1 2017-05-19 02:36:26	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jtimon opened pull request #10427: Consensus: Introduce static GetScriptFlags (mostly MOVEONLY) (06master...06b15-consensus-script-flags-min) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10427
  2 2017-05-19 02:55:57	0|luke-jr|ugh, it's like people refactored Core intentionally to make this rebase harder! (I know that's not the case..)
  3 2017-05-19 03:36:57	0|jtimon|updated https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10118
  4 2017-05-19 04:02:55	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15earonesty opened pull request #10428: -bip148 option (060.14...060.14) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10428
  5 2017-05-19 04:15:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15theuni opened pull request #10429: tests: fix spurious addrman test failure (06master...06fix-addrman-test) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10429
  6 2017-05-19 04:30:51	0|SopaXorzTaker|guys, I want to propose a BIP
  7 2017-05-19 04:31:12	0|SopaXorzTaker|Let's bring back the removed script opcodes, and standartize their behavior
  8 2017-05-19 04:31:17	0|ajd_|have you tried the mailing list?
  9 2017-05-19 04:31:40	0|SopaXorzTaker|ajd_, well, I've never had an experience with mailing lists
 10 2017-05-19 04:31:48	0|SopaXorzTaker|where can it be found?
 11 2017-05-19 04:32:25	0|ajd_|hold on lmgtfy
 12 2017-05-19 04:32:58	0|ajd_|https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
 13 2017-05-19 04:33:35	0|ajd_|not sure how successful you'll be but probably not less successful than pitching it here
 14 2017-05-19 04:33:54	0|SopaXorzTaker|hmm
 15 2017-05-19 04:33:58	0|SopaXorzTaker|yup, found that
 16 2017-05-19 04:34:08	0|SopaXorzTaker|um, what should I write?
 17 2017-05-19 04:34:25	0|SopaXorzTaker|"Umm guys do u wanna look at my BIP proposal?"
 18 2017-05-19 04:35:24	0|ajd_|- Generally discouraged: shower thoughts, wild speculation, jokes, +1s, non-technical bitcoin issues, rehashing settled topics without new data, moderation concerns.
 19 2017-05-19 04:35:24	0|ajd_|- Generally encouraged: patches, notification of pull requests, BIP proposals, academic paper announcements. And discussions that follow.
 20 2017-05-19 04:35:24	0|ajd_|- Posts should be technical or academic in nature.
 21 2017-05-19 04:36:20	0|ajd_|maybe better to run the proposal past the people in #bitcoin first
 22 2017-05-19 04:36:35	0|ajd_|Anyway I'm going to shut up now
 23 2017-05-19 04:41:35	0|SopaXorzTaker|hmm
 24 2017-05-19 04:58:35	0|SopaXorzTaker|BTW, just a core dev question
 25 2017-05-19 04:58:44	0|SopaXorzTaker|do we prune old UTXOs?
 26 2017-05-19 04:59:22	0|SopaXorzTaker|If not, I'd suggest keeping ones older than a parameter in on-disk cache, and allocating memory only for the new ones
 27 2017-05-19 05:26:40	0|luke-jr|SopaXorzTaker: please at least understand things before making suggestions.. all UTXOs are kept primarily in an on-disk database
 28 2017-05-19 05:44:54	0|sipa|SopaXorzTaker: please go away
 29 2017-05-19 05:45:11	0|sipa|SopaXorzTaker: you've been told repeatedly to not make proposals about changing bitcoin here
 30 2017-05-19 05:46:02	0|sipa|the UTXO question is indeed on topic, but you could do some basic research like trying to read the code and ask questions about it
 31 2017-05-19 05:57:01	0|SopaXorzTaker|wait
 32 2017-05-19 05:57:13	0|SopaXorzTaker|I had that misconception that UTXOs are kept in memory
 33 2017-05-19 05:57:24	0|sipa|they are cached in memory
 34 2017-05-19 05:57:29	0|sipa|the most recently used ones
 35 2017-05-19 05:58:01	0|sipa|-dbcache controls the size of that cache
 36 2017-05-19 05:58:14	0|sipa|the default since the latest release is 450 MB
