1 2016-06-13 05:57:57	0|GitHub37|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3e4cf8fe2644...65a9d7dcdcb2
  2 2016-06-13 05:57:58	0|GitHub37|13bitcoin/06master 14980e7eb 15Cory Fields: depends: only build qt on linux for x86_64/x86
  3 2016-06-13 05:57:58	0|GitHub37|13bitcoin/06master 149d25362 15Cory Fields: build: add armhf/aarch64 gitian builds...
  4 2016-06-13 05:57:59	0|GitHub37|13bitcoin/06master 1465a9d7d 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8188: Add armhf/aarch64 gitian builds...
  5 2016-06-13 05:58:06	0|GitHub135|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8188: Add armhf/aarch64 gitian builds (06master...06arm-bins) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8188
  6 2016-06-13 09:19:19	0|GitHub163|13bitcoin/06master 14b0938a0 15fanquake: [trivial][doc] Use Debian 8.5 in the gitian-build guide
  7 2016-06-13 09:19:19	0|GitHub163|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/65a9d7dcdcb2...37c98307ac76
  8 2016-06-13 09:19:20	0|GitHub163|13bitcoin/06master 1437c9830 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8193: [trivial][doc] Use Debian 8.5 in the gitian-build guide...
  9 2016-06-13 09:19:29	0|GitHub17|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8193: [trivial][doc] Use Debian 8.5 in the gitian-build guide (06master...06gitian-debian-85) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8193
 10 2016-06-13 09:23:05	0|GitHub36|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #7622: Increase DEFAULT_BLOCK_MAX_SIZE to 1MB (06master...06increaseDefaultBlockSize) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7622
 11 2016-06-13 09:36:15	0|GitHub61|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 4 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/37c98307ac76...e1486eb95c50
 12 2016-06-13 09:36:16	0|GitHub61|13bitcoin/06master 144dc94d1 15Alex Morcos: Refactor CreateNewBlock to be a method of the BlockAssembler class
 13 2016-06-13 09:36:16	0|GitHub61|13bitcoin/06master 14a278764 15Alex Morcos: FIX: Account for txs already added to block in addPriorityTxs
 14 2016-06-13 09:36:17	0|GitHub61|13bitcoin/06master 14c2dd5a3 15Alex Morcos: FIX: correctly measure size of priority block
 15 2016-06-13 09:36:19	0|GitHub4|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #7598: Refactor CreateNewBlock to be a method of the BlockAssembler class (06master...06BlockAssembler) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7598
 16 2016-06-13 09:38:00	0|GitHub191|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 5 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e1486eb95c50...44c1b1c9bb54
 17 2016-06-13 09:38:01	0|GitHub191|13bitcoin/06master 14291f8aa 15mrbandrews: Continuing port of java comptool
 18 2016-06-13 09:38:01	0|GitHub191|13bitcoin/06master 148c9e681 15mrbandrews: Tests: Rework blockstore to avoid re-serialization.
 19 2016-06-13 09:38:02	0|GitHub191|13bitcoin/06master 1412c5a16 15mrbandrews: Catch exceptions from non-canonical encoding and print only to log
 20 2016-06-13 09:38:06	0|GitHub75|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8141: Continuing port of java comparison tool (06master...06ba-comptool) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8141
 21 2016-06-13 09:39:12	0|GitHub191|13bitcoin/06master 14384b99e 15MarcoFalke: [docUpdate git-subtree-check.sh README
 22 2016-06-13 09:39:12	0|GitHub191|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 1 new commit to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/384b99e4082cc90d7a92c31a7827ac2fbcfb2eee
 23 2016-06-13 09:39:16	0|MarcoFalke|fuck
 24 2016-06-13 09:39:40	0|MarcoFalke|this is bad
 25 2016-06-13 09:40:00	0|sipa|what happened.
 26 2016-06-13 09:40:02	0|sipa|?
