1 2017-03-05 00:06:10 0|jeremyrubin|hm ok I know what the problem is more or less... now just to solve it :p
2 2017-03-05 01:02:12 0|jeremyrubin|CMutableTransaction tx(*block.vtx[0]);
3 2017-03-05 01:02:12 0|jeremyrubin|tx.vout.resize(1);
4 2017-03-05 01:02:13 0|jeremyrubin|block.vtx[0] = MakeTransactionRef(std::move(tx));
5 2017-03-05 01:02:31 0|jeremyrubin|That's the fix for it to work in TestChain100Setup
6 2017-03-05 01:02:52 0|jeremyrubin|(And then a call to GenerateCoinbaseComittment)
7 2017-03-05 01:02:59 0|jeremyrubin|Maybe I should pr that...
8 2017-03-05 01:13:39 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #9920: [0.14] Allow any subkey in verify-commits (BlueMatt) (060.14...06Mf1703-verifySubkeys) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9920
9 2017-03-05 09:18:05 0|wumpus|would P2P over UNIX sockets be useful? it obviously can't be used for anything like address advertisement, but if you want to set up a local test network (as the tests do) with -connect/-addnode it may make sense
10 2017-03-05 09:19:35 0|wumpus|also maybe Tor hidden services could connect to us over a UNIX socket?
11 2017-03-05 09:19:38 0|wumpus|apparently, yes https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/11485
12 2017-03-05 09:24:56 0|Tinglysning|you guys are amazing. have a nice day.
13 2017-03-05 09:25:27 0|Tinglysning|cya :)
14 2017-03-05 10:12:32 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #9921: build: Probe MSG_DONTWAIT in the same way as MSG_NOSIGNAL (06master...062017_03_cloudabi_netcompat) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9921
15 2017-03-05 12:38:35 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/53c300fb525a...01b7cda91684
16 2017-03-05 12:38:36 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fa7da3f 15MarcoFalke: [contrib] gh-merge: Move second sha512 check to before signing
17 2017-03-05 12:38:37 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1401b7cda 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9905: [contrib] gh-merge: Move second sha512 check to the end...
18 2017-03-05 12:38:56 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9905: [contrib] gh-merge: Move second sha512 check to the end (06master...06Mf1703-gh-merge) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9905
19 2017-03-05 13:34:23 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #9920: [0.14] Allow any subkey in verify-commits (BlueMatt) (060.14...06Mf1703-verifySubkeys) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9920
20 2017-03-05 13:40:51 0|MarcoFalke|wumpus: Sorry, I missed that #9884 needs backport as well.
21 2017-03-05 13:40:53 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9884 | An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
22 2017-03-05 13:41:53 0|MarcoFalke|Oh wait, you already did.
23 2017-03-05 14:30:44 0|wumpus|yep I backported that one
24 2017-03-05 15:54:43 0|BlueMatt|wtf is the travis failure oon 0.14
25 2017-03-05 16:22:50 0|BlueMatt|wumpus: see #9880's latest commit which will fix 0.14 verify-commits
26 2017-03-05 16:22:52 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9880 | Verify Tree-SHA512s in merge commits, enforce sigs are not SHA1 by TheBlueMatt ÷ Pull Request #9880 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
27 2017-03-05 16:41:28 0|MarcoFalke_lab|BlueMatt: As the script will now accept different subkeys, you might have to track the which subkey was revoked for revsigs.
28 2017-03-05 16:41:46 0|MarcoFalke_lab|I think the easiest solution is to just revert my pull on 0.14
29 2017-03-05 16:41:58 0|BlueMatt|hmm?
30 2017-03-05 16:42:06 0|BlueMatt|no, gpg knows whats revoked
31 2017-03-05 16:42:17 0|BlueMatt|and gpg prints the same VALIDSIG line whether it was signed by a revoked key or not
32 2017-03-05 16:42:36 0|MarcoFalke_lab|We don't need the commit for 0.14 as only laanwj commits on that branch and his key is all fine
33 2017-03-05 16:43:17 0|BlueMatt|yea, but pieter has merged things on that branch with a subkey that is now revoked?
