1 2016-09-13 00:47:47	0|GitHub12|[13bitcoin] 15theuni opened pull request #8707: net: fix maxuploadtarget setting (06master...06fix-maxupload) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8707
  2 2016-09-13 01:09:58	0|dcousens|Giszmo: hey mate you around?
  3 2016-09-13 01:10:06	0|dcousens|nvm, PM
  4 2016-09-13 02:00:58	0|GitHub101|[13bitcoin] 15theuni opened pull request #8708: net: have CConnman handle message sending (06master...06connman-send) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8708
  5 2016-09-13 02:31:26	0|GitHub140|[13bitcoin] 15rebroad opened pull request #8709: Allow filterclear messages for enabling TX relay only. (06master...06AllowFilterclear) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8709
  6 2016-09-13 08:18:50	0|wumpus|do we really need a zillion pulls updating copyright messages :/
  7 2016-09-13 08:21:54	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: heh. Indeed.
  8 2016-09-13 08:23:17	0|wumpus|omg #8653 tells people building for windows to disable hardening :(
  9 2016-09-13 08:24:02	0|wumpus|any pulls that I should review that make me happy instead of depressed?
 10 2016-09-13 08:27:15	0|jonasschnelli|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8653 is indeed silly...
 11 2016-09-13 08:27:36	0|jonasschnelli|Can't you not just use a PPA with a mingw compiler that suppors c++11 including threads?
 12 2016-09-13 08:27:58	0|wumpus|why do the only people with an actual clue about security on windows seem to be the blackhats that try to steal your coins
 13 2016-09-13 08:28:09	0|jonasschnelli|haha
 14 2016-09-13 08:28:12	0|wumpus|well switching to a posix-compliant compiler is not silly
 15 2016-09-13 08:28:28	0|wumpus|although it' a bit weird that it is needed
 16 2016-09-13 08:28:55	0|wumpus|it's working around a mingw bug indeed
 17 2016-09-13 08:29:58	0|jonasschnelli|I never had problems on any of my machines crosscompiling with minwg even after the c++11 switch...
 18 2016-09-13 08:30:18	0|wumpus|apparently the non-POSIX version doesn't give you c++11 synchronization, but piling on a posix emulation layer is probably not ideal either
 19 2016-09-13 08:30:21	0|jonasschnelli|I guess per default it installs the posix comp. mingw32-gcc/g++
 20 2016-09-13 08:30:37	0|wumpus|I've had no issues at all either
 21 2016-09-13 08:30:48	0|wumpus|and have built for windows on 16.04
 22 2016-09-13 08:31:07	0|jonasschnelli|But why is the --disable-hardenin required?
 23 2016-09-13 08:31:13	0|wumpus|so either it installs the posix one by default, or this is a new problem
 24 2016-09-13 08:31:25	0|wumpus|I don't know, ask the guy, seems like really bad advice
 25 2016-09-13 08:31:41	0|wumpus|'our security system reports a problem sir'.. 'just disable it, it must be a false alarm'
 26 2016-09-13 08:31:43	0|jonasschnelli|Yes. The advice comes also without a concrete reason...
 27 2016-09-13 08:31:53	0|jonasschnelli|"You may also need to disable..."
 28 2016-09-13 08:31:57	0|wumpus|heh.
 29 2016-09-13 08:32:38	0|wumpus|I understand lazy developers, but being lazy with security issues areound bitcoin is a deadly sin
 30 2016-09-13 08:35:29	0|GitHub32|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 10 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/2a0836f6d5e7...7e9ab9555cab
 31 2016-09-13 08:35:30	0|GitHub32|13bitcoin/06master 146edf2fd 15nomnombtc: add gen-manpages.sh description to README.md
 32 2016-09-13 08:35:30	0|GitHub32|13bitcoin/06master 14d2cd9c0 15nomnombtc: add script to generate manpages with help2man
 33 2016-09-13 08:35:31	0|GitHub32|13bitcoin/06master 14eb5643b 15nomnombtc: add autogenerated manpages by help2man
 34 2016-09-13 08:35:41	0|GitHub42|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8608: Install manpages via make install, also add some autogenerated manpages (06master...06man_automake2) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8608
 35 2016-09-13 08:45:05	0|Eliel|wumpus: I have this theory that there's not an actual shortage of people who have an actual clue about windows security but the motivations for actually learning about it are because they think the skill will make them money, so unless you're willing to pay a lot, it's not generally available.
