1 2016-11-29 01:49:38	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15kallewoof opened pull request #9235: Refactor: Removes all uses of `using namespace` in all source files. (06master...06no-using-ns2) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9235
 2 2016-11-29 05:17:48	0|achow101|what happened to createwitnessaddress?
 3 2016-11-29 05:36:54	0|btcdrak|achow101: it was removed
 4 2016-11-29 05:39:10	0|achow101|I gathered that much. I don't quite understand why it was removed. Couldn't it just have been modified to check for address validity too?
 5 2016-11-29 05:41:22	0|sipa|achow101: it has no access to the wallet, so it would at least need an api change
 6 2016-11-29 05:41:34	0|sipa|where you pass it the full script, pubkeys, ...
 7 2016-11-29 05:43:07	0|achow101|oh. i see
 8 2016-11-29 07:19:46	0|fanquake|Finally finished a deterministic fuzzing cycle with 9172. Happy to share the outputs with anyone who'd like a look.
 9 2016-11-29 08:32:23	0|gmaxwell|https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5ffwg2/raspberry_pi_1_b_512mb_ram_running_bitcoind_0131/  positive report.
10 2016-11-29 08:33:22	0|rabidus|next step: pebble
11 2016-11-29 08:33:25	0|rabidus|:)
12 2016-11-29 08:37:01	0|rabidus|wow, i didn't know that pebble has some sort of crypto/hash processor
13 2016-11-29 08:37:08	0|rabidus|https://www.reddit.com/r/pebble/wiki/tech_specs
14 2016-11-29 08:37:10	0|rabidus|/offtopic
15 2016-11-29 09:46:57	0|btcdrak|fullnode wrist watches? I like the idea.
16 2016-11-29 09:52:24	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15gmaxwell opened pull request #9236: Fix races for strMiscWarning and fLargeWork*Found, make QT runawayException use GetWarnings (06master...06strMiscraceless) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9236
17 2016-11-29 10:14:50	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1415fa95d 15fsb4000: Fix some typos
18 2016-11-29 10:14:50	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c4522e71c7e1...7bd1aa566fb4
19 2016-11-29 10:14:51	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 147bd1aa5 15MarcoFalke: Merge #9233: Fix some typos...
20 2016-11-29 10:15:10	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #9233: Fix some typos (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9233
21 2016-11-29 10:23:18	0|gmaxwell|damn, I noticed that github is now setting that 'allow edits from maintainers' thing without prompting you.
22 2016-11-29 10:29:19	0|luke-jr|gmaxwell: wasn't it always, since introduction?
23 2016-11-29 10:30:13	0|gmaxwell|at least before on the pull req screen it was a clear option there, I don't see it now and it's just on.
24 2016-11-29 10:30:52	0|luke-jr|:/
25 2016-11-29 11:25:40	0|wumpus|yea it always defaulted to on from when the option was there, not sure whether you can change that default for your account
26 2016-11-29 11:38:06	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14498a1d7 15Ivo van der Sangen: Include select.h when WIN32 is not defined
27 2016-11-29 11:38:06	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7bd1aa566fb4...0a0441358c81
28 2016-11-29 11:38:07	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 140a04413 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9224: Prevent FD_SETSIZE error building on OpenBSD...
29 2016-11-29 11:38:20	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9224: Prevent FD_SETSIZE error building on OpenBSD (06master...06unix-compilation) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9224
30 2016-11-29 11:40:05	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 6 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0a0441358c81...5488514b901d
31 2016-11-29 11:40:06	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14047ea10 15Matt Corallo: Make fImporting an std::atomic
32 2016-11-29 11:40:06	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1442071ca 15Matt Corallo: Make fDisconnect an std::atomic
33 2016-11-29 11:40:07	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14dbfaade 15Matt Corallo: Fix AddrMan locking
34 2016-11-29 11:40:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9225: Fix some benign races (06master...062016-11-lockfixes) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9225
35 2016-11-29 11:41:56	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5488514b901d...e56cf67e6b3f
36 2016-11-29 11:41:57	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 143532818 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: bench: Add support for measuring CPU cycles...
37 2016-11-29 11:41:57	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e56cf67 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9202: bench: Add support for measuring CPU cycles...
38 2016-11-29 11:42:10	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9202: bench: Add support for measuring CPU cycles (06master...062016_11_bench_cpu_cycles) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9202
39 2016-11-29 15:37:54	0|Chris_Stewart_5|Do redeem scripts have a push op added to them when they are removed from the stack? I'm looking at this test case specifically
40 2016-11-29 15:37:56	0|Chris_Stewart_5|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/test/data/script_tests.json#L1863
41 2016-11-29 15:39:06	0|Chris_Stewart_5|When the tx is serialized for a signature, the redeem script has a '43' pushop prepended to it so the script is '4341047...'
