1 2017-08-22 00:11:24	0|meshcollider|BlueMatt: re #11106, does it literally just require locking cs_main before the print statement?
  2 2017-08-22 00:11:45	0|luke-jr|jonasschnelli: ping, do you have a stats_qt based on your more recent stats_rpc? :/
  3 2017-08-22 00:26:21	0|BlueMatt|meshcollider: yes? I'd think just locking for the print statement, but personally dont care too much to debug it
  4 2017-08-22 00:26:31	0|BlueMatt|ehh, s/debug/do/
  5 2017-08-22 06:24:15	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1406a3aec 15Karel Bílek: Docs: Hash in ZMQ hash is raw bytes, not hex...
  6 2017-08-22 06:24:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c559884cac90...271e40a98984
  7 2017-08-22 06:24:15	0|jonasschnelli|luke-jr: the stats rpc is most recent AFAIK. But I have more recent qt stat work
  8 2017-08-22 06:24:16	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14271e40a 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11094: Docs: Hash in ZMQ hash is raw bytes, not hex...
  9 2017-08-22 06:24:54	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11094: Docs: Hash in ZMQ hash is raw bytes, not hex (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11094
 10 2017-08-22 06:52:05	0|wumpus|luke-jr: does #11026 have any user-visible effect? I think it's correct, but the outcome in both cases is the same, doesn't seem like something high-priority to backport :)
 11 2017-08-22 06:53:58	0|wumpus|btw; -acceptnonstdtxn looks like another case similar to #10357, where a chain parameter has migrated back to a global to be able to override it
 12 2017-08-22 06:54:46	0|wumpus|we really need a better way to override (part of) the chain parameters during initialization that doesn't friggin move everything back to globals and cancels out the whole idea of the chain parameters project
 13 2017-08-22 06:57:28	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 144aa2508 15Luke Dashjr: Bugfix: Use testnet RequireStandard for -acceptnonstdtxn default
 14 2017-08-22 06:57:28	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/271e40a98984...ea3ac5990d9d
 15 2017-08-22 06:57:29	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ea3ac59 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11026: Bugfix: Use testnet RequireStandard for -acceptnonstdtxn default...
 16 2017-08-22 06:58:01	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11026: Bugfix: Use testnet RequireStandard for -acceptnonstdtxn default (06master...06bugfix_acceptnonstd_def) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11026
 17 2017-08-22 07:27:04	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 5 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ea3ac5990d9d...7ed57d3d7ce8
 18 2017-08-22 07:27:05	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e666efc 15Russell Yanofsky: Get rid of redundant RPC params.size() checks...
 19 2017-08-22 07:27:06	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e067673 15Russell Yanofsky: Avoid treating null RPC arguments different from missing arguments...
 20 2017-08-22 07:27:06	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fd5d71e 15Russell Yanofsky: Update developer notes after params.size() cleanup
 21 2017-08-22 07:27:44	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11050: Avoid treating null RPC arguments different from missing arguments (06master...06pr/narg) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11050
 22 2017-08-22 07:31:00	0|wumpus|if we're not going to make chainparams mutable we should at least move all those things to a 'validation parameters' structure instead of a grab-bag of loose globals IMO
 23 2017-08-22 07:32:09	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14360b464 15Jim Posen: Comments: More comments on functions/globals in standard.h.
 24 2017-08-22 07:32:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7ed57d3d7ce8...4b65fa592123
 25 2017-08-22 07:32:10	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 144b65fa5 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11058: Comments: More comments on functions/globals in standard.h....
 26 2017-08-22 07:32:39	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11058: Comments: More comments on functions/globals in standard.h. (06master...06standard-comments) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11058
 27 2017-08-22 07:39:19	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/4b65fa592123...2ab7c6300f87
 28 2017-08-22 07:39:20	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 142ab7c63 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10843: Add attribute [[noreturn]] (C++11) to functions that will not return...
 29 2017-08-22 07:39:20	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14b82c55a 15practicalswift: Add attribute [[noreturn]] (C++11) to functions that will not return...
 30 2017-08-22 07:39:41	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10843: Add attribute [[noreturn]] (C++11) to functions that will not return (06master...06noreturn) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10843
 31 2017-08-22 07:40:04	0|wumpus|so if there are PRs that are ready to be merged (have lots of review) like 10843, do let me know, I cannot monitor all PRs
 32 2017-08-22 07:43:09	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14c06755f 15practicalswift: wallet: Fix memory leak when loading a corrupted wallet file
 33 2017-08-22 07:43:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/2ab7c6300f87...fc5c237d4a84
 34 2017-08-22 07:43:10	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fc5c237 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11007: wallet: Fix potential memory leak when loading a corrupted wallet file...