 36 2016-09-13 08:47:38	0|wumpus|Eliel: yes, that's how my reasoning goes, too. One popular way to make a lot of money from knowing windows internals is exploiting them or working for companies that sell add-on security products, but helping secure open source software is not one of them at least
 37 2016-09-13 08:48:57	0|wumpus|it's a different kind of culture, in Linux people show that they know about e.g. kernel internals by working on them in public, in windows it's all much more hush hush
 38 2016-09-13 08:50:43	0|midnightmagic|the Sysinternals guys (used to?) do *incredible* workshops
 39 2016-09-13 08:50:45	0|wumpus|I'm sure an issue "ASLR doesn't seem to work properly on " Linux/*BSD or even MacOSX would be solved in a day
 40 2016-09-13 08:51:14	0|wumpus|for windows you get one reply from a clueless user 'look at the DLL flags' .. .yea, we hadn't thought of that yet
 41 2016-09-13 08:51:57	0|wumpus|yes the sysinternals guys are extrememly clueful, too clueful to be allowed to exist outside Microsoft so they were bought up :)
 42 2016-09-13 08:55:50	0|luke-jr|jonasschnelli: being able to build from source is important; it's not enough to just have hacks that work for gitian
 43 2016-09-13 08:56:16	0|wumpus|which 'hacks that work for gitian'?
 44 2016-09-13 08:56:26	0|jonasschnelli|Yes. Please elaborate... :)
 45 2016-09-13 08:56:52	0|jonasschnelli|As far as i know we are using the default unpatched mingw compiler in out ubuntu vm
 46 2016-09-13 08:56:55	0|midnightmagic|<3 the sysinternals guys. very cool what they do. srsly, if they have workshops, attend them, just being around them makes you smarter. :)
 47 2016-09-13 08:57:42	0|dcousens|wumpus: it doesn't seem that GetNextWorkRequired was called with a NULL argument since 2010 when pIndexBest =NULL was the default in main.cpp
 48 2016-09-13 08:57:53	0|dcousens|but, I haven't checked *every* commit since then :S
 49 2016-09-13 08:58:36	0|dcousens|I'd hazard it stopped having that oppurtunity when pindexBest was refactored out
 50 2016-09-13 08:59:44	0|wumpus|dcousens: then an assert makes some sense; although in a more general sense we do use assert too much for invalid input handling
 51 2016-09-13 09:00:14	0|dcousens|wumpus: its probably just an indication we should use more references rather than pointers? (unless the aim is to be C compatible)
 52 2016-09-13 09:00:16	0|wumpus|though an assertion crash is absolutely preferable to a SIGSEGV due to a null pointer
 53 2016-09-13 09:01:06	0|dcousens|to me,  the assertion just indicates, we're 99% this doesn't happen,  but not 100% sure enough to dereference at the call site
 54 2016-09-13 09:01:13	0|wumpus|yes
 55 2016-09-13 09:01:31	0|wumpus|I didn't mean that as an argument againt your specific change
 56 2016-09-13 09:01:45	0|dcousens|wumpus: oh I know, I agree with you
 57 2016-09-13 09:03:16	0|wumpus|using references would indeed avoid the issue in this case
 58 2016-09-13 09:03:39	0|GitHub125|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7e9ab9555cab...4ced5de71d4d
 59 2016-09-13 09:03:40	0|GitHub125|13bitcoin/06master 145547aeb 15instagibbs: p2psegwit.py transaction is rejected due to premature witness not size
 60 2016-09-13 09:03:40	0|GitHub125|13bitcoin/06master 14bc1d1f2 15instagibbs: Update p2p-segwit.py to reflect correct AskFor behavior
 61 2016-09-13 09:03:41	0|GitHub125|13bitcoin/06master 144ced5de 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8528: Update p2p-segwit.py to reflect correct behavior...