 37 2017-05-19 06:03:00	0|SopaXorzTaker|hm
 38 2017-05-19 06:03:11	0|wumpus|also, please don't prefix any question with a "wait!" or "guys!" or "hm" line, you can just go and ask the question
 39 2017-05-19 06:03:14	0|SopaXorzTaker|so I tried to oversmart the Core dev team, uh
 40 2017-05-19 06:05:23	0|sipa|any idea what's going on here: https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/233833539
 41 2017-05-19 06:05:55	0|sipa|the win32 build repeatedly fails to test... 10 min timeout
 42 2017-05-19 06:06:18	0|sipa|if i look at other PRs that succeed there, there is '790s' marker next to that line
 43 2017-05-19 06:06:56	0|wumpus|seems the util test is taking very long
 44 2017-05-19 06:07:31	0|sipa|i think it's the test_bitcoin
 45 2017-05-19 06:07:38	0|sipa|just hasn't produced output yet
 46 2017-05-19 06:08:56	0|sipa|but i don't understand how in normal (succesful) builds, there can be line that takes 790s, while not timing out
 47 2017-05-19 06:09:49	0|sipa|https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/233849245#L2526
 48 2017-05-19 06:10:14	0|sipa|oh, perhaps that 790s for the entire section
 49 2017-05-19 06:10:43	0|wumpus|maybe it's on the edge of timing out, and usually it falls within the allotted time, but sometimes (due to VM unpredictability) it doesn't
 50 2017-05-19 06:11:20	0|wumpus|travis issues are usually so hard to debug , especially intermittent ones, it's become its own kind of dread
 51 2017-05-19 06:11:36	0|sipa|but with 10195 (after the latest rebase, not before) reproducibly times out there
 52 2017-05-19 06:12:01	0|sipa|can we increase that 10min timeout?
 53 2017-05-19 06:12:09	0|sipa|or make test_bitcoin print some dots
 54 2017-05-19 06:12:56	0|sipa|oh, it wouldn't be visible even to travis, as the makefile construction doesn't connect stdout/stderr of the tests with the actual outut
 55 2017-05-19 06:13:04	0|wumpus|you could increase the verbosity level, but yeah exactly
 56 2017-05-19 06:17:29	0|sipa|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10195/commits/71837d800cdacd92ddb5bf8536c0e16338a6a889
 57 2017-05-19 07:59:58	0|sipa|seems that worked
 58 2017-05-19 08:24:24	0|wumpus|interesting
 59 2017-05-19 08:47:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15paveljanik opened pull request #10431: Prevent shadowing the global dustRelayFee (06master...0620170519_policy_shadowing) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10431
 60 2017-05-19 09:01:50	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15plaxton opened pull request #10432: [Trivial] Add BITCOIN_FS_H endif footer in fs.h (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10432
 61 2017-05-19 09:51:08	0|rafalcpp|Hello. Using your tool github-merge.py - it seems not work in some cases, e.g. it dislikes when one of the files is a symlink, is that not supported?
 62 2017-05-19 09:51:22	0|rafalcpp|(Using you tool, but for another project)
 63 2017-05-19 09:52:28	0|wumpus|symlinks are indeed not supported
 64 2017-05-19 09:54:52	0|wumpus|(this is partially on purpose, partially because we don't know how to handle them for the treesum - but in any case it prevents symlinks from being introduced to the repository)
 65 2017-05-19 10:01:06	0|rafalcpp|wumpus: perhaps like SYMLINK filename targetname? though yeah I guess we can live without symlinks :)
 66 2017-05-19 10:02:13	0|wumpus|not all OSes support them anyway, and we're slightly afraid it can be used for nefarious things, but for your own project you could patch it to do something with symlinks sure
 67 2017-05-19 10:58:07	0|rafalcpp|wumpus: even without the symlink, now both current and older script fails for one of PRs. It worked without problem for hundreds of merges before. Perhaps a bug in the tool, can I PM you urls/example?
