1 2016-09-26 00:44:54	0|achow101|Is there any condition where core won't send a getdata when it receives an inv for a tx?
  2 2016-09-26 00:45:04	0|achow101|assuming it doesn't already have the tx
  3 2016-09-26 00:49:05	0|instagibbs|achow101, if it's in the recent rejects filter, which I guess already counts as "has"
  4 2016-09-26 00:55:30	0|achow101|nvm. I think I found my problem. Shouldn't have MSG_WITNESS_TX in the inv.
  5 2016-09-26 01:01:35	0|achow101|that didn't work.
  6 2016-09-26 01:29:36	0|btcdrak|luke-jr: saying BIP1 is deprecated and now use BIP2 is the same as changing the text of BIP1, but more confusing. Let's just change BIP1
  7 2016-09-26 01:30:26	0|luke-jr|btcdrak: ignoring the way it's supposed to work is far more confusing than following the process
  8 2016-09-26 01:30:54	0|gmaxwell|I would generally agree for protocols that are deployed.
  9 2016-09-26 01:31:14	0|gmaxwell|"X operators according to BIP10 not BIP11"
 10 2016-09-26 01:31:20	0|luke-jr|it's trivial and clear to just put a large banner at the top of BIP 1 and throughout the document that it's obsolete, see BIP 2
 11 2016-09-26 01:31:31	0|gmaxwell|but yes, thats okay too I guess.
 12 2016-09-26 02:24:56	0|achow101|has the behavior of segwit peer services diverged from the bip?
 13 2016-09-26 02:50:20	0|sipa|achow101: elaborate?
 14 2016-09-26 02:51:18	0|achow101|has their been changes to the format of the getdata message? Or to when core responds to an inv?
 15 2016-09-26 02:51:41	0|sipa|i don't think so
 16 2016-09-26 02:52:33	0|achow101|ok
 17 2016-09-26 02:52:55	0|achow101|I'm trying to debug sending txs with armory and the behavior from core is inconsistent
 18 2016-09-26 02:53:15	0|achow101|sometimes it will send a getdata in response to the inv, and other times it won't
 19 2016-09-26 02:55:46	0|sipa|while the node is fully synced?
 20 2016-09-26 02:56:02	0|achow101|yes. testnet though, and testnet has been super weird lately
 21 2016-09-26 02:57:51	0|achow101|it works if I unset the NODE_WITNESS service bit in Armory
 22 2016-09-26 03:30:22	0|achow101|is getdata changed in any significant way in segwit?
 23 2016-09-26 03:30:27	0|achow101|besides the inv types
 24 2016-09-26 03:33:31	0|sipa|it doesn't disconnect, right?
 25 2016-09-26 03:33:43	0|achow101|no
 26 2016-09-26 03:33:56	0|sipa|just not getdata in response to a MSG_TX inv?
 27 2016-09-26 03:34:16	0|achow101|sometimes it gets a response
 28 2016-09-26 03:34:42	0|achow101|but when it does, armory either isn't getting it or doesn't understand it
 29 2016-09-26 03:34:54	0|achow101|but it works fine without the witness service bit
 30 2016-09-26 03:36:42	0|sipa|how can it not understand?
 31 2016-09-26 03:36:54	0|sipa|it's just a getdata
 32 2016-09-26 03:37:08	0|achow101|idk. works fine without segwit
 33 2016-09-26 03:37:14	0|achow101|that's why I asked if getdata changed
 34 2016-09-26 03:47:49	0|sipa|well it will ask for a MSG_WITNESS_TX in response, not an MSG_TX
 35 2016-09-26 03:48:47	0|achow101|right. and I have that covered. but it's not even making it that far
 36 2016-09-26 03:49:15	0|achow101|it looks like it isn't even receiving the getdata, but I can't possibly fathom why that would be the case
 37 2016-09-26 03:49:36	0|sipa|it being armory?