 27 2016-06-13 09:40:16	0|MarcoFalke|GitHub pushed an unsigned commit
 28 2016-06-13 09:40:27	0|MarcoFalke|I used the web editor to fiddle around
 29 2016-06-13 09:42:25	0|MarcoFalke|Normally it would do it in my fork but since I have commit access it was doing it in the actual repo
 30 2016-06-13 09:44:02	0|sipa|i'd say force push to revert it, but you want to coordinate with wumpus who seems to be merging things
 31 2016-06-13 09:44:21	0|wumpus|I'll do it
 32 2016-06-13 09:44:24	0|MarcoFalke|wumpus: force push is disabled IIRC
 33 2016-06-13 09:44:35	0|wumpus|I know, I can override it
 34 2016-06-13 09:46:07	0|GitHub159|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj 04force-pushed 06master from 14384b99e to 1444c1b1c: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master
 35 2016-06-13 09:46:18	0|wumpus|back to 44c1b1c9bb54082625c7ad76af25473abf79f866
 36 2016-06-13 09:48:51	0|sipa|woah, number of issues/prs has exceeded 8192
 37 2016-06-13 09:49:45	0|btcdrak|sipa: LOL
 38 2016-06-13 09:59:15	0|sipa|i'd like to see some acks on 7749
 39 2016-06-13 10:00:18	0|sipa|(the last dependency for segwit)
 40 2016-06-13 10:07:29	0|wumpus|oh cool, github has a new per-branch setting "Restrict who can push to this branch"
 41 2016-06-13 10:08:29	0|wumpus|yes, I was going to look at that one next
 42 2016-06-13 10:11:38	0|wumpus|sipa: last power of 2 before #10000!
 43 2016-06-13 10:12:23	0|sipa|10000! is a big number :)
 44 2016-06-13 10:13:21	0|wumpus|tor is almost at 20000, then again, that project has been running for much longer
 45 2016-06-13 10:15:01	0|wumpus|trying to compute 10000! as double results in round-to-infinity
 46 2016-06-13 11:06:38	0|wumpus|luke-jr: now that it's possible to set committers per branch, it'd be possible to give you push access to old branches for maintenance
 47 2016-06-13 11:10:00	0|wumpus|https://help.github.com/articles/enabling-branch-restrictions/
 48 2016-06-13 11:11:40	0|btcdrak|nice feature from Github! though isnt some of the problem also about getting enough review on patches to older branches?
 49 2016-06-13 11:12:14	0|wumpus|well possibly, I mean that's up to the three people that actually use old releases
 50 2016-06-13 11:12:44	0|wumpus|:<
 51 2016-06-13 11:12:46	0|btcdrak|even for a maintained branch like 0.11, there isnt sufficient interest in backporting CSV despite the backport being done (and subsequently closed).
 52 2016-06-13 11:14:13	0|wumpus|well the developers working on master have no time or interest to maintain them, but if luke-jr wants to pick up that task that's ok with me
 53 2016-06-13 11:16:13	0|wumpus|I wonder if this also means that if  we give someone write access to the repository, but no push access to any branch, they can only open/close/edit issues and PRs but not the code
 54 2016-06-13 11:16:53	0|wumpus|fanquake may still be interested in that
 55 2016-06-13 11:35:55	0|fanquake|wumpus sorry I think I've missed something here. Interested in what?
 56 2016-06-13 11:36:16	0|wumpus|<wumpus> I wonder if this also means that if  we give someone write access to the repository, but no push access to any branch, they can only open/close/edit issues and PRs but not the code
 57 2016-06-13 11:36:32	0|wumpus|(refers to https://help.github.com/articles/enabling-branch-restrictions/)
 58 2016-06-13 11:37:09	0|fanquake|Ok, yes I would be interested in that; if it's possible, and the rest of the maintainers thought it was appropriate.