 62 2016-09-13 09:03:49	0|GitHub57|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8528: Update p2p-segwit.py to reflect correct behavior (06master...06rejectsw) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8528
 63 2016-09-13 09:05:30	0|GitHub197|13bitcoin/06master 1446606af 15BtcDrak: Update btcdrak signing key
 64 2016-09-13 09:05:30	0|GitHub197|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/4ced5de71d4d...256215244105
 65 2016-09-13 09:05:31	0|GitHub197|13bitcoin/06master 142562152 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8662: Update btcdrak signing key...
 66 2016-09-13 09:05:40	0|GitHub118|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8662: Update btcdrak signing key (06master...06updatekey) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8662
 67 2016-09-13 09:06:16	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: as far as I know we're using an unpatched compiler for gitian win32/64 building too; I dont think we do any specific hacks to get it to build/run
 68 2016-09-13 09:07:56	0|wumpus|well there is one hack to zero the heap during compilation to work around an issue in 14.04's mingw gcc compiler where four random heap bytes leak into the executable, but that's only required for determinism
 69 2016-09-13 09:08:57	0|wumpus|so yes there are some hacks for determinism, someone building from source for themselves can safely skip them, that's why they're not described in doc/build-*.md
 70 2016-09-13 09:13:39	0|wumpus|disabling hardening is advice you should never give anyone in good conscience though
 71 2016-09-13 09:16:26	0|GitHub142|13bitcoin/06master 141d635ae 15rodasmith: fix op order to append first alert
 72 2016-09-13 09:16:26	0|GitHub142|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/256215244105...39ac1ec64264
 73 2016-09-13 09:16:27	0|GitHub142|13bitcoin/06master 1439ac1ec 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8697: fix op order to append first alert...
 74 2016-09-13 09:16:37	0|GitHub145|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8697: fix op order to append first alert (06master...06fix-op-order-1st-alert) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8697
 75 2016-09-13 09:20:31	0|wumpus|so is https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8699 an intermediate measure for 0.13.1 or does the `createwitnessaddress` command need to disappear forever?
 76 2016-09-13 09:20:57	0|dcousens|wumpus: my understanding was it was for testing,  but has no purpose in mainnet?
 77 2016-09-13 09:21:26	0|wumpus|right, so it should never have made it into a release at all, and needs to be removed now?
 78 2016-09-13 09:21:59	0|wumpus|do people still use it for testing or is there a better alternative?
 79 2016-09-13 09:22:34	0|wumpus|apparently the RPC tests don't use it otherwise it couldn't be removed without affecting the tests
 80 2016-09-13 09:24:13	0|dcousens|wumpus: not sure about current testing, my understanding is the RPC now understand witness scripts?
 81 2016-09-13 09:24:53	0|dcousens|not sure about the wallet code, haven't used it in terms of segwit tbh
 82 2016-09-13 09:35:49	0|GitHub171|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 4 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/39ac1ec64264...37ac67816afb
 83 2016-09-13 09:35:50	0|GitHub171|13bitcoin/06master 1405fa823 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: wallet: Add BIP125 comment for MAXINT-1/-2 behavior
 84 2016-09-13 09:35:50	0|GitHub171|13bitcoin/06master 14152f45b 15Peter Todd: Add option to opt into full-RBF when sending funds
 85 2016-09-13 09:35:51	0|GitHub171|13bitcoin/06master 1486726d8 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Rename `-optintofullrbf` option to `-walletrbf`...