34 2017-03-05 16:43:25 0|BlueMatt|(same commit as on the master branch)
35 2017-03-05 16:44:00 0|MarcoFalke_lab|Yeah, but that subkey is in trusted keys and all commits are already marked as trusted as well
36 2017-03-05 16:44:21 0|MarcoFalke_lab|We only need that commit if pieter uses a different subkey on 0.14
37 2017-03-05 16:44:43 0|BlueMatt|?
38 2017-03-05 16:44:43 0|BlueMatt|well we need the revsig checking fix either way
39 2017-03-05 16:45:06 0|MarcoFalke_lab|verify-commits in case of a revsig, will only check against the hardcoded keys in trusted-keys
40 2017-03-05 16:45:38 0|MarcoFalke_lab|so if the keys are replaced by the root keys, it will no longer detect the revsig
41 2017-03-05 16:46:07 0|MarcoFalke_lab|BlueMatt: Jup, on master we need the fix at some time
42 2017-03-05 16:46:30 0|BlueMatt|ahh, es, ok, so travis wil pass by not backporting that fix....I mean, sure, but I'd rather fix it so that others can merge on 0.14?
43 2017-03-05 16:50:02 0|MarcoFalke_lab|I don't think there is a need for others to merge on 0.14 right now. Though you are still welcome to fix that until tomorrow :P
44 2017-03-05 16:50:21 0|BlueMatt|MarcoFalke_lab: well the commit i just pushed should fix it
45 2017-03-05 16:50:26 0|BlueMatt|or, it fixes the current failure for me
46 2017-03-05 17:13:32 0|wumpus|ok, going to try that
47 2017-03-05 18:13:15 0|wumpus|cherry-picked that commit to 0.14, looks like verify-commits is taking a very long time
48 2017-03-05 18:13:44 0|BlueMatt|it always does
49 2017-03-05 18:14:24 0|BlueMatt|hum, failed
50 2017-03-05 18:14:24 0|wumpus|ok
51 2017-03-05 18:14:25 0|BlueMatt|wtf
52 2017-03-05 18:14:50 0|BlueMatt|oh, you didnt push yet
53 2017-03-05 18:14:51 0|BlueMatt|heh, nvm
54 2017-03-05 18:15:21 0|BlueMatt|its massively slow with the --tree-checks option after the new pr
55 2017-03-05 18:15:30 0|BlueMatt|because git-cat is slow as fuck cat'ing every file :(
56 2017-03-05 18:16:32 0|BlueMatt|(other option is to do a checkout as you go and then hash, which is faster, but does a checkout in your repo which really sucks)
57 2017-03-05 19:25:09 0|gmaxwell|wumpus: p2p on domain sockets would be useful to avoid port conflicts when running test tnings. oh man, and tor using it would give a nice way of distinguishing tor HS without needing to listen on another port the a user might forget to firewall off.
58 2017-03-05 19:25:47 0|gmaxwell|(I think the biggest argument against having a HS listening port is that the user will not firewall it off and it'll be awful for privacy.)
59 2017-03-05 19:29:25 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15SCDeveloper opened pull request #9924: [UI Styling] Left-Align Tab Bar (06master...06patch-1) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9924
60 2017-03-05 19:29:48 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15SCDeveloper opened pull request #9925: [UI Styling] Left-Align Tab Bar (06master...06patch-2) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9925
61 2017-03-05 19:40:50 0|wumpus|BlueMatt: i didn't push yet, was waiting for it to succeed first. But it does: "There is a valid path from HEAD to 82bcf405f6db1d55b684a1f63a4aabad376cdad7 where all commits are signed!", so pushing
62 2017-03-05 19:41:34 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 060.14: 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/43a987c1cbcd04b9c59052606c3c31c56abc826e
63 2017-03-05 19:41:35 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/060.14 1443a987c 15Matt Corallo: Fix regsig checking for subkey sigs in verify-commits...
64 2017-03-05 20:08:42 0|Victorsueca|is there going to be a rc4 so far or you're going for the final release unless some bug is found?
65 2017-03-05 20:15:46 0|sipa|if no bug is found, the rc becomes the final release
66 2017-03-05 20:28:54 0|luke-jr|why is it not sufficient that only the tip be signed?