42 2016-11-29 15:48:59	0|Chris_Stewart_5|in the case of segwit I should say
43 2016-11-29 15:55:35	0|morcos|sipa: What do you think about removing txConflicted from the block connection logic?  You and I had a discussion about it referenced here: #8692 and sdaftuar and I have been discussing all morning
44 2016-11-29 15:55:36	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8692 | Marking chains of txs conflicted properly · Issue #8692 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
45 2016-11-29 15:56:26	0|morcos|Right now, it does effectively nothing (marks balances dirty, but the balance recalculation will result in the same balance because the txs conflicted via mempool detection aren't actually marked conflicted)
46 2016-11-29 15:57:24	0|morcos|I propose commenting (in the code?) about a general out line of how we could do a better best efforts for also using the mempool for conflict detection.   but there are several corner cases that make this a larger project.
47 2016-11-29 15:58:00	0|morcos|I think it woudl be simpler to understand if for now we didn' thave this ineffective method sitting around, and later if anyone is inclined they could try a new design to do it properly?
48 2016-11-29 15:59:55	0|morcos|BlueMatt: ^ ?
49 2016-11-29 16:19:57	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli opened pull request #9238: Ignore BIP35 mempool command by default (06master...062016/11/dis_mempool) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9238
50 2016-11-29 17:04:36	0|sipa|morcos: i vaguely remember we're effectively only using the in-wallet confict detection?
51 2016-11-29 17:05:25	0|morcos|sipa: correct, the in-wallet detection is the only one that marks conflicted..  that issue links to the IRC convo you and i had, but in short you were proposing we could make the mempool conflict detection also mark conflicted
52 2016-11-29 17:05:39	0|morcos|and then be smarter later about how to mark things dirty if they might have become unconflicted
53 2016-11-29 17:05:47	0|sipa|hmm
54 2016-11-29 17:05:51	0|morcos|this would improve our "best efforts" basis of finding all conflicts
55 2016-11-29 17:06:03	0|morcos|but i think there are lots of corner cases and its basically impossible to get perfect
56 2016-11-29 17:06:41	0|sipa|my only concern was that it felt stupid to delete code which has a reasonable chance of being close to working
57 2016-11-29 17:06:46	0|morcos|my only suggestion now, is remove the misleading and useless mempool conflict detection for now, until we decide to do it better, if we ever do
58 2016-11-29 17:07:00	0|sipa|but if you say there are many edge cases to get right, delete it
59 2016-11-29 17:07:18	0|morcos|yeah that was my concern too, but i think there are enough issues around it .. yep.. ok, i'll propose a PR
60 2016-11-29 17:07:43	0|morcos|not necessarily too many, but too many that we're about to do it anytime soon, and it might look a bit different when we do
61 2016-11-29 17:15:03	0|morcos|jonasschnelli: I have some questions about the new smart fee slider label introduced in #8989
62 2016-11-29 17:15:05	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8989 | [Qt] overhaul smart-fee slider, adjust default confirmation target by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #8989 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
63 2016-11-29 17:15:55	0|morcos|The way the smart fee slider always worked was it was displaying to you the estimate that estimateSMARTfee was returning which might have been at a different number of blocks than your requested target.
64 2016-11-29 17:17:00	0|morcos|now it is true, that the pre-existing code was then actually trying to send your transaction with estimatesmartefee from you requested target, which i guess might have changed if that was all of a sudden now possible to return an answer
65 2016-11-29 17:17:06	0|morcos|so that was maybe already a slight bug
66 2016-11-29 17:18:06	0|morcos|but i think it is confusing now that the label below the slider shows your requested target, which maybe different from the label above ths slider which shows the found target
67 2016-11-29 17:18:58	0|morcos|That said... i'm not really sure what the solution is
68 2016-11-29 18:14:42	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15morcos opened pull request #9239: Disable fee estimates for 1 block target (06master...06blockstreamtil2blocks) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9239
69 2016-11-29 18:24:25	0|morcos|jonasschnelli: I think the way I did above PR, the problem will be rare that the 2 numbers will be different...  so its probably not worth worrying about..  although you should make sure you are ok with changes to smartfeeslider
70 2016-11-29 19:41:09	0|Chris_Stewart_5|Is casting to CScriptBase the only way to serialize CScript to a hex string while keeping the push ops around?
71 2016-11-29 19:48:53	0|BlueMatt|morcos: hum, I dont think I've looked at the conflict-detection code in forever
72 2016-11-29 19:49:13	0|BlueMatt|if you fix it up I'm more than happy to take a look :p
73 2016-11-29 19:50:45	0|morcos|BlueMatt: i'm not fixing it up (at least not now) i'm removing the code that doesn't serve a valuable function..  partly pinging you as it affects #9014.  anyway, will do and then we can discuss on PR.  right now i'm swimming in asserts
74 2016-11-29 19:50:48	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9014 | Fix block-connection performance regression by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #9014 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
75 2016-11-29 19:51:17	0|BlueMatt|morcos: yea, i figured it'd effect 9014, but probably not in any way I care about :p
76 2016-11-29 20:39:52	0|jonasschnelli|morcos: good point.
77 2016-11-29 20:40:01	0|jonasschnelli|The label does show the requested target
78 2016-11-29 20:54:31	0|morcos|jonasschnelli: once we eliminate fee estimates for 1, they will only disagree either on startup or very rarely..  so i think its probably ok..
79 2016-11-29 23:04:02	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15morcos opened pull request #9240: Remove txConflicted (06master...06removeTxConflicted) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9240