 86 2016-09-13 09:35:59	0|GitHub29|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8601: Add option to opt into full-RBF when sending funds (rebase, original by petertodd) (06master...062016_08_full_rbf_option) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8601
 87 2016-09-13 09:45:16	0|GitHub97|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #8710: [0.13.1] qt Backports (060.13...06Mf1609-qtBackports) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8710
 88 2016-09-13 09:55:00	0|dcousens|wumpus: IIRC the txoutsbyaddress isn't utxos byaddress
 89 2016-09-13 09:55:10	0|dcousens|its just txos, throughout history
 90 2016-09-13 09:55:44	0|dcousens|aka, give me the balance of address X @ blockheight 233000
 91 2016-09-13 09:56:04	0|dcousens|atleast, that was my impression
 92 2016-09-13 09:57:26	0|dcousens|nvm
 93 2016-09-13 09:57:29	0|dcousens|my impression was wrong
 94 2016-09-13 09:59:51	0|wumpus|no, IIRC it ignores history and just gives you current utxo, that's what makes it interesting
 95 2016-09-13 10:00:55	0|GitHub114|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/37ac67816afb...7fe6c5c99370
 96 2016-09-13 10:00:56	0|GitHub114|13bitcoin/06master 14438e94d 15whythat: remove root test directory for RPC tests
 97 2016-09-13 10:00:56	0|GitHub114|13bitcoin/06master 14c62cc4e 15whythat: fix path for bak file
 98 2016-09-13 10:00:57	0|GitHub114|13bitcoin/06master 147fe6c5c 15MarcoFalke: Merge #8652: [qa]: remove root test directory for RPC tests...
 99 2016-09-13 10:01:10	0|GitHub174|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #8652: [qa]: remove root test directory for RPC tests (06master...06cleanup) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8652
100 2016-09-13 11:19:40	0|jl2012|wumpus: I think nothing in the RPC test is using createwitnessaddress, and that could be done with 2 lines of python code
101 2016-09-13 11:19:57	0|wumpus|right, nothing is using it
102 2016-09-13 13:55:20	0|jonasschnelli|hmm... NotifyHeaderTip is firing during IBD for every block connected to the main chain... I though it should only fire when a new header gets append to the headers-chain.
103 2016-09-13 13:55:21	0|jonasschnelli|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/39ac1ec6426447b924052c2da3f80e0220c308c3/src/main.cpp#L3004
104 2016-09-13 14:01:20	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: that's what it does
105 2016-09-13 14:01:43	0|jonasschnelli|For the overlay I'm working on, a notification of the header-chain tip update would be convinient..
106 2016-09-13 14:02:09	0|sipa|i'm not sure why you think that's not what happens
107 2016-09-13 14:03:49	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: right now, I get NotifyHeaderTip() during IBDs header-sync of the blocks that gets connected (example: NotifyHeaderTip fires when header-chain is at 300'000 with a block-connect at height 100).
108 2016-09-13 14:04:40	0|jonasschnelli|Listening to the signal I cannot distinct between the actual header-sync-tip-update and the block-connect
109 2016-09-13 14:05:00	0|jonasschnelli|Or it looks like the listener cannot distinct.
110 2016-09-13 14:06:30	0|jonasschnelli|Well, now I can just load pindexBestHeader->nHeight when the signal fires..
111 2016-09-13 14:06:41	0|sipa|i'm really confused
112 2016-09-13 14:07:19	0|jonasschnelli|Maybe I'm interpreting the signal wrong..
113 2016-09-13 14:07:40	0|sipa|it should fire whenever we learn about a new best header
114 2016-09-13 14:07:53	0|jonasschnelli|What i'm looking for is a way to get a tip-update of the headers-chain (in order to calculate the remaining blocks to verify)
115 2016-09-13 14:08:01	0|sipa|ok
116 2016-09-13 14:08:11	0|sipa|that's what it doez
117 2016-09-13 14:08:13	0|sipa|does
118 2016-09-13 14:08:22	0|jonasschnelli|But it does fire _again_ when a block connects
119 2016-09-13 14:08:40	0|jonasschnelli|(with the header=true)
120 2016-09-13 14:09:14	0|sipa|it should not
121 2016-09-13 14:11:03	0|sipa|can you explain the call graph that results in that spurious call?
