1 2016-04-10 05:27:42	0|michagogo|If anyone's around, my rc2 sigs have been up since Friday
 2 2016-04-10 05:28:51	0|michagogo|They're in the PR that cfields closed... I should really change my script to comment if there's already a PR
 3 2016-04-10 05:30:01	0|luke-jr_|gmaxwell: is there any crypto/security problem if we were to use SHA256(witness script) rather than SHA256d(witness script) for anything? (thinking P2SH^2..)
 4 2016-04-10 07:42:51	0|sipa|luke-jr_: you mean the other way around, i guess
 5 2016-04-10 07:45:56	0|luke-jr_|sipa: no, I mean to use SHA256(program) in the "address" (or equivalent) rather than SHA256d(program) which is fixed on the consensus protocol
 6 2016-04-10 10:09:03	0|luke-jr_|oh great, looks like AT&T is going to spam me with "malware infection" emails every day I run my Bitcoin node.
 7 2016-04-10 10:09:26	0|luke-jr_|and trying to reply bounces because their RBL is apparently incompetent as well
 8 2016-04-10 10:33:42	0|GitHub0|[13bitcoin] 15btcdrak opened pull request #7852: [0.12] Add missing reference to release notes (060.12...06bip113) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7852
 9 2016-04-10 15:25:38	0|GitHub55|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #7853: [qa] py2: Unfiddle strings into bytes explicitly (06master...06Mf1604-qaBytes) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7853
10 2016-04-10 15:26:09	0|Chris_Stewart_5|Can some one explain to me why we can sometimes have 5 byte numbers in Script? When is it ok to have numbers larger than 4 bytes?
11 2016-04-10 15:26:19	0|Chris_Stewart_5|The context I'm looking at is this test case in script_valid.json
12 2016-04-10 15:26:21	0|Chris_Stewart_5|"2147483647", "1ADD 2147483648 EQUAL", "P2SH,STRICTENC", "We can do math on 4-byte integers, and compare 5-byte ones"
13 2016-04-10 15:27:53	0|sipa|the (historically defined) rules are that arithmetic operators don't accept inputs larger than 4 bytes
14 2016-04-10 15:28:13	0|sipa|but adding 2 4-byte integers together may result in one that takes 5 bytes to represent
15 2016-04-10 15:29:08	0|sipa|and stack elements are only restricted to 520 bytes
16 2016-04-10 15:29:37	0|sipa|so while you can't feed the output of such an addition to another addition for example, you can feed it to other operators that don't interpret it as a number
17 2016-04-10 15:31:35	0|Chris_Stewart_5|Hmm so basically no arithmetic operation accepts a number > 4 bytes?
18 2016-04-10 15:34:36	0|sipa|indeed
19 2016-04-10 15:42:48	0|GitHub139|[13bitcoin] 15sipa opened pull request #7854: [0.12 backport] Various script_tests improvements from master and #7818 (060.12...06refactorscriptests_12) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7854
20 2016-04-10 15:50:44	0|Chris_Stewart_5|sipa: Does that pull request force the script tests to make sure it failed with the correct error?
21 2016-04-10 15:53:00	0|Chris_Stewart_5|also what is the reasoning behind combing script_valid & script_invalid? From a outsiders perspective it is much easier to figure what is going on having two individual files
22 2016-04-10 15:53:08	0|Chris_Stewart_5|combining*
23 2016-04-10 15:54:58	0|sipa|Chris_Stewart_5: i disagree
24 2016-04-10 15:55:34	0|sipa|almost all tests are doing two nearly identical tests, but with one slight change, where one succeeds and one fails
25 2016-04-10 15:55:46	0|sipa|the interesting part is knowing what makes it succeed or fail
26 2016-04-10 15:56:02	0|sipa|having to look at two different files makes this completely nonobvious
27 2016-04-10 16:08:48	0|Chris_Stewart_5|Actually yeah the more I look at it you are right. Really like the specific script errors.
28 2016-04-10 17:42:30	0|michagogo|cfields_: is there any *downside* to having a set of rc1 in there too?
29 2016-04-10 17:42:44	0|michagogo|Now I need to massage my tree and reset and stuff :-(
30 2016-04-10 17:43:09	0|michagogo|(And force-push etc)
31 2016-04-10 17:43:35	0|michagogo|(To avoid breaking anything my scripts all use --ff-only)
32 2016-04-10 17:55:19	0|btcdrak|michagogo: no, the rc failed, there is zero point building it.
33 2016-04-10 17:55:44	0|michagogo|btcdrak: I get that
34 2016-04-10 17:55:55	0|michagogo|But given that the sigs exist…
35 2016-04-10 17:56:27	0|michagogo|I don't see a significant downside to pulling them in anyway
36 2016-04-10 17:56:49	0|michagogo|OTOH this way forces me to fetch, reset, force push, etc
37 2016-04-10 18:48:08	0|GitHub187|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #7855: [doc] gitian: Replace precise with trusty (06master...06Mf1604-docGitian) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7855
38 2016-04-10 20:24:28	0|gmaxwell|sipa: ctaes passes https://github.com/TrustInSoft/tis-interpreter  (an interperter for C based on a formalization of the language that detects undefined operations)
39 2016-04-10 20:26:25	0|sipa|ah, nice