 38 2016-09-26 03:49:40	0|achow101|yes
 39 2016-09-26 03:50:31	0|sipa|can you run with -debug=net, and create an excerpt from debug.log with the receival of the inv, and the few folpwong message
 40 2016-09-26 03:50:38	0|sipa|following
 41 2016-09-26 03:55:22	0|achow101|2016-09-26 03:53:37 askfor witness-tx cf1ae8a9d9b93eaa281a853315a36f9f2ea256752bae0a72e2727522cb82bd1f  0 (00:00:00) peer=1
 42 2016-09-26 03:55:22	0|achow101|2016-09-26 03:53:37 got inv: tx cf1ae8a9d9b93eaa281a853315a36f9f2ea256752bae0a72e2727522cb82bd1f  new peer=1
 43 2016-09-26 03:55:22	0|achow101|2016-09-26 03:53:37 Requesting witness-tx cf1ae8a9d9b93eaa281a853315a36f9f2ea256752bae0a72e2727522cb82bd1f peer=1
 44 2016-09-26 03:55:22	0|achow101|2016-09-26 03:53:37 sending: getdata (37 bytes) peer=1
 45 2016-09-26 03:55:40	0|achow101|and that's it. no response with that txid
 46 2016-09-26 03:56:49	0|sipa|the getdata does not contain a msg_witness_tx for that txid?
 47 2016-09-26 03:57:24	0|achow101|it should. NODE_WITNESS is set in armory's services
 48 2016-09-26 03:58:06	0|sipa|but it does not?
 49 2016-09-26 03:58:12	0|sipa|what does it contain?
 50 2016-09-26 03:58:41	0|sipa|bitcoin core is sending you a getdata
 51 2016-09-26 03:59:11	0|achow101|i don't know what it contains. none of my breakpoints are being set off. I can wireshark it though
 52 2016-09-26 04:00:19	0|sipa|ok
 53 2016-09-26 04:02:20	0|sipa|it would be good to know where the problem lies
 54 2016-09-26 04:03:31	0|achow101|this is the getdata from wireshark (well for another tx since I ran it again)
 55 2016-09-26 04:03:32	0|achow101|0000   00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 08 00 45 00
 56 2016-09-26 04:03:32	0|achow101|0010   00 71 3e 73 40 00 40 06 fe 11 7f 00 00 01 7f 00
 57 2016-09-26 04:03:32	0|achow101|0020   00 01 47 9d aa 92 be 7f 69 f8 f7 cf 08 33 80 18
 58 2016-09-26 04:03:32	0|achow101|0030   01 5e fe 65 00 00 01 01 08 0a 00 81 8f 34 00 81
 59 2016-09-26 04:03:32	0|achow101|0040   8f 34 0b 11 09 07 67 65 74 64 61 74 61 00 00 00
 60 2016-09-26 04:03:33	0|achow101|0050   00 00 25 00 00 00 11 8c ea 6c 01 01 00 00 40 1f
 61 2016-09-26 04:03:35	0|achow101|0060   bd 82 cb 22 75 72 e2 72 0a ae 2b 75 56 a2 2e 9f
 62 2016-09-26 04:03:38	0|achow101|0070   6f a3 15 33 85 1a 28 aa 3e b9 d9 a9 e8 1a cf
 63 2016-09-26 04:06:58	0|achow101|nvm. I found the problem. I forget the invtype in one place and that screwed the whole thing
 64 2016-09-26 06:43:51	0|paveljanik|jonasschnelli, the new overlay when syncing/reindexing: is there any way to bring it back once hidden?
 65 2016-09-26 06:45:00	0|luke-jr|paveljanik: click the icon
 66 2016-09-26 06:45:36	0|paveljanik|which one? I already tried all of them ;-)
 67 2016-09-26 06:45:53	0|paveljanik|ah, triangle with ! ;-)
 68 2016-09-26 06:45:56	0|paveljanik|thank you!
 69 2016-09-26 06:46:34	0|luke-jr|☺
 70 2016-09-26 06:50:06	0|wumpus|hehe
 71 2016-09-26 06:58:05	0|luke-jr|nah, I just have the weirdest memory. I remember the PR saying that :P
 72 2016-09-26 08:58:41	0|jonasschnelli|Yes. Pressing on the warning icon is not really elegant UX
 73 2016-09-26 09:13:08	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: are you on MacOSX? can you please check if the libc function daemon() is available?
 74 2016-09-26 09:13:47	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: Yes. It's available
 75 2016-09-26 09:13:50	0|jonasschnelli|daemon(int nochdir, int noclose);
 76 2016-09-26 09:13:56	0|wumpus|thanks, yes that'sthe one
 77 2016-09-26 09:13:57	0|jonasschnelli|I'm on OSX 10.10
 78 2016-09-26 09:14:41	0|wumpus|let's extend this: can anyone with a UNIX-ish OS that is not Linux please check this? I've checked OpenBSD and it does, at least.