 35 2017-08-22 07:43:18	0|jonasschnelli|Hmm.. my 0.15.0rc2 GUI on OSX stopped syncing at 480831 (tried to catch up 1 week)
 36 2017-08-22 07:43:39	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11007: wallet: Fix potential memory leak when loading a corrupted wallet file (06master...06wallet-corrupted-leak) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11007
 37 2017-08-22 07:44:40	0|jonasschnelli|No... wait. It's syncing.. but just very slow
 38 2017-08-22 07:44:47	0|jonasschnelli|2017-08-22 07:43:08 UpdateTip: new best=0000000000000000004a2d0fabef7596dface8d30674d49b5f1b471ac2bbb8e3 height=480832 version=0x20000002 log2_work=86.947898 tx=247113581 date='2017-08-16 23:01:42' progress=0.994222 cache=92.1MiB(702795txo)
 39 2017-08-22 07:44:47	0|jonasschnelli|2017-08-22 07:44:22 UpdateTip: new best=000000000000000000ca745a4016d1a02b95ceb7f256cf69c1dfddeece30bb48 height=480833 version=0x20000002 log2_work=86.947936 tx=247116092 date='2017-08-16 23:13:07' progress=0.994229 cache=92.5MiB(705941txo)
 40 2017-08-22 07:51:12	0|jonasschnelli|Slow peer
 41 2017-08-22 07:51:22	0|wumpus|bitcoin-cli logging "bench"  maybe?
 42 2017-08-22 07:51:38	0|wumpus|okay
 43 2017-08-22 07:51:39	0|jonasschnelli|Since when do we have runtime log enabling?
 44 2017-08-22 07:51:53	0|jonasschnelli|How could I miss that
 45 2017-08-22 07:52:07	0|wumpus|#10150 :)
 46 2017-08-22 07:52:40	0|wumpus|don't feel ashamed, so much is happening, it's impossible to keep track of everything
 47 2017-08-22 07:53:31	0|jonasschnelli|However, I'm impressed how you can keep up to date with everything. :)
 48 2017-08-22 09:06:11	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MeshCollider opened pull request #11107: Fix race for mapBlockIndex in AppInitMain (06master...06fix_mapBlockIndex_race) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11107
 49 2017-08-22 09:44:09	0|wumpus|rc2 executables up https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.15.0/test.rc2/ https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.15.0/test.rc2/
 50 2017-08-22 13:45:17	0|jonasschnelli|Is there a simple way to get the sighash by providing a 1. rawtx, 2. inputindex, 3. scriptPubKey?
 51 2017-08-22 13:59:48	0|rubensayshi|hmm, when will BIP173 move from Draft to Final?
 52 2017-08-22 14:22:09	0|sipa|jonasschnelli: for segwit, you also need the amount
 53 2017-08-22 14:22:24	0|jonasschnelli|yes. Good point.
 54 2017-08-22 14:22:33	0|jonasschnelli|There is no RPC interface call I can use? (currently hacking in)
 55 2017-08-22 14:22:42	0|sipa|no
 56 2017-08-22 14:22:45	0|jonasschnelli|Ok
 57 2017-08-22 15:01:19	0|sipa|rubensayshi: when it's in use, i guess
 58 2017-08-22 15:01:58	0|sipa|luke-jr: should a BIP be marked final before it's in use, but after there are no plans to change it anymore?
 59 2017-08-22 15:02:05	0|rubensayshi|I'd say yea
 60 2017-08-22 15:02:15	0|rubensayshi|cuz why would I implement it as wallet dev if there's no guarentee it's final
 61 2017-08-22 15:02:28	0|wumpus|because you want to be part of the process forming it?
 62 2017-08-22 15:02:39	0|rubensayshi|I might just be creating a huge mess for myself by implementing a BIP that can still change
 63 2017-08-22 15:02:39	0|wumpus|if you find issues when it's final, it's too bad
 64 2017-08-22 15:02:49	0|rubensayshi|this one not so much
 65 2017-08-22 15:03:13	0|rubensayshi|but lets say BIP39 (*hint hint that actually did change under my feet while it was Final, but lets not side step too much*)
 66 2017-08-22 15:03:29	0|wumpus|the idea is that people start implementing it before it's final, to know for sure whether it works for their use cases
 67 2017-08-22 15:03:34	0|rubensayshi|you can get screwed pretty badly if the BIP changes and while you intended to be compatible you're now not and have to migrate
 68 2017-08-22 15:03:35	0|sipa|rubensayshi: i personally have no intention of changing bip173 anymore
 69 2017-08-22 15:04:11	0|wumpus|yes, for key generation for wallets I agree, you'd want it to be final at least before releasing or deploying to production
 70 2017-08-22 15:04:20	0|wumpus|but for P2P protocols it's different...