122 2016-09-13 14:12:40	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: I'll try to give you clear steps to reproduce... give me a minute
123 2016-09-13 14:20:14	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: I think I'm misunderstanding something. Isn't pindexBestHeader the chaintip of the headers-only chain?
124 2016-09-13 14:21:08	0|jonasschnelli|During the NotifyHeaderTip signal, I get something like: initialSync: 1, height: 359 but bestheaderheight->nHeight == 48000
125 2016-09-13 14:21:48	0|jonasschnelli|I expected the signal to fire (with headers=true) when pindexBestHeader get updated with the next chunk of headers.
126 2016-09-13 14:24:54	0|sipa|oh, i see
127 2016-09-13 14:25:06	0|sipa|i does not actually notify for the best header
128 2016-09-13 14:25:22	0|sipa|it notifies for updates to the best header chain which could be verified
129 2016-09-13 14:25:35	0|sipa|so only when all blocks towards it have been downloaded
130 2016-09-13 14:26:26	0|sipa|which is sufficient for reindexing
131 2016-09-13 14:31:14	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: Do you think it would make sense to extend the signal to also fire when the best header chain updates its tip?
132 2016-09-13 14:31:22	0|jonasschnelli|Or would that break the reindexing?
133 2016-09-13 14:34:10	0|sipa|i think that would be fine
134 2016-09-13 14:34:15	0|sipa|i'll try to create a PR
135 2016-09-13 14:35:17	0|jonasschnelli|sipa: Super! +1
136 2016-09-13 14:55:21	0|GitHub50|[13bitcoin] 15jl2012 closed pull request #8685: Discourage P2WSH with too big script or stack (06master...06bigp2wsh) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8685
137 2016-09-13 14:59:45	0|wumpus|I still don't get the situation around the createwitnessaddress command https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8699
138 2016-09-13 15:00:07	0|wumpus|why does it exist? why was it ever added if it is never going to be useful, and even dangerous?
139 2016-09-13 15:00:18	0|wumpus|what is the point of it?
140 2016-09-13 15:03:05	0|moli|wumpus, afaik it's used to create multisig SW addresses
141 2016-09-13 15:03:21	0|sipa|creating them without adding them to the wallet
142 2016-09-13 15:03:31	0|GitHub83|13bitcoin/06master 1486c3f8d 15Johnson Lau: Remove createwitnessaddress...
143 2016-09-13 15:03:31	0|GitHub83|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7fe6c5c99370...c9914c209468
144 2016-09-13 15:03:32	0|GitHub83|13bitcoin/06master 14c9914c2 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8699: Remove createwitnessaddress RPC command...
145 2016-09-13 15:03:38	0|sipa|it's a utility function to match the wallet code
146 2016-09-13 15:03:39	0|wumpus|ah like createmultisig
147 2016-09-13 15:03:41	0|GitHub163|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8699: Remove createwitnessaddress RPC command (06master...06nocreatewitadd) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8699
148 2016-09-13 15:04:14	0|wumpus|well in any case it's a historical curiosity now, probably should mention it is removed in the release notes, at least if adding it was
149 2016-09-13 15:04:31	0|sipa|it was only ever usable on testnet
150 2016-09-13 15:04:49	0|wumpus|I hope it will be gone before anyone loses their coins due to it
151 2016-09-13 15:05:25	0|sipa|with 0.13.0 it can never be used on mainnet, even after segwit activates
152 2016-09-13 15:05:41	0|wumpus|yes but my question was whether it should be removed on master
153 2016-09-13 15:05:50	0|wumpus|it is a pull to master
154 2016-09-13 15:07:27	0|wumpus|the description was indeed formulated as 'this is never useful on 0.13' ,so I asked whether it was on purpose that it removes it from master too, but appearantly it is
155 2016-09-13 15:07:36	0|MarcoFalke|We should still do a backport. Just for consistency.
