if there is no new information added in the rationale. ACKs are reposted because they are linked with commits and become stale after rebase or update.
💬 1440000bytes commented on pull request "policy: uncap datacarrier by default":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933425115)
> Sure, but I'm still marked as "Concept ACK" here for some reason?
Probably the bot misunderstood your previous [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933103177) based on the [regex](https://github.com/maflcko/DrahtBot/blob/c368f3a5257e7bf16ba82582556bf950ef97c629/webhook_features/src/features/summary_comment.rs#L444) used.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933425115)
> Sure, but I'm still marked as "Concept ACK" here for some reason?
Probably the bot misunderstood your previous [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32406#issuecomment-2933103177) based on the [regex](https://github.com/maflcko/DrahtBot/blob/c368f3a5257e7bf16ba82582556bf950ef97c629/webhook_features/src/features/summary_comment.rs#L444) used.
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#issuecomment-2933458278)
@bigspider OS (firmware) version 2.4.2. I tried removing and reinstalling Bitcoin Test, but that didn't bump the version. Will await your update. So you're testing on mainnet then? :-)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#issuecomment-2933458278)
@bigspider OS (firmware) version 2.4.2. I tried removing and reinstalling Bitcoin Test, but that didn't bump the version. Will await your update. So you're testing on mainnet then? :-)
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: Return normalized descriptor in parent_descs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32594#issuecomment-2933471621)
re-utACK 0def84d407
"vcpkg install failed" on Windows CI seems unrelated.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32594#issuecomment-2933471621)
re-utACK 0def84d407
"vcpkg install failed" on Windows CI seems unrelated.
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add bitcoin-{node,gui} to release binaries for IPC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31802#discussion_r2122697512)
Will do if I need to retouch.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31802#discussion_r2122697512)
Will do if I need to retouch.
✅ maflcko closed a pull request: "uint256 cxx-20 constexpr patch"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32663)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32663)
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "uint256 cxx-20 constexpr patch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32663#issuecomment-2933481510)
Closing for now. Looks like this was opened by accident.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32663#issuecomment-2933481510)
Closing for now. Looks like this was opened by accident.
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "policy: make pathological transactions packed with legacy sigops non-standard":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32521#issuecomment-2933483080)
re-ACK abd0749fae
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32521#issuecomment-2933483080)
re-ACK abd0749fae
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Drop unused `#include <boost/operators.hpp>`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32668#issuecomment-2933488025)
lgtm ACK 1e09c00239dafe7e9fa4f4d3f0d80c07bb7120bf
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32668#issuecomment-2933488025)
lgtm ACK 1e09c00239dafe7e9fa4f4d3f0d80c07bb7120bf
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "refactor: Drop unused `#include <boost/operators.hpp>`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32668#issuecomment-2933495508)
There are still some places where it is incorrectly suggested, but this seems unrelated:
```
[19:19:20.209] /ci_container_base/src/node/miner.cpp should add these lines:
[19:19:20.209] #include <boost/multi_index/detail/bidir_node_iterator.hpp> // for operator==
[19:19:20.209] #include <boost/operators.hpp> // for operator!=
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32668#issuecomment-2933495508)
There are still some places where it is incorrectly suggested, but this seems unrelated:
```
[19:19:20.209] /ci_container_base/src/node/miner.cpp should add these lines:
[19:19:20.209] #include <boost/multi_index/detail/bidir_node_iterator.hpp> // for operator==
[19:19:20.209] #include <boost/operators.hpp> // for operator!=
💬 maflcko commented on pull request "index: Fix coinstats overflow and introduce index versioning":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30469#discussion_r2122723920)
Deleting the folder right away should be fine, too. (This is what this pull is doing?) An alternative would be to delay the deletion until the next major release and keep the old data for one release.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30469#discussion_r2122723920)
Deleting the folder right away should be fine, too. (This is what this pull is doing?) An alternative would be to delay the deletion until the next major release and keep the old data for one release.