 68 2017-05-19 10:58:45	0|wumpus|sure
 69 2017-05-19 10:59:02	0|rafalcpp|error is that Automatic merge failed.  How ever, merge  of that author/branch that he tries to PR,  to same target/target_branch that the PR addresses, works fine (even as ff only)
 70 2017-05-19 11:01:32	0|wumpus|automatic merge failed means that the merge could not be done automatically, it's usually fixed by rebasing the branch
 71 2017-05-19 11:01:45	0|wumpus|hm okay
 72 2017-05-19 11:03:02	0|wumpus|what it does is: GIT,'merge','-q','--commit','--no-edit','--no-ff','-m',message.encode('utf-8'),head_branch   ... if that returns a non-zero exit code, you get the "Cannot be merged cleanly" error
 73 2017-05-19 13:50:58	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 142300a5e 15Ahmad Kazi: [Trivial] Add BITCOIN_FS_H endif footer in fs.h
 74 2017-05-19 13:50:58	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14993a1d7 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10432: [Trivial] Add BITCOIN_FS_H endif footer in fs.h...
 75 2017-05-19 13:50:58	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ea6fde3f1d26...993a1d710e7e
 76 2017-05-19 13:51:33	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10432: [Trivial] Add BITCOIN_FS_H endif footer in fs.h (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10432
 77 2017-05-19 13:51:58	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146b51b0a 15Cory Fields: tests: fix spurious addrman test failure...
 78 2017-05-19 13:51:58	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/993a1d710e7e...6b99dafe4204
 79 2017-05-19 13:51:59	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 146b99daf 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10429: tests: fix spurious addrman test failure...
 80 2017-05-19 13:52:33	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10429: tests: fix spurious addrman test failure (06master...06fix-addrman-test) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10429
 81 2017-05-19 13:55:56	0|instagibbs|code seems simple enough, but IsInitialBlockDownload() will return true if IBD || reindex || importing blocks from disk?
 82 2017-05-19 13:56:41	0|instagibbs|(asking if any sharp edges)
 83 2017-05-19 14:15:06	0|wumpus|instagibbs: yes, that's the ida
 84 2017-05-19 15:22:44	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jnewbery opened pull request #10433: [tests] improve tmpdir structure (06master...06test_runner_tmpdir) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10433
 85 2017-05-19 16:51:15	0|sipa|so #10426's bogosize counts around 50 bytes per utxo (excluding the scriptPubKey)
 86 2017-05-19 16:51:16	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10426 | Replace bytes_serialized with bogosize by sipa · Pull Request #10426 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 87 2017-05-19 16:51:37	0|sipa|disksize counts around 19 bytes per utxo
 88 2017-05-19 16:55:47	0|gmaxwell|if would be more accurate if you made it work in units of nat-bytes. :P
 89 2017-05-19 16:55:57	0|sipa|hahaha
 90 2017-05-19 16:56:07	0|sipa|octonats
 91 2017-05-19 18:02:18	0|Eliel_|I'm trying to debug a weird problem with the bitcoind wallet occasionally not unlocking after an apparently succesful walletpassphrase RPC call. The sendfrom RPC that follows the unlock errors with "Error: Please enter the wallet passphrase with walletpassphra
 92 2017-05-19 18:02:22	0|Eliel_|se first."
 93 2017-05-19 18:03:36	0|Eliel_|I found the debug parameter from bitcoind --help -help-debug. Which categories would make sense to activate? I think at least rpc category, but would other categories be useful?
 94 2017-05-19 18:05:35	0|Eliel_|maybe lock or http categories as well?
 95 2017-05-19 20:29:03	0|Chris_Stewart_5|Why would fundrawtransaction fail with 'Signing Transaction failed'? I thought fundrawtransaction does no signing?
 96 2017-05-19 20:32:28	0|arubi|it does run some script with a dummy signature in the process though
 97 2017-05-19 20:32:47	0|arubi|maybe the script you're redeeming is disallowed in itself
 98 2017-05-19 20:33:05	0|arubi|some = the script being spent in the input
 99 2017-05-19 21:04:33	0|instagibbs|Chris_Stewart_5, you likely don't know how to sign an input you included
100 2017-05-19 21:05:10	0|instagibbs|oh sorry I see you moved elsewhere, ignore...