156 2016-09-13 15:07:45	0|wumpus|yes
157 2016-09-13 15:07:52	0|wumpus|it's marked as needs backport
158 2016-09-13 15:09:19	0|sipa|i'd rather only add something like this back of there is a demand for it
159 2016-09-13 15:09:46	0|wumpus|agreed
160 2016-09-13 15:09:59	0|sipa|and then we can assess what protections are useful
161 2016-09-13 15:10:22	0|wumpus|it's just an utility call anyhow, it doesn't need to be on RPC
162 2016-09-13 15:10:33	0|sipa|indeed
163 2016-09-13 15:10:48	0|GitHub4|13bitcoin/06master 1462ffbbd 15instagibbs: add witness address to address book
164 2016-09-13 15:10:48	0|GitHub4|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c9914c209468...fa7caf6d9116
165 2016-09-13 15:10:49	0|GitHub4|13bitcoin/06master 14fa7caf6 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8693: add witness address to address book...
166 2016-09-13 15:11:06	0|GitHub8|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8693: add witness address to address book (06master...06addwitbook) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8693
167 2016-09-13 15:22:13	0|btcdrak|sipa: are there any more changes coming to #8393 (segwit cb)
168 2016-09-13 15:23:17	0|sipa|i haven't looked at matt's proposed changes yet
169 2016-09-13 15:23:37	0|GitHub11|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 4 new commits to 060.13: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a9429ca26dd8...4731623777ab
170 2016-09-13 15:23:38	0|GitHub11|13bitcoin/060.13 1441fd852 15rodasmith: fix op order to append first alert...
171 2016-09-13 15:23:38	0|GitHub11|13bitcoin/060.13 14d9f0d4e 15adlawren: Fix minimize and close bugs...
172 2016-09-13 15:23:39	0|GitHub11|13bitcoin/060.13 14a37cec5 15Andrew Chow: Persist the datadir after option reset...
173 2016-09-13 15:23:40	0|GitHub93|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8710: [0.13.1] qt Backports (060.13...06Mf1609-qtBackports) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8710
174 2016-09-13 15:30:45	0|jonasschnelli|Re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8559 ... should we just remove the maxuploadtargets "recommended" minimum?
175 2016-09-13 15:31:00	0|jonasschnelli|Any objections?
176 2016-09-13 15:35:46	0|wumpus|no objections
177 2016-09-13 15:39:09	0|cfields|no objection here either
178 2016-09-13 15:41:07	0|btcdrak|no objections
179 2016-09-13 15:42:48	0|cfields|btw, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8708/commits/89c57428e335fefe87c6f5b4fd173c9ba9bdb486 may be worth backporting. I'm not sure what the implications are, but i assume it's possible for that to cause a stall in initial sync. Not quite sure how to test.
180 2016-09-13 15:44:32	0|cfields|basically if a user doesn't have the expected services, we start to disconnect, but we send them an initial getheaders anyway. Not sure how long it takes to recover from that, maybe a non-issue.
181 2016-09-13 15:44:39	0|cfields|s/user/peer/
182 2016-09-13 15:48:07	0|wumpus|let's backport is just in case
183 2016-09-13 15:49:11	0|wumpus|btw: which maxupload test failure? does it fail intermittently?
184 2016-09-13 15:49:50	0|cfields|wumpus: the rpc test, in -extended
185 2016-09-13 15:50:41	0|wumpus|ok
186 2016-09-13 15:51:20	0|cfields|it fails 100% without #8707. With that, I think it's intermittent (depends on how much goes through the optimistic send) without #8708, which fixes it completely.
187 2016-09-13 15:51:35	0|wumpus|thanks for the explanation
188 2016-09-13 15:51:56	0|cfields|np, sorry for the breakage.
189 2016-09-13 15:52:29	0|cfields|thanks for shoving the CConnman PR in, btw. I had lots of stuff blocked on that :)
190 2016-09-13 15:53:26	0|GitHub110|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8457: Add block height support in rpc call getblock (06master...06feature/add-get-block-by-number) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8457
191 2016-09-13 15:53:33	0|wumpus|well this is a pretty light breakage as these things go, it had to happen at some time
192 2016-09-13 15:53:47	0|wumpus|now it's in it can be improved
193 2016-09-13 15:53:49	0|wumpus|right :)
194 2016-09-13 15:54:43	0|wumpus|I'm happy travis is so stable again
195 2016-09-13 15:57:12	0|cfields|yea, that was getting really annoying. And as gmaxwell said, it has a quick psychological effect. Doesn't take long before you start ignoring the failures completely.