 79 2016-09-26 09:14:50	0|jonasschnelli|daemon is a standard BSD function, BSD is the base-system of darwin (fork)
 80 2016-09-26 09:14:56	0|wumpus|right
 81 2016-09-26 09:15:27	0|wumpus|so I think we can just rely on that any OS that support daemonization in the first place and runs bitcoin core has that call
 82 2016-09-26 09:16:09	0|wumpus|didn't BSD come up with deamons in the first place :)
 83 2016-09-26 09:17:22	0|wumpus|this would make https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8278 trivial
 84 2016-09-26 09:20:23	0|wumpus|even better, we can remove the windows-specific path. Windows doesn't have daemon(), so it wouldn't support --daemonize
 85 2016-09-26 09:21:01	0|wumpus|going to do a pull for this
 86 2016-09-26 09:25:29	0|sipa|windows has background services, but their purpose seems a bit different, as they just avoid being tied to abuser session
 87 2016-09-26 09:26:07	0|gmaxwell|what does-- say-- apache do on windows?
 88 2016-09-26 09:28:04	0|luke-jr|I would be surprised if it didn't install as a system service
 89 2016-09-26 09:28:19	0|wumpus|windows is out of scope here
 90 2016-09-26 09:28:31	0|wumpus|we don't support that yet, and the point of this pull is not to support anything on wnidows
 91 2016-09-26 09:28:42	0|wumpus|it's just to simplify and improve behavior on UNIX
 92 2016-09-26 09:29:29	0|sipa|agree, just saying that the corresponding concept on windows has a different goal
 93 2016-09-26 09:29:32	0|wumpus|windows services are a completely different animal, you can't just spawn them arbitrarily like UNIX daemons, they're more like /etc/init.d services installed as root
 94 2016-09-26 09:29:45	0|wumpus|oh I agree with that
 95 2016-09-26 09:30:19	0|sipa|maybe it makes sense to support that when we have done more use for wallet-less/wallet-split support
 96 2016-09-26 09:30:56	0|wumpus|yes, it may be worthwhile to work on, but it won't share any code with -daemonize, it's more like the "how to install as a system service" guide that we have for some linux distros
 97 2016-09-26 09:32:19	0|wumpus|I'm afraid it takes a lot of OS-specific code and registry wrangling
 98 2016-09-26 09:32:21	0|luke-jr|looking over some old code I wrote for a Windows service, it's probably ~100 LOC
 99 2016-09-26 09:32:41	0|luke-jr|maybe ~200
100 2016-09-26 09:32:42	0|wumpus|as well as needs to set up an account to run it under
101 2016-09-26 09:32:49	0|wumpus|you won't want to spawn it as ADMINISTRATOR
102 2016-09-26 09:32:56	0|luke-jr|>_<
103 2016-09-26 09:33:50	0|wumpus|(or "local services" which is pretty much admin-equiv)
104 2016-09-26 09:38:36	0|paveljanik|jonasschnelli, I have started testnet Qt with the current master from scratch, only bitcoin.conf remained. There is no overlay window showing it is synchronizing. Should it be displayed?
105 2016-09-26 09:38:51	0|paveljanik|Can't click on triangle with excl. mark...
106 2016-09-26 09:39:18	0|GitHub26|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #8813: bitcoind: Daemonise using daemon(3) (06master...062016_09_daemonize) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8813
107 2016-09-26 09:39:26	0|paveljanik|I understood that this is the primary use case where it should be shown.
108 2016-09-26 09:40:08	0|luke-jr|wumpus: well, Windows isn't going to be secure no matter what user Core runs as  <.<
109 2016-09-26 09:40:13	0|GitHub11|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8278: Forking daemon (06master...06forking-daemon) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8278
110 2016-09-26 09:40:25	0|wumpus|luke-jr: sure, but if we do it, we need to support best practices
111 2016-09-26 09:49:44	0|wumpus|the help message for -daemon is pretty strange: "Run in the background as a daemon and accept commands". Run in the background, check. Accept commands? Don't we always?