 71 2017-08-22 15:04:49	0|wumpus|anyhow it's up to you
 72 2017-08-22 15:05:13	0|wumpus|but when it's final and you find any issues, it means a new BIP must be created to amend it
 73 2017-08-22 15:05:31	0|sipa|it's an annoying situation indeed; i wish there was a state "no intent to change"
 74 2017-08-22 15:05:37	0|rubensayshi|true, ofc ppl should implement / test it before then
 75 2017-08-22 15:05:40	0|rubensayshi|just bringing it up for discussion
 76 2017-08-22 15:05:46	0|wumpus|and most issues are found at implementation time, or after
 77 2017-08-22 15:05:52	0|rubensayshi|because putting it into prod when there's a chance it might still change doesn't feel very good either
 78 2017-08-22 15:06:19	0|wumpus|implementing doesn't mean the same as putting it into production, you can have an impementation on a branch or something
 79 2017-08-22 15:06:31	0|wumpus|just for testing
 80 2017-08-22 15:06:52	0|rubensayshi|but if nobody dares to put it into prod, then how can it ever reach Final?
 81 2017-08-22 15:07:10	0|wumpus|I think that's a hypothetical question
 82 2017-08-22 15:07:21	0|sipa|rubensayshi: i plan to try to get the next bitcoin corelease (after 0.15) to implement support for it
 83 2017-08-22 15:07:35	0|sipa|regardless of bip status
 84 2017-08-22 15:07:39	0|rubensayshi|well, there's a process here that I guess could still use some polishing
 85 2017-08-22 15:07:43	0|wumpus|people are not robots, have a finite lifetime, so under that time pressure someone will deploy it at some time - if they need it at all
 86 2017-08-22 15:07:46	0|sipa|i agree
 87 2017-08-22 15:08:15	0|sipa|rubensayshi: i think there have been too many cases of bips fundamentally changing after initial publishing
 88 2017-08-22 15:08:36	0|sipa|i think the intent is that even draft does indicate some form of confidence in not changing
 89 2017-08-22 15:08:39	0|rubensayshi|yea which BIP2 addresses to prevent that from happening once they reach Final
 90 2017-08-22 15:09:33	0|rubensayshi|the addresses require widespread deployment of support for it before people can really start using it, it's kinda hard for it to be used and reach Final without people feeling certain it will be Final and should be deployed
 91 2017-08-22 15:09:39	0|rubensayshi|chicken & egg issue
 92 2017-08-22 15:09:41	0|wumpus|yes, at some point it's better to create a new BIP
 93 2017-08-22 15:09:53	0|sipa|rubensayshi: oh, BIP2 has a "proposed" status
 94 2017-08-22 15:09:58	0|sipa|i think that is applicable
 95 2017-08-22 15:10:12	0|sipa|A BIP may only change status from Draft (or Rejected) to Proposed, when the author deems it is complete, has a working implementation (where applicable), and has community plans to progress it to the Final status.
 96 2017-08-22 15:10:23	0|wumpus|could try an initial phase where they're used on testnet only?
 97 2017-08-22 15:11:20	0|sipa|bip173 was written with many reference implementations at the time of publishing already, in the hope of not needing any significant change afterwards
 98 2017-08-22 15:11:37	0|wumpus|what the trial period would be like really depends on the kind of BIP, but usually testnet will be useful for that
 99 2017-08-22 15:11:42	0|sipa|so maybe it could have been "proposed" from the start
100 2017-08-22 15:11:50	0|wumpus|yes
101 2017-08-22 15:12:39	0|rubensayshi|yea Proposed sounds like the right status for BIP173 and for people to starting deploying (wallet support for) it
102 2017-08-22 15:19:48	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a897d0e 15practicalswift: tests: Remove OldSetKeyFromPassphrase/OldEncrypt/OldDecrypt
103 2017-08-22 15:19:48	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fc5c237d4a84...3e55f13bfc98
104 2017-08-22 15:19:49	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 143e55f13 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11024: tests: Remove OldSetKeyFromPassphrase/OldEncrypt/OldDecrypt...