 59 2016-06-13 11:42:12	0|fanquake|Also, is the debug-split.sh that's being generated when compiling now meant to be ignored? Seems like it should be
 60 2016-06-13 11:47:11	0|GitHub67|[13bitcoin] 15fanquake opened pull request #8197: [trivial] Ignore split-debug.sh (06master...06ignore-split-debug) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8197
 61 2016-06-13 12:13:53	0|GitHub100|[13bitcoin] 15fanquake opened pull request #8198: [trivial] Sync ax_pthread with upstream draft4 (06master...06sync-pthread) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8198
 62 2016-06-13 12:19:04	0|wumpus|yes, I think that should be ignored, good catch
 63 2016-06-13 12:26:48	0|sipa|fundrawtransaction.py:
 64 2016-06-13 12:26:48	0|sipa|Initializing test directory /tmp/testerakbjk5/16
 65 2016-06-13 12:26:48	0|sipa|JSONRPC error: Insufficient funds
 66 2016-06-13 12:26:48	0|sipa|Mining blocks...
 67 2016-06-13 12:26:48	0|sipa|Stopping nodes
 68 2016-06-13 12:30:10	0|fanquake|sipa latest master? I can't recreate "fundrawtransaction.py | True   | 69 s"
 69 2016-06-13 12:31:32	0|sipa|seems to happen about 30% of the time
 70 2016-06-13 12:31:58	0|sipa|(this is in a branch with 7749 merged, but i don't think that's related)
 71 2016-06-13 12:33:37	0|sipa|5 out of 16 runs
 72 2016-06-13 12:39:41	0|fanquake|I'll run through a few more times, but I've got 9/9 passing.
 73 2016-06-13 12:48:22	0|fanquake|(just master)
 74 2016-06-13 12:48:52	0|sipa|trying to bisect
 75 2016-06-13 13:10:55	0|sipa|i'm seeing the problem as early as 761cddb
 76 2016-06-13 13:19:08	0|wumpus|you do throw away the cache between runs?
 77 2016-06-13 13:20:42	0|sipa|the cache is only used when running from rpc-tests, right, not when calling the test individually?
 78 2016-06-13 13:21:16	0|wumpus|oh, never knew that
 79 2016-06-13 13:21:27	0|sipa|if you're not sure about it, i better check
 80 2016-06-13 13:21:35	0|sipa|but the cache is inside the pull-tester directory
 81 2016-06-13 13:21:45	0|wumpus|I assumed the cache would always be used, if there is a cache directory in your current path
 82 2016-06-13 13:22:30	0|wumpus|I tend to have cache directories all over the place because I call the tests from different places :p
 83 2016-06-13 13:41:39	0|sdaftuar|i believe wumpus is right; at least it used to be that the cache would always be used if found, or created if not found (ie if you ran from a different place)
 84 2016-06-13 13:41:55	0|GitHub39|[13bitcoin] 15sipa opened pull request #8199: Avoid test bug introduced in #7967 (06master...06fixfund) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8199
 85 2016-06-13 13:42:09	0|sipa|well i used git bisect, and it reliably found the exact commit that introduced the test
 86 2016-06-13 13:42:21	0|sipa|i don't know where to look for a cache directory if there is one
 87 2016-06-13 13:42:42	0|sipa|i run the rpc test from root/qa/rpc-tests/, and there is no cache directory there
 88 2016-06-13 13:43:08	0|sdaftuar|hm.  me either!
 89 2016-06-13 13:44:48	0|sipa|hmm, i do have a root/cache directory
 90 2016-06-13 13:44:58	0|sipa|deleting that one and retrying with master
 91 2016-06-13 13:47:28	0|sdaftuar|oh, i think fundrawtransaction doesn't use a cached chain
 92 2016-06-13 13:47:47	0|sdaftuar|setup_clean_chain is set to true
 93 2016-06-13 13:48:21	0|sipa|i'm testing by running ./fundrawtransaction.py 8 times in parallel
 94 2016-06-13 13:50:06	0|sipa|it fails reliably that way
 95 2016-06-13 13:51:53	0|sdaftuar|strangely i can't get it to fail locally
 96 2016-06-13 13:52:09	0|sipa|i've seen the failure also once on travis
 97 2016-06-13 13:53:04	0|sdaftuar|do you know which line fails in the test, ie which invocation of fundrawtransaction?
