1 2017-05-01 04:57:26	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15kallewoof opened pull request #10303: [bench] Include ms/blk stats in Connect* benchmarks. (06master...06bench-add-per-block-stats) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10303
  2 2017-05-01 07:17:48	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14b297426 15Pieter Wuille: Add -stopatheight for benchmarking
  3 2017-05-01 07:17:48	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/80c3a734298e...8d6d43e9338a
  4 2017-05-01 07:17:49	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 148d6d43e 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10290: Add -stopatheight for benchmarking...
  5 2017-05-01 07:18:08	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10290: Add -stopatheight for benchmarking (06master...06shutdown_at_height) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10290
  6 2017-05-01 07:25:02	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 140ff9320 15jonnynewbs: refactor TxToJSON() and ScriptPubKeyToJSON()
  7 2017-05-01 07:25:02	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8d6d43e9338a...9c33ffd38764
  8 2017-05-01 07:25:03	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 149c33ffd 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8824: Refactor TxToJSON() and ScriptPubKeyToJSON()...
  9 2017-05-01 07:51:48	0|wumpus|gmaxwell: sipa: I'm just worried that taking up the concern of doing proper seeding in bitcoin core itself, without anyone else looking at it or using it, will result in a worse outcome for us. Allthe platform specific stuff is a hell to maintain, and it forces us to stay up to date in developments in that area
 10 2017-05-01 07:52:27	0|wumpus|a person can't be a specialist in everything, and neither can a project, I think
 11 2017-05-01 07:54:38	0|gmaxwell|someone else writing it doesn't magically make it good however, it can just be a way to launder bad code.
 12 2017-05-01 07:54:55	0|wumpus|yes, that is true too
 13 2017-05-01 07:56:37	0|gmaxwell|the openssl code smells pretty bad. (in particular, IIRC if it's unable to open any strong random device it keeps on going)-- but it does at least have the benefit of being widely used. I too am not keep on platform specfifc code, we don't want to have a case where someone runs on BeOS and doesn't get randomness at all because /dev/urandom is symlinked ot /dev/zero and how were we so stupid as t
 14 2017-05-01 07:56:43	0|gmaxwell|o not know this and account for it. :P
 15 2017-05-01 07:56:51	0|wumpus|but someone else cooporating on it outside the context of bitcoin core (which is pretty narrow) isn't necessarily bad
 16 2017-05-01 07:58:47	0|gmaxwell|The challenge we have for doing a general RNG library which you suggested before (we tried) is that our needs are pretty different and addressing it in the general case is really really hard.  In particular, other applications have strong performance requirements that necessitates lockfree state management, while at the same time handling forced RNG reseeding across forks.  The approaches people
 17 2017-05-01 07:58:53	0|gmaxwell|have come up with for this are ugly and pretty platform specific.  And these are both properties that we don't need.
 18 2017-05-01 07:59:10	0|wumpus|yes, defending openssl in that regard is pretty pointless
 19 2017-05-01 07:59:43	0|gmaxwell|(they're handling the fork transisition stuff using things like special page flags that cause tagged pages to get zeroed on fork ... and other similar functionality that is different on every OS that implements something like it)
 20 2017-05-01 07:59:52	0|wumpus|"In particular, other applications have strong performance requirements that necessitates lockfree state management" then we explicitly exclude those
 21 2017-05-01 08:00:08	0|gmaxwell|('there' in this case referring to other people attempting general RNG code.)
 22 2017-05-01 08:00:08	0|wumpus|the kind of thing I'm thinking of it other wallets
 23 2017-05-01 08:00:21	0|wumpus|usually need low-frequency, but very good entropy
 24 2017-05-01 08:00:24	0|gmaxwell|okay we could do something that would perhaps mostly only be used by other bitcoin things.
 25 2017-05-01 08:00:33	0|gmaxwell|(or cryptocurrency rather)
 26 2017-05-01 08:01:08	0|wumpus|yup other cryptocurrency and things that need strong keys
 27 2017-05-01 08:01:24	0|wumpus|it's a growing space at least
 28 2017-05-01 08:01:52	0|wumpus|indeed I don't care the least about satisfying any need for randomness for any project in existence
 29 2017-05-01 08:02:26	0|wumpus|but improving wallets in general would already be a nice aim
 30 2017-05-01 08:02:33	0|gmaxwell|well one thing that was suggested was just doing initial seed generation as a library, which is basically all you need for most wallet keygen things, and has the least concern.
 31 2017-05-01 08:02:39	0|wumpus|yup
 32 2017-05-01 08:03:08	0|wumpus|then we agree I guess :)
 33 2017-05-01 08:03:55	0|gmaxwell|okay, thats a fine scope.
 34 2017-05-01 08:08:03	0|wumpus|I sometimes wonder what gpg's key generation does
 35 2017-05-01 08:09:41	0|wumpus|this is the only non-wallet example of a long term key, not easy to replace, potential disaster if compromised, that I can think of right now
 36 2017-05-01 08:54:34	0|kallewoof|Maybe bitcoin could use libgcrypt (GnuPG uses it for keys, I think; it has a bunch of random things) instead of OpenSSL. Though it seems to be LGPL. Some parts of it are dual MPL-compat though, like random-drbg.c
 37 2017-05-01 08:54:52	0|kallewoof|"a bunch of random things" = "a bunch of things related to RNG"
 38 2017-05-01 08:55:23	0|kallewoof|Uh, meant MIT, not MPL
 39 2017-05-01 10:05:27	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15kallewoof opened pull request #10304: [rpc] Allow a txid param in getrawmempool (06master...06getrawmempool-include-txid) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10304
 40 2017-05-01 10:17:32	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1485f950a 15Jimmy Song: [test] Add tests for getconnectioncount, getnettotals and ping...
 41 2017-05-01 10:17:32	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9c33ffd38764...492d22f92919
 42 2017-05-01 10:17:33	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14492d22f 15MarcoFalke: Merge #10264: [test] Add tests for getconnectioncount, getnettotals and ping...
 43 2017-05-01 10:17:51	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #10264: [test] Add tests for getconnectioncount, getnettotals and ping (06master...06test_netrpccalls) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10264
 44 2017-05-01 13:21:22	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 147c58863 15Gregory Sanders: [Wallet] unset change position when there is no change on exact match
 45 2017-05-01 13:21:22	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/492d22f92919...e2b99b13131b
 46 2017-05-01 13:21:23	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e2b99b1 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10294: [Wallet] unset change position when there is no change...
 47 2017-05-01 13:21:45	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10294: [Wallet] unset change position when there is no change (06master...06fixchangepos) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10294
 48 2017-05-01 15:52:38	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15TheBlueMatt opened pull request #10305: Fix potential NPD introduced in b297426c (06master...062017-05-fix-10290-npd) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10305
 49 2017-05-01 16:13:21	0|BlueMatt|should #10294 not get backported?
 50 2017-05-01 16:13:23	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10294 | [Wallet] unset change position when there is no change by instagibbs · Pull Request #10294 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 51 2017-05-01 16:13:36	0|BlueMatt|(are we backporting for a theoretical 0.14.2?)
 52 2017-05-01 16:14:36	0|instagibbs|definitely should be if there is a 0.14.2
 53 2017-05-01 16:14:41	0|instagibbs|imo
 54 2017-05-01 16:20:26	0|sipa|agree
 55 2017-05-01 18:47:25	0|jl2012|is the blockchain database of 0.9 compatible with 0.13?
 56 2017-05-01 18:47:44	0|sipa|yes
 57 2017-05-01 18:48:35	0|sipa|0.8.0 through 0.14.1 should have compatible chainstates
 58 2017-05-01 18:48:42	0|sipa|(forward and backward)
 59 2017-05-01 18:58:07	0|jl2012|thanks
 60 2017-05-01 18:58:52	0|sipa|actually, op_return pruning was added in between somewhere, if you downgrade, the startup check may complain
 61 2017-05-01 18:58:59	0|gmaxwell|uh, no.
 62 2017-05-01 18:59:19	0|gmaxwell|chainstate obfscuation was introduced around 0.11.x
 63 2017-05-01 18:59:23	0|sipa|oh!
 64 2017-05-01 18:59:37	0|gmaxwell|(maybe in 0.12.0?)
 65 2017-05-01 19:00:01	0|sipa|indeed, 0.12.0
 66 2017-05-01 19:01:07	0|jl2012|ok. So my case is: I have a working 0.9 node, and I want to minimize the time to IBD a 0.13 node . Should I just copy the blocks folder?
 67 2017-05-01 19:01:36	0|sipa|copy the blocks folder and the chainstate
 68 2017-05-01 19:01:46	0|sipa|copy the chainstate first, while the node is offline
 69 2017-05-01 19:02:03	0|sipa|the blocks dir can be copied later (and the node can have run in between)
 70 2017-05-01 19:02:04	0|jl2012|but I have to keep it online
 71 2017-05-01 19:02:11	0|jl2012|so it will corrupt?
 72 2017-05-01 19:02:25	0|luke-jr|could try lsyncd I guess
 73 2017-05-01 19:02:50	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15tjps closed pull request #10182: [scheduler] Switched CScheduler to C++11 threading primitives (06master...06tjps_scheduler) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10182
 74 2017-05-01 19:12:39	0|SopaXorzTaker|sipa, what's this bounty? http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.bitcoin.devel/3089
 75 2017-05-01 19:12:42	0|BlueMatt|cfields: lol, so I've now got a long branch with a bunch of scripted diffs that make CBlockIndexes outside of validation (and mostly outside of CChainState) all const :p
 76 2017-05-01 19:12:47	0|BlueMatt|guess that stuff /is/ useful :p
 77 2017-05-01 19:12:49	0|SopaXorzTaker|(on-topic to core dev)
 78 2017-05-01 19:13:17	0|cfields|:)
 79 2017-05-01 19:14:07	0|BlueMatt|also, yay, const access to validation outside of validation!
 80 2017-05-01 19:14:10	0|sipa|SopaXorzTaker: why do you ask me?
 81 2017-05-01 19:14:14	0|BlueMatt|crazy, yo
 82 2017-05-01 19:14:21	0|sipa|SopaXorzTaker: ask the person who sent that mail
 83 2017-05-01 19:14:30	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jnewbery opened pull request #10307: [tests] allow zmq test to be run in out-of-tree builds (06master...06fix_zmq_test_out_of_tree) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10307
 84 2017-05-01 19:16:24	0|BlueMatt|cfields: re: 10189: instead of TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE might it make sense to go back until the nearest merge commit?
 85 2017-05-01 19:17:30	0|cfields|BlueMatt: why? I believe TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE includes the merge commit it creates
 86 2017-05-01 19:17:44	0|BlueMatt|well i meant eg for private repo runs
 87 2017-05-01 19:17:51	0|BlueMatt|it'd be nice, but i guess doesn't matter /that/ much
 88 2017-05-01 19:17:58	0|BlueMatt|it just feels weird that it would only be tested on prs
 89 2017-05-01 19:18:21	0|cfields|BlueMatt: ah, I hadn't even considered non-PRs. Yes.
 90 2017-05-01 19:19:01	0|cfields|BlueMatt: can probably diff to branch point
 91 2017-05-01 19:19:01	0|SopaXorzTaker|the addresses belong to gmaxwell and jgarzik, and one more
 92 2017-05-01 19:19:08	0|SopaXorzTaker|let's extort them, muhahah
 93 2017-05-01 19:19:20	0|SopaXorzTaker|(offtoipic end)
 94 2017-05-01 19:19:30	0|BlueMatt|cfields: i guess doesnt matter for first version in pr
 95 2017-05-01 19:22:06	0|BlueMatt|cfields: hmmm, I cant run the script locally
 96 2017-05-01 19:22:06	0|cfields|BlueMatt: Well, actually, it may break for simple pushes (not sure, I have those disabled). I assume TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE is empty for those.
 97 2017-05-01 19:22:13	0|BlueMatt|I get "bash: !b}: event not found"
 98 2017-05-01 19:23:26	0|SopaXorzTaker|ROLL, ROT, SWAP
 99 2017-05-01 19:23:27	0|cfields|BlueMatt: got a branch I can look at?