196 2016-09-13 15:58:23	0|wumpus|yes, I was already starting to rely on local testing only again
197 2016-09-13 15:59:08	0|wumpus|(which means only one platform/compiler)
198 2016-09-13 15:59:41	0|cfields|yes, same
199 2016-09-13 16:01:42	0|GitHub58|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #7728: Fees: Tests: Check CFeeRate internal precision in mempool_tests.cpp (06master...060.12.99-feerate-precision-test) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7728
200 2016-09-13 16:12:59	0|GitHub151|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli opened pull request #8712: Remove maxuploadtargets recommended minimum (06master...062016/09/rem_maxupt_min) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8712
201 2016-09-13 16:13:49	0|GitHub20|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli closed pull request #8559: Change maxuploadtarget recommended minimum calculation (06master...062016/08/max_ut) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8559
202 2016-09-13 16:38:52	0|phantomcircuit|wumpus: can you take a peak at 8696 (and 8695 but less urgently as no acks yet)
203 2016-09-13 16:39:09	0|phantomcircuit|oh you did look at 8695
204 2016-09-13 17:45:34	0|GitHub170|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #8713: [qa] create_cache: Delete temp dir when done (06master...06Mf1609-qaCacheTempdir) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8713
205 2016-09-13 17:50:39	0|GitHub155|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #8714: [qa] gitignore, travis: Remove unused lines (06master...06Mf1609-qaUnused) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8714
206 2016-09-13 17:56:37	0|MarcoFalke|cfields: Do you think it is hard to get osx builds woring?
207 2016-09-13 17:57:04	0|cfields|MarcoFalke: we already do a cross osx build. You mean a native one?
208 2016-09-13 17:57:32	0|Lightsword|what’s wrong with osx builds?
209 2016-09-13 17:57:46	0|MarcoFalke|If there is no plan to add native ones, we don't need the os:linux
210 2016-09-13 17:57:49	0|MarcoFalke|strictly speaking
211 2016-09-13 17:58:21	0|cfields|MarcoFalke: sure, it's just explicit there in case it's ever required
212 2016-09-13 18:01:36	0|morcos|cfields: additional slight bug in shutdown related to ConnMan
213 2016-09-13 18:01:50	0|morcos|you call g_connman->Stop() when it might be a null pointer
214 2016-09-13 18:02:00	0|morcos|there is even a comment above warning you not to do that. :)
215 2016-09-13 18:02:20	0|cfields|heh, looking
216 2016-09-13 18:02:26	0|morcos|can be demonstrated by just running 2 bitcoind's the second one tries to exit due to data directory locked and then segfaults
217 2016-09-13 18:04:41	0|cfields|morcos: indeed. Thanks, fixing.
218 2016-09-13 18:58:38	0|GitHub32|[13bitcoin] 15theuni opened pull request #8715: net: only delete CConnman if it's been created (06master...06fix-connman-shutdown) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8715
219 2016-09-13 19:00:08	0|cfields|morcos: ^^. Thanks.
220 2016-09-13 19:54:57	0|GitHub83|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #8716: [qa] wallet: Check legacy wallet as well (06master...06Mf1609-qaWalletLegacy) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8716
221 2016-09-13 22:30:55	0|GitHub132|[13bitcoin] 15spencerlievens opened pull request #8717: [WALLET] Addition of ImmatureCreditCached to MarkDirty() (06master...06patch-2) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8717
222 2016-09-13 22:31:31	0|GitHub169|[13bitcoin] 15SCDeveloper closed pull request #8703: Addition of ImmatureCreditCached to MarkDirty() (06master...06patch-5) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8703