105 2017-08-22 15:20:25	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11024: tests: Remove OldSetKeyFromPassphrase/OldEncrypt/OldDecrypt (06master...06OldDecrypt-cleanup) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11024
106 2017-08-22 15:38:58	0|luke-jr|‎[15:01:57] ‎<‎sipa‎>‎ luke-jr: should a BIP be marked final before it's in use, but after there are no plans to change it anymore? <-- no, that's what the Proposed status is for
107 2017-08-22 15:40:05	0|luke-jr|jonasschnelli: right, the stats RPC is more recent, but it breaks your current Qt stats branch because the interface changed.. at the moment, I am planning to put the older code in Knots 0.15.0, but if you have a newer RPC+Qt version, I can update it
108 2017-08-22 15:40:38	0|luke-jr|wumpus: no user-visible effect, but it'd make Knots slightly easier to assemble I think :p
109 2017-08-22 15:49:02	0|jonasschnelli|luke-jr: indeed. Currently I'm rebasing the gui one on top of the newer RPC one
110 2017-08-22 15:49:51	0|luke-jr|jonasschnelli: thanks!
111 2017-08-22 17:18:43	0|bitbee|https://themerkle.com/gregory-maxwell-claims-the-bitcoin-cash-mining-income-is-being-inflated/
112 2017-08-22 17:24:27	0|BlueMatt|bitbee: ot, take it to #bitcoin (or elsewhere)
113 2017-08-22 17:24:38	0|bitbee|np
114 2017-08-22 17:36:35	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15TheBlueMatt opened pull request #11108: Changing -txindex requires -reindex, not -reindex-chainstate (06master...062017-08-fix-reindex-txindex-err) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11108
115 2017-08-22 17:36:53	0|BlueMatt|got another one that's (probably) for 0.15 ^ :(
116 2017-08-22 17:38:15	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15felco- opened pull request #11109: Fix a typo in line 926 (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11109
117 2017-08-22 17:55:03	0|edin00n|Why do people use expensive GPUs for Bitcoin mining and not CPU
118 2017-08-22 17:55:42	0|BlueMatt|edin00n: ot, take it to #bitcoin
119 2017-08-22 18:10:01	0|edin00n|Thank's
120 2017-08-22 18:31:31	0|jimpo|Is it true that headers for side branches are stored in the block index DB and loaded into mapBlockIndex on init regardless of how old the side branch is?
121 2017-08-22 18:42:02	0|sipa|jimpo: yes
122 2017-08-22 18:43:18	0|jimpo|I noticed this comment about possible fingerprinting if Core served side blocks more than a month old. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/net_processing.cpp#L1006
123 2017-08-22 18:43:42	0|jimpo|Is something similar not possible by sending an empty getheaders locator with a stop hash on an old side branch?
124 2017-08-22 18:44:05	0|BlueMatt|jimpo: (limited by what we will accept - after ibd we wont accept things that are older than checkpoints....this is really one of the more important, if not only important left reason for keeping checkpoints)
125 2017-08-22 18:46:49	0|jimpo|I don't fully understand, BlueMatt. Can you point me at the code that checks for requests before checkpoints?
126 2017-08-22 18:47:12	0|BlueMatt|jimpo: yes, probably worth just using locator if its a month back (or returning from genesis if they were dumb and didnt give us a locator)
127 2017-08-22 18:47:26	0|BlueMatt|I'm sure there are more of these issues lurking...
128 2017-08-22 18:47:53	0|BlueMatt|jimpo: hmm, no, i meant we wont actually add to mapBlockIndex (see AcceptBlockHeader) if its pre-checkpoints after we've done initial-headers-sync
129 2017-08-22 18:48:10	0|jimpo|Ah, got it
130 2017-08-22 18:49:32	0|jimpo|So do you think it's worth putting together a change to ignore getheaders locators for a header on a side branch older than a month? Happy to put that together if so.
131 2017-08-22 18:49:45	0|BlueMatt|yea, probably
132 2017-08-22 18:49:53	0|BlueMatt|i mean dont ignore the locator
133 2017-08-22 18:49:57	0|BlueMatt|just scan further back in the locator
134 2017-08-22 18:50:13	0|BlueMatt|(ie pretend we dont have that header)
135 2017-08-22 18:52:50	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #11110: script: Avoid implicit casts from bool to CScriptNum (06master...06implicit-casts-from-bool-to-cscriptnum) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11110
136 2017-08-22 19:15:45	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15cruizh opened pull request #11111: Qt: correct Spanish translation of "receiving address" (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11111
137 2017-08-22 19:28:16	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15cruizh closed pull request #11111: Qt: correct Spanish translation of "receiving address" (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11111
138 2017-08-22 20:57:40	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #11112: developer-notes: By default, declare single-argument constructors `explicit`. (06master...06declare-single-argument-constructors-explicit) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11112
139 2017-08-22 21:15:18	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jimpo opened pull request #11113: [net] Ignore getheaders requests for very old side blocks. (06master...06net-getheaders-fingerprint) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11113
140 2017-08-22 22:32:08	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15instagibbs closed pull request #11049: coincontrol can filter for segwit inputs, expose fundraw option (06master...06segwitfundraw) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11049