 98 2016-06-13 13:53:18	0|sipa|JSONRPC error: Insufficient funds
 99 2016-06-13 13:53:19	0|sipa|File "/home/pw/git/bitcoin/qa/rpc-tests/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 144, in main
100 2016-06-13 13:53:22	0|sipa|self.run_test()
101 2016-06-13 13:53:24	0|sipa|File "./fundrawtransaction.py", line 684, in run_test
102 2016-06-13 13:53:27	0|sipa|result = self.nodes[3].fundrawtransaction(rawtx) # uses min_relay_tx_fee (set by settxfee)
103 2016-06-13 13:53:34	0|sdaftuar|hm the first one
104 2016-06-13 13:54:11	0|sdaftuar|that doesn't seem like a coin selection non-determinism, does it?
105 2016-06-13 13:56:32	0|GitHub162|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli opened pull request #8200: [Tests] Fix fundrawtransaction feerate test (06master...062016/06/fix_frt_test) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8200
106 2016-06-13 13:56:34	0|sipa|unsure, i haven't looked over the test
107 2016-06-13 13:56:46	0|jonasschnelli|^^ should fix it.
108 2016-06-13 13:56:59	0|jonasschnelli|I think the test tend to fail if you play with different input types.
109 2016-06-13 13:57:57	0|jonasschnelli|sipa, wait,.. you run into <sipa>	JSONRPC error: Insufficient funds?
110 2016-06-13 13:58:00	0|sdaftuar|sipa: jonasschnelli: if i print self.nodes[3].getbalance, i see a balance of 20
111 2016-06-13 13:58:14	0|sipa|i can add a print
112 2016-06-13 13:58:35	0|jonasschnelli|Caching issues? sipa: Do you test on current master?
113 2016-06-13 13:58:56	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: i have this problem on every commit ever since the test was introduced
114 2016-06-13 13:59:07	0|sdaftuar|jonasschnelli: i believe this test uses a initialize_chain_clean, so there should be no cache issues
115 2016-06-13 13:59:08	0|jonasschnelli|strange...
116 2016-06-13 13:59:27	0|jonasschnelli|I never saw travis reporting an issue there...
117 2016-06-13 13:59:36	0|sipa|it seems very rare on travis
118 2016-06-13 13:59:46	0|sipa|maybe something in my setup makes it happen more often
119 2016-06-13 13:59:53	0|jonasschnelli|`outputs = {self.nodes[2].getnewaddress() : 1}`
120 2016-06-13 13:59:58	0|sipa|note that i'm running the fundrawtransaction 8 time in parallel
121 2016-06-13 14:00:02	0|jonasschnelli|could the missing "1.0" be the issue?
122 2016-06-13 14:00:09	0|jonasschnelli|1.0 instead of 1
123 2016-06-13 14:00:11	0|sipa|no
124 2016-06-13 14:00:18	0|sipa|that wouldn't cause a problem only 30% of the time
125 2016-06-13 14:00:27	0|jonasschnelli|Hmm.. maybe a locked input?
126 2016-06-13 14:01:25	0|jonasschnelli|I think a self.sync_all()/self.nodes[0].generate(1) might fix it.
127 2016-06-13 14:02:10	0|sdaftuar|jonasschnelli: i was just thinking the same thing...
128 2016-06-13 14:02:18	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: going to try that
129 2016-06-13 14:02:27	0|jonasschnelli|I'll update the PR
130 2016-06-13 14:02:42	0|sipa|
131 2016-06-13 14:02:42	0|sipa|inputs = []
132 2016-06-13 14:02:42	0|sipa|outputs = {self.nodes[2].getnewaddress() : 1}
133 2016-06-13 14:02:42	0|sipa|self.nodes[0].sendrawtransaction(signedtx["hex"])
134 2016-06-13 14:02:42	0|sipa|+        self.sync_all()
135 2016-06-13 14:02:46	0|sipa|is what i'm trying
136 2016-06-13 14:03:10	0|sdaftuar|i think you want to do self.nodes[0].generate(1)
137 2016-06-13 14:03:15	0|sdaftuar|and then sync again
138 2016-06-13 14:04:33	0|jonasschnelli|Better check the PRs code so if it fixes the issue, we can merge that.