100 2017-05-01 19:23:38	0|BlueMatt|cfields: I'm literally just running the command manually
101 2017-05-01 19:23:47	0|SopaXorzTaker|that's a lifetime of a TX script in a nutshell
102 2017-05-01 19:23:49	0|BlueMatt|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10189/files#diff-6f65a3cbb40a72a97be8d4930d214685R25
103 2017-05-01 19:23:51	0|BlueMatt|that line fails
104 2017-05-01 19:24:39	0|BlueMatt|SopaXorzTaker: thanks, but lets keep this on-topic :) people often read scrollback and its very rude when there is a bunch of chatter that is off-topic in the scrollback that people have to spend time reading later
105 2017-05-01 19:26:02	0|SopaXorzTaker|+
106 2017-05-01 19:26:59	0|cfields|BlueMatt: hmm, unsure. Does it object to the sed syntax?
107 2017-05-01 19:27:21	0|BlueMatt|cfields: yes, I assume its the last part of the sed line (that is the only place with a !b)
108 2017-05-01 19:27:30	0|BlueMatt|but its bash complaining, not sed
109 2017-05-01 19:30:27	0|cfields|BlueMatt: i'm not sure why it would matter in a script, but it sounds like history expansion's kicking in. Does using ' ' instead fix it?
110 2017-05-01 19:31:00	0|BlueMatt|using ' ' where?
111 2017-05-01 19:31:18	0|cfields|BlueMatt: sec
112 2017-05-01 19:33:04	0|cfields|yea, i can reproduce when running the sed script by hand. Must be some interactive/non-interactive difference
113 2017-05-01 19:33:13	0|BlueMatt|oh strange
114 2017-05-01 19:33:38	0|cfields|BlueMatt: https://pastebin.com/raw/q9N6NE4b
115 2017-05-01 19:34:04	0|BlueMatt|ah, heh
116 2017-05-01 19:34:11	0|BlueMatt|s'pose i should have tried that
117 2017-05-01 19:38:05	0|cfields|I'll fix that and add a quick change to make it only run on PRs
118 2017-05-01 19:38:22	0|BlueMatt|thanks
119 2017-05-01 19:39:28	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15tjps opened pull request #10308: [wallet] Securely erase potentially sensitive keys/values (06master...06tjps_secure_erase) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10308
120 2017-05-01 19:46:06	0|cfields|pushed (we'll see if travis likes those)
121 2017-05-01 21:25:55	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15CryptAxe opened pull request #10309: Trivial: remove extra character from comment (06master...06typoquestion) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10309
122 2017-05-01 21:58:55	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 143503716 15CryptAxe: Trivial: remove extra character from comment
123 2017-05-01 21:58:55	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e2b99b13131b...ab1f1d324691
124 2017-05-01 21:58:56	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ab1f1d3 15Pieter Wuille: Merge #10309: Trivial: remove extra character from comment...
125 2017-05-01 21:59:25	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa closed pull request #10309: Trivial: remove extra character from comment (06master...06typoquestion) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10309
126 2017-05-01 22:01:55	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1470d3945 15Matt Corallo: Fix potential NPD introduced in b297426c...
127 2017-05-01 22:01:55	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ab1f1d324691...c45da32047ca
128 2017-05-01 22:01:56	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14c45da32 15Pieter Wuille: Merge #10305: Fix potential NPD introduced in b297426c...
129 2017-05-01 22:02:24	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa closed pull request #10305: Fix potential NPD introduced in b297426c (06master...062017-05-fix-10290-npd) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10305
130 2017-05-01 23:41:10	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 144fbae77 15Marcos Mayorga: Improved efficiency in COutPoint constructors
131 2017-05-01 23:41:10	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c45da32047ca...e4bbd3d230f2
132 2017-05-01 23:41:11	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e4bbd3d 15Pieter Wuille: Merge #10292: Improved efficiency in COutPoint constructors...
133 2017-05-01 23:41:34	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa closed pull request #10292: Improved efficiency in COutPoint constructors (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10292