112 2016-09-26 09:50:51	0|wumpus|(well strictly unless you set -server=0, but it has nothing to do with the daemon option)
113 2016-09-26 10:09:57	0|GitHub50|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8451: Get rid of the const field in CTransaction (06master...06noconsttx) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8451
114 2016-09-26 10:17:36	0|btcdrak|gmaxwell: Apache registers Windows services
115 2016-09-26 10:29:30	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: btw https://github.com/jgarzik/univalue/pull/27 is passing now, it was just a temporary hiccum with MacOSX as you thought
116 2016-09-26 10:29:40	0|MarcoFalke|jup
117 2016-09-26 10:29:46	0|MarcoFalke|jgarzik already merged it
118 2016-09-26 10:30:03	0|wumpus|it still shows as open here
119 2016-09-26 10:30:15	0|MarcoFalke|oh, my osx fix
120 2016-09-26 10:30:18	0|MarcoFalke|I mean
121 2016-09-26 10:30:31	0|wumpus|oh okay
122 2016-09-26 10:31:33	0|paveljanik|jonasschnelli, please ignore it. It is shown correctly when you use correct tree/binary 8)
123 2016-09-26 10:31:54	0|wumpus|I didn't know you did an osx fix
124 2016-09-26 10:36:33	0|MarcoFalke|https://github.com/jgarzik/univalue/pull/28
125 2016-09-26 10:36:56	0|MarcoFalke|jonasschnelli: Does the sync overlay block the gui for you when you do reindex?
126 2016-09-26 10:43:56	0|MarcoFalke|re ^ https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8371#pullrequestreview-1462647
127 2016-09-26 10:44:07	0|MarcoFalke|I think we can do this without any lock to cs_main
128 2016-09-26 10:44:26	0|MarcoFalke|Will try to create a pull this week.
129 2016-09-26 10:45:53	0|MarcoFalke|(Or at least reduce the locking, but get rid of the fHeader "shortcut")
130 2016-09-26 10:53:26	0|wumpus|I wonder, is windows on 32 bit even still a thing these days?
131 2016-09-26 10:55:20	0|MarcoFalke|Windows XP 32 bit seems to be the most common os these days
132 2016-09-26 10:55:24	0|wumpus|it wouldn't make me terribly sad if we had to only support one architecture for windows
133 2016-09-26 10:55:44	0|wumpus|well the train for XP support has already failed
134 2016-09-26 10:55:54	0|wumpus|:p
135 2016-09-26 10:57:09	0|wumpus|I think android is the most common OS these days
136 2016-09-26 10:59:06	0|wumpus|but I don't think we should support that out of the box before there is some kind of SPV fallback for the wallet
137 2016-09-26 11:04:22	0|wumpus|in any case I think windows 32 bit is dead or dying as a platform. Linux 32-bit still makes some sense for VMs, I suppose.
138 2016-09-26 11:04:42	0|wumpus|I mean x86. ARM 32 makes obvious sense.
139 2016-09-26 11:35:04	0|GitHub61|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/37871f216e0d...4e1567acff4b
140 2016-09-26 11:35:05	0|GitHub61|13bitcoin/06master 1462c2915 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: supply `-Wl,--high-entropy-va`...
141 2016-09-26 11:35:05	0|GitHub61|13bitcoin/06master 149a75d29 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: devtools: Check for high-entropy ASLR in 64-bit PE executables...
142 2016-09-26 11:35:06	0|GitHub61|13bitcoin/06master 144e1567a 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8249: Enable (and check for) 64-bit ASLR on Windows...
143 2016-09-26 11:35:09	0|GitHub135|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8249: Enable (and check for) 64-bit ASLR on Windows (06master...062016_06_windows64_security) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8249
144 2016-09-26 11:35:28	0|wumpus|huh isn't it *daemonize* instead of *daemonise*? confused
145 2016-09-26 11:35:40	0|sipa|british vs american?
146 2016-09-26 11:36:39	0|sipa|daemonize seems more common
147 2016-09-26 11:36:54	0|wumpus|what is the UNIX spelling?
148 2016-09-26 11:36:57	0|wumpus|yes, I thought so
149 2016-09-26 11:37:34	0|paveljanik|getting testnet IBD finished is a pain...
150 2016-09-26 11:39:16	0|wumpus|daemonize appears 2 times in the current source, daemonise 0 times, clear, changing the PR to keep sanity
151 2016-09-26 11:41:17	0|wumpus|paveljanik: why so?
152 2016-09-26 11:42:19	0|paveljanik|wumpus, doing it the second time here. Both stuck at block ~892320.
153 2016-09-26 11:42:32	0|wumpus|stuck in what way?
154 2016-09-26 11:42:39	0|paveljanik|8 peers
155 2016-09-26 11:42:56	0|paveljanik|no progress in received blocks
156 2016-09-26 11:42:56	0|wumpus|any errors in the log?
157 2016-09-26 11:42:59	0|paveljanik|no
158 2016-09-26 11:43:09	0|paveljanik|many got inv, received inv
159 2016-09-26 11:43:23	0|paveljanik|debug console shows 0 txs in mempool
160 2016-09-26 11:43:38	0|paveljanik|it was a rm -rf testnet3 run. In both cases...
161 2016-09-26 11:44:18	0|paveljanik|12 weeks ago in both cases.
162 2016-09-26 11:44:24	0|paveljanik|hmm.
163 2016-09-26 11:44:41	0|paveljanik|all nodes are 12.99+
164 2016-09-26 11:45:03	0|MarcoFalke|paveljanik: A stalling issue?
165 2016-09-26 11:45:09	0|paveljanik|yup
166 2016-09-26 11:45:13	0|MarcoFalke|ugh
167 2016-09-26 11:46:53	0|MarcoFalke|Does it disconnect peers?
168 2016-09-26 11:46:57	0|paveljanik|Syncyng headers
169 2016-09-26 11:47:12	0|wumpus|I haven't done a testnet sync from scratch in quite a while, maybe I should
170 2016-09-26 11:47:43	0|paveljanik|all peers at 947573
171 2016-09-26 11:47:50	0|MarcoFalke|Hmm, I saw some slow header syncs yesterday. I blamed my slow internet...
172 2016-09-26 11:47:56	0|wumpus|maybe I should try it in a win 32-bit VM for extra masochism points
173 2016-09-26 11:47:57	0|wumpus|nah
174 2016-09-26 11:49:38	0|sipa|paveljanik: all witness capable peers?
175 2016-09-26 11:50:16	0|paveljanik|all NETWORK & BLOOM & WITNESS
176 2016-09-26 11:50:35	0|sipa|did you reindex?
177 2016-09-26 11:50:57	0|paveljanik|in both cases rm -rf testnet3 full IBD
178 2016-09-26 11:51:09	0|paveljanik|from scratch
179 2016-09-26 11:57:31	0|GitHub167|13bitcoin/06master 14faef293 15MarcoFalke: [wallet] Add high transaction fee warnings
180 2016-09-26 11:57:31	0|GitHub167|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/4e1567acff4b...ab0b411868e1
181 2016-09-26 11:57:31	0|wumpus|restarting (e.g., to get new peers) didn't solve it either?
182 2016-09-26 11:57:32	0|GitHub167|13bitcoin/06master 14ab0b411 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8486: [wallet] Add high transaction fee warnings...
183 2016-09-26 11:57:36	0|GitHub138|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8486: [wallet] Add high transaction fee warnings (06master...06Mf1607-walletHighFeeWarn) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8486
184 2016-09-26 11:58:05	0|MarcoFalke|Wondering if 8738 should be locked.
185 2016-09-26 11:58:10	0|paveljanik|wumpus, no.
186 2016-09-26 11:58:28	0|paveljanik|I even tried to rm peers.dat and restart
187 2016-09-26 11:58:41	0|MarcoFalke|paveljanik: So debug=net show nothing?
188 2016-09-26 11:58:45	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: oh no, rebroad got involved too
189 2016-09-26 11:58:53	0|paveljanik|MarcoFalke, will try
190 2016-09-26 12:00:18	0|phantomcircuit_|wumpus: i apologize for how long it takes in advance
191 2016-09-26 12:00:49	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: locked it
192 2016-09-26 12:01:58	0|wumpus|jonasschnelli: the comment nit was already solved in #8813, remember that github won't hide changes anymore.
193 2016-09-26 12:05:05	0|paveljanik|sent getheaders to all peas, received 947582
194 2016-09-26 12:05:12	0|paveljanik|Ignoring getheaders from peer=9 because node is in initial block download
195 2016-09-26 12:05:15	0|paveljanik|from all of them
196 2016-09-26 12:05:30	0|phantomcircuit_|wumpus: is there a particular pattern we're already using for RAII wrappers for db handles or things?
197 2016-09-26 12:05:40	0|phantomcircuit_|it's gonna need to be reference counted
198 2016-09-26 12:05:52	0|wumpus|a shared pointer?
199 2016-09-26 12:06:19	0|wumpus|std::shared_ptr is automagically reference counted
200 2016-09-26 12:06:42	0|paveljanik|looks like we are ignoring too much when n IBD
201 2016-09-26 12:07:00	0|phantomcircuit_|wumpus: yeah except none of the functions know whether they were the originally called method
202 2016-09-26 12:07:05	0|phantomcircuit_|there's public methods which call each other
203 2016-09-26 12:07:35	0|phantomcircuit_|so the first one creates the CWalletDB object and the rest use a private member
204 2016-09-26 12:08:08	0|phantomcircuit_|but doing that just with a shared pointer wont work cause the private member isn't destroyed
205 2016-09-26 12:08:17	0|wumpus|or create your own RAII wrapper, though I prefer going with existing c++11 features where possible
206 2016-09-26 12:08:52	0|wumpus|esp eith reference counting it's kind of easy to introduce off-by-one errors
207 2016-09-26 12:09:16	0|jonasschnelli|wumpus: Arg. Yes. I still find it confusing to see old code on the PR page. :) But probably good for clear documentation.
208 2016-09-26 12:09:16	0|wumpus|" except none of the functions know whether they were the originally called method" I'd suggest to fix that first
209 2016-09-26 12:09:27	0|wumpus|create explicit API methods and internal helper methods
210 2016-09-26 12:09:34	0|phantomcircuit_|hmm
211 2016-09-26 12:09:35	0|wumpus|this helps with locking too
212 2016-09-26 12:09:42	0|phantomcircuit_|yeah i guess just fixing the api first would be the way to go
213 2016-09-26 12:09:59	0|MarcoFalke|wumpus: https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin-core/univalue/settings. Is it enabled for pull requests?
214 2016-09-26 12:10:26	0|wumpus|and make the internal helper methods private so that external clients won't be tempted into calling them
215 2016-09-26 12:10:51	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: yes
216 2016-09-26 12:11:08	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: both for pushes and prs
217 2016-09-26 12:11:14	0|MarcoFalke|Hmm, didn't pick it up: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/univalue/pull/3
218 2016-09-26 12:13:15	0|paveljanik|peers send me: getheaders (which I ignore because of still in IBD), sendheaders, sendcmpct, pong, headers
219 2016-09-26 12:14:56	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: bah, no travis buttons either
220 2016-09-26 12:15:16	0|jonasschnelli|paveljanik: Ignoring getheaders seems correct..
221 2016-09-26 12:15:22	0|jonasschnelli|During IBD
222 2016-09-26 12:16:02	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: it doesnt look like travis is doing anything there
223 2016-09-26 12:16:06	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: no builds at all yet
224 2016-09-26 12:16:21	0|MarcoFalke|Oh, maybe it needs at least one build at master...
225 2016-09-26 12:16:58	0|wumpus|just going to merge your pull, let's see if that will get travis to test
226 2016-09-26 12:17:02	0|wumpus|oh! it's starting
227 2016-09-26 12:17:14	0|MarcoFalke|heh
228 2016-09-26 12:17:18	0|wumpus|did anyone do anything?
229 2016-09-26 12:19:49	0|sipa|paveljanik: did you ever send a getheaders?
230 2016-09-26 12:20:58	0|paveljanik|yes, to all peers
231 2016-09-26 12:21:15	0|paveljanik|I'm now grepping though the old log, because I'm trying reindex
232 2016-09-26 12:22:10	0|paveljanik|and then received: headers (163 bytes) peer=1
233 2016-09-26 12:26:16	0|wumpus|can anyone please make a browser extension that hides github's big green 'merge' button? :-)
234 2016-09-26 12:27:22	0|jonasschnelli|heh... yes. Some local CSS injection.
235 2016-09-26 12:27:24	0|sipa|alternative: can we pay github to add a setting to remove it?
236 2016-09-26 12:28:12	0|achow101|why do you want that?
237 2016-09-26 12:28:16	0|wumpus|I've already requested that feature once, they actually have a per-repository option to remove it in some cases
238 2016-09-26 12:28:26	0|paveljanik|sipa, I sent this: initial getheaders (947583) to peer=1
239 2016-09-26 12:28:33	0|wumpus|but you can't disable it in all cases, and they don't  intend to do that :(
240 2016-09-26 12:28:43	0|paveljanik|ie. I know the current height, but do not have blocks...
241 2016-09-26 12:31:07	0|wumpus|achow101: because I don't want to accidentally use that button instead of the script that we wrote for merging+signing
242 2016-09-26 12:31:38	0|wumpus|and the button seems to be explicitly designed to be big and green and easy to accidentally click
243 2016-09-26 12:32:19	0|wumpus|I guess in the next version it will follow the mouse cursor :p
244 2016-09-26 12:34:40	0|MarcoFalke|can it be disabled on events such as travis fails?
245 2016-09-26 12:35:35	0|wumpus|yes
246 2016-09-26 12:35:41	0|MarcoFalke|We could add another "CI" (maybe a linter) and have it return false all the time
247 2016-09-26 12:36:40	0|wumpus|I've thought about that, but I think the UI impact of that is even worse. No green checkmarks anymore
248 2016-09-26 12:44:08	0|GitHub193|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #7857: Add fee option to fundrawtransaction (06master...06enhancement/add-fee-to-fundrawtransaction) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7857
249 2016-09-26 12:54:00	0|GitHub87|13bitcoin/06master 14381826d 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: bitcoin-cli: More detailed error reporting...
250 2016-09-26 12:54:00	0|GitHub87|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ab0b411868e1...bb843adc8d04
251 2016-09-26 12:54:01	0|GitHub87|13bitcoin/06master 14bb843ad 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8722: bitcoin-cli: More detailed error reporting...
252 2016-09-26 12:54:10	0|GitHub154|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8722: bitcoin-cli: More detailed error reporting (06master...062016_09_cli_http_error) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8722
253 2016-09-26 12:59:04	0|GitHub192|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #8814: [wallet, policy] ParameterInteraction: Don't allow 0 fee (06master...06Mf1607-walletHighFeeWarn) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8814
254 2016-09-26 13:03:26	0|GitHub105|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/bb843adc8d04...dd20ed1223b9
255 2016-09-26 13:03:27	0|GitHub105|13bitcoin/06master 14ddddaaf 15MarcoFalke: [rpc] Deprecate getinfo...
256 2016-09-26 13:03:27	0|GitHub105|13bitcoin/06master 14fa6e71b 15MarcoFalke: [qa] Add getinfo smoke tests and rework versionbits test
257 2016-09-26 13:03:28	0|GitHub105|13bitcoin/06master 14dd20ed1 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8780: [rpc] Deprecate getinfo...
258 2016-09-26 13:03:41	0|GitHub160|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8780: [rpc] Deprecate getinfo (06master...06Mf1609-getinfoDeprecate) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8780
259 2016-09-26 13:03:51	0|MarcoFalke|^ for release notes, if someone feels like adding this
260 2016-09-26 13:11:23	0|GitHub103|13bitcoin/06master 14c14ffd5 15jonnynewbs: [trivial] fix mempool comment (outdated by BIP125)
261 2016-09-26 13:11:23	0|GitHub103|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/dd20ed1223b9...8f1fbf36a769
262 2016-09-26 13:11:24	0|GitHub103|13bitcoin/06master 148f1fbf3 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8796: [trivial] fix mempool comment (outdated by BIP125)...
263 2016-09-26 13:11:38	0|GitHub85|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8796: [trivial] fix mempool comment (outdated by BIP125) (06master...06trivial_comment) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8796
264 2016-09-26 13:12:23	0|paveljanik|-reindex and it is slowly walking up - 892349 now
265 2016-09-26 13:12:38	0|paveljanik|happily requesting blocks, getdata...
266 2016-09-26 13:16:34	0|paveljanik|Strange. Have to leave now :-(
267 2016-09-26 14:23:37	0|GitHub173|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #8772: [0.13] Backports (060.13...06backports-0.13) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8772
268 2016-09-26 14:23:40	0|GitHub162|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 55 new commits to 060.13: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8d9e8adc05f4...254e990ce5c3
269 2016-09-26 14:23:42	0|GitHub162|13bitcoin/060.13 143606b6b 15instagibbs: Update p2p-segwit.py to reflect correct AskFor behavior...
270 2016-09-26 14:23:42	0|GitHub162|13bitcoin/060.13 14733760a 15BtcDrak: Update btcdrak signing key...
271 2016-09-26 14:23:42	0|GitHub162|13bitcoin/060.13 14c6a6291 15instagibbs: add witness address to address book...
272 2016-09-26 14:34:05	0|MarcoFalke|wumpus: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8712 is a trivial cherry-pick, which was missed in ^
273 2016-09-26 14:35:38	0|wumpus|yes, I'm working on a new pull for the remaining ones
274 2016-09-26 14:38:11	0|wumpus|isn't #8418 needed in 0.13.1 as well?
275 2016-09-26 14:38:36	0|wumpus|otherwise some recent pulls become harder to backport as they all make changes in those tests
276 2016-09-26 14:39:04	0|sipa|i don't think it ever hurts to backport tests
277 2016-09-26 14:39:10	0|sipa|it just may mean more work
278 2016-09-26 14:39:41	0|wumpus|well it hurts if the functionality tested doesn't exist
279 2016-09-26 14:39:48	0|wumpus|but compactblocks does, right?
280 2016-09-26 14:40:00	0|sipa|compact blocks is in 0.13
281 2016-09-26 14:40:25	0|wumpus|right
282 2016-09-26 14:45:09	0|wumpus|seems #8418 applies without any changes to 0.13 (though haven't actually run the tests yet)
283 2016-09-26 14:48:05	0|wumpus|another thing is, #8739 was tagged for 0.13.1, that makes no sense at all without #8418
284 2016-09-26 14:48:11	0|sdaftuar|wumpus: it should!  i actually thought it was already merged in 0.13
285 2016-09-26 14:48:18	0|sdaftuar|sorry about that confusion with 8739
286 2016-09-26 14:48:25	0|wumpus|no problem, fixing it now
287 2016-09-26 14:54:12	0|GitHub120|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #8815: Backports for 0.13.1 (060.13...062016_09_backports_0_13_1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8815
288 2016-09-26 15:00:51	0|wumpus|finally, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls?q=is%3Apr+milestone%3A0.13.1+is%3Aclosed+label%3A%22Needs+backport%22 empty
289 2016-09-26 16:37:32	0|paveljanik|the third sync on testnet was OK. Strange.
290 2016-09-26 16:37:44	0|paveljanik|slow, but ok
291 2016-09-26 16:50:15	0|GitHub176|[13bitcoin] 15czzarr opened pull request #8816: print P2WSH redeemScript in getrawtransaction if it s not a pubkey (06master...06print-p2wsh-redeemscript-in-getrawtransaction) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8816
292 2016-09-26 16:51:01	0|GitHub154|[13bitcoin] 15czzarr closed pull request #8816: print P2WSH redeemScript in getrawtransaction if it s not a pubkey (06master...06print-p2wsh-redeemscript-in-getrawtransaction) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8816
293 2016-09-26 20:17:53	0|paveljanik|MarcoFalke, can you please check #8808 for the same binaries now? I reverted one hunk (trivial one though 8) which cause me problems here and now travis is OK.
294 2016-09-26 20:18:58	0|MarcoFalke|I think I did 20 minutes ago and it didn't match
295 2016-09-26 20:28:30	0|GitHub18|13bitcoin/06master 14c9ce17b 15Derek Miller: Trivial: Grammar and capitalization
296 2016-09-26 20:28:30	0|GitHub18|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8f1fbf36a769...2f71490d2179
297 2016-09-26 20:28:31	0|GitHub18|13bitcoin/06master 142f71490 15MarcoFalke: Merge #8805: Trivial: Grammar and capitalization...
298 2016-09-26 20:28:45	0|GitHub129|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #8805: Trivial: Grammar and capitalization (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8805
299 2016-09-26 21:08:43	0|GitHub106|[13bitcoin] 15jnewbery opened pull request #8817: update bitcoin-tx to output witness data (06master...06bitcoin-tx-witness) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8817
300 2016-09-26 22:12:52	0|achow101|is there a way to disable segwit activation on regtest?
301 2016-09-26 22:15:29	0|btcdrak|another openssl advisory https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20160926.txt
302 2016-09-26 22:25:06	0|gmaxwell|achow101: change the dates in the chainparams.
303 2016-09-26 22:25:48	0|achow101|I guess that's one way to do it..
304 2016-09-26 22:35:09	0|sipa|achow101: use a miner that doesn't support segwit :)