139 2016-06-13 14:05:49	0|sipa|just sync is not enough
140 2016-06-13 14:06:44	0|sipa|worse, with just a sync, it fails 100% of the time...
141 2016-06-13 14:07:03	0|sdaftuar|sipa: !
142 2016-06-13 14:09:01	0|sdaftuar|but... is it failing in the sync itself?
143 2016-06-13 14:09:07	0|sdaftuar|or with the same error as before?
144 2016-06-13 14:09:22	0|sipa|same error as before
145 2016-06-13 14:09:30	0|sipa|including a generate: success
146 2016-06-13 14:09:46	0|sdaftuar|ok that's good to hear at least.
147 2016-06-13 14:10:10	0|sdaftuar|the conjecture was that earlier invocations to fundrawtransaction selected coins needed for the failing test... so mining those transactions makes more inputs available
148 2016-06-13 14:10:37	0|GitHub93|[13bitcoin] 15sipa closed pull request #8199: Avoid test bug introduced in #7967 (06master...06fixfund) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8199
149 2016-06-13 14:14:51	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: Re bip32: You mentioned if users set -usehd=1 it should detect and abort when running on a non HD wallet.
150 2016-06-13 14:14:59	0|jonasschnelli|But `-usehd` default value is 1
151 2016-06-13 14:15:19	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: you can still distinguish between explicitly set and not
152 2016-06-13 14:15:34	0|jonasschnelli|hmm.. right. Thats a point.
153 2016-06-13 14:15:40	0|sipa|mapArgs.count('-usehd')
154 2016-06-13 14:15:44	0|sipa|or so
155 2016-06-13 14:27:34	0|MarcoFalke|SoftSetBoolArg
156 2016-06-13 14:27:49	0|sipa|that's not enough
157 2016-06-13 14:27:55	0|sipa|unless we make it a tristate
158 2016-06-13 14:31:03	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: its here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8035/commits/71ff55fcc2245e03c786d7e0312755e812d9de8e
159 2016-06-13 15:32:00	0|MarcoFalke|When the bip32 stuff is merged, we should make sure the test framework still runs the legacy wallet sometimes
160 2016-06-13 17:18:35	0|luke-jr|[11:16:13] <wumpus> I wonder if this also means that if  we give someone write access to the repository, but no push access to any branch, they can only open/close/edit issues and PRs but not the code <-- that would be handy
161 2016-06-13 17:19:51	0|luke-jr|btcdrak: stable branches virtually never get enough testing for a release, but it's sometimes possible to do it as a branch with the "not well-tested" caveat
162 2016-06-13 17:34:38	0|GitHub172|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 7 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/44c1b1c9bb54...be9711e59707
163 2016-06-13 17:34:39	0|GitHub172|13bitcoin/06master 143764dec 15Pieter Wuille: Keep addrman's nService bits consistent with outbound observations
164 2016-06-13 17:34:39	0|GitHub172|13bitcoin/06master 14fc83f18 15Pieter Wuille: Verify that outbound connections have expected services
165 2016-06-13 17:34:40	0|GitHub172|13bitcoin/06master 145e7ab16 15Pieter Wuille: Only store and connect to NODE_NETWORK nodes
166 2016-06-13 17:34:48	0|GitHub8|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #7749: Enforce expected outbound services (06master...06checkservices) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7749
167 2016-06-13 17:50:20	0|GitHub142|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #8201: [qa] fundrawtransaction: Fix race, assert amounts (06master...06Mf1606-qaFundraw) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8201
168 2016-06-13 19:20:34	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: is testnetbitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch running a filter-capable dns seed?
169 2016-06-13 19:20:51	0|sipa|dig x5.testnetbitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch gives no results
170 2016-06-13 19:25:39	0|sipa|nor does testnet-seed.bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch