1 2017-05-16 06:10:30	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14761392d 15John Newbery: [logging] log system time and mock time
 2 2017-05-16 06:10:30	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b6ee855b411e...d0c37ee78984
 3 2017-05-16 06:10:31	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14d0c37ee 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10383: [logging] log system time and mock time...
 4 2017-05-16 06:11:00	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10383: [logging] log system time and mock time (06master...06log_mocktime) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10383
 5 2017-05-16 06:24:07	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15str4d opened pull request #10408: Net: Improvements to Tor control port parser (06master...06torcontrol-parser-patches) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10408
 6 2017-05-16 06:55:12	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14012fa9b 15Spencer Lievens: Add OSX keystroke to clear RPCConsole...
 7 2017-05-16 06:55:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d0c37ee78984...95546c859b71
 8 2017-05-16 06:55:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1495546c8 15Jonas Schnelli: Merge #10362: [GUI] Add OSX keystroke to RPCConsole info...
 9 2017-05-16 06:55:39	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jonasschnelli closed pull request #10362: [GUI] Add OSX keystroke to RPCConsole info (06master...06RPC-OSX-Keystroke) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10362
10 2017-05-16 06:58:58	0|jonasschnelli|Can someone working on the net-code give a final ACK/NACK for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9502? sipa, cfields?
11 2017-05-16 07:06:20	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: I'll give it a detailed look in the morning (getting ready for bed atm). Looks ok at a glance, though. Though, I'm a bit confused about nBlocksInFlight being atomic.
12 2017-05-16 07:07:58	0|jonasschnelli|cfields: Okay. Thanks... have a rest (it's not urgent). And yes, I would like to hear why you think nBlocksInFlight as an atomic may be confusing.
13 2017-05-16 07:08:48	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: just looks like it should either be non-atomic and require the lock, or be atomic and possibly out of sync.
14 2017-05-16 07:09:44	0|jonasschnelli|Okay... let me check that again. Thanks for pointing out.
15 2017-05-16 07:10:25	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: (i haven't looked deeply, so no idea if it makes sense), maybe useful to trigger a gui event for mapBlocksInFlight.erase(), similar to the other recent changes like that?
16 2017-05-16 07:10:47	0|cfields|that way you'd keep it cached at the gui and not have to query the other way?
17 2017-05-16 07:11:08	0|jonasschnelli|cfields: But wouldn't mapBlocksInFlight.erase() not result in still downloading the blocks?
18 2017-05-16 07:11:41	0|jonasschnelli|IMO what the GUI should know is how many blocks are still "in transit" when someone pressed "pause"...
19 2017-05-16 07:11:55	0|jonasschnelli|because you won't stop a peer of sending you the already requestes blocks...
20 2017-05-16 07:12:00	0|jonasschnelli|and you should accept them,...
21 2017-05-16 07:12:19	0|jonasschnelli|*the peer should accept them
22 2017-05-16 07:13:21	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: i just mean add a gui event for when mapBlocksInFlight is added to or removed. that way the gui gets notifications for each change, and doesn't have to try to query
23 2017-05-16 07:13:50	0|jonasschnelli|aha... yeah. That would work.. though seems a bit an overkill to add a signal for that... but maybe not.
24 2017-05-16 07:14:46	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: yea, that's the part i wasn't sure about. I only mentioned because it's the direction things have been going in lately.
25 2017-05-16 07:15:08	0|jonasschnelli|Yes. That's true. Maybe its useful for other stuff as well..
26 2017-05-16 07:15:28	0|jonasschnelli|What are the downside of the atomic approach? Calling the getter in the middle of an "update sequence"?
27 2017-05-16 07:19:48	0|cfields|yea, possible off-by-one in some future code i guess. unlikely to be an actual issue probably, just feels a bit icky to introduce a race strictly because the non-racy path would require the slow lock :(
28 2017-05-16 07:20:28	0|cfields|s/race/de-sync/, i suppose
29 2017-05-16 14:51:29	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #10409: [tests] Add fuzz testing for BlockTransactions (BLOCKTXN) and BlockTransactionsRequest (GETBLOCKTXN) deserialization (06master...06fuzz-blocktransactions) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10409
30 2017-05-16 15:48:42	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky opened pull request #10410: Fix importwallet edge case rescan bug (06master...06pr/scanimp) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10410
31 2017-05-16 19:44:52	0|Chris_Stewart_5|If I have a transaction that spends a raw witness spk and the input is already signed on the spending tx, and then I'm trying to call fundrawtransaction to add a fee. Is this currently unsupported in bitcoin core? Do I need to use P2SH(P2WSH)?
32 2017-05-16 20:04:08	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky opened pull request #10412: Improve wallet rescan API (06master...06pr/scanclean) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10412