1 2017-10-11 02:32:39 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15PierreRochard opened pull request #11478: ODB Integration (06master...06odb) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11478
2 2017-10-11 02:35:09 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15PierreRochard closed pull request #11478: ODB Integration (06master...06odb) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11478
3 2017-10-11 02:51:29 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15kswapd opened pull request #11479: [Docs] Update README.md to add Freenode links (06master...06master) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11479
4 2017-10-11 05:02:09 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15tjps opened pull request #11480: [ui] Add toggle for unblinding password fields (06master...06tjps_wallet_dialog) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11480
5 2017-10-11 08:12:06 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15AmirAbrams opened pull request #11482: Use CPrivKey typedef for keydata in CKey (06master...06patch-3) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11482
6 2017-10-11 08:45:55 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 5 new commits to 06master: 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5a9da37fb3f4...0e3a41135157
7 2017-10-11 08:45:56 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 143f0ee3e 15Jorge Timón: Proper indentation for CheckTxInputs and other minor fixes
8 2017-10-11 08:45:56 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14832e074 15Jorge Timón: Optimization: Minimize the number of times it is checked that no money is created...
9 2017-10-11 08:45:57 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 143e8c916 15Jorge Timón: Introduce CheckInputsAndUpdateCoins static wrapper in txmempool.cpp
10 2017-10-11 08:53:30 0|wumpus|meshcollider: listing 'available' wallets would be a lot easier with the walletdir
11 2017-10-11 08:54:36 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0e3a41135157...fef65c4f5e59
12 2017-10-11 08:54:37 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a2be3b6 15Jim Posen: [net] Ignore getheaders requests for very old side blocks...
13 2017-10-11 08:54:37 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14eff4bd8 15Jim Posen: [test] P2P functional test for certain fingerprinting protections
14 2017-10-11 08:54:38 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fef65c4 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11113: [net] Ignore getheaders requests for very old side blocks...
15 2017-10-11 08:55:14 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11113: [net] Ignore getheaders requests for very old side blocks (06master...06net-getheaders-fingerprint) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11113
16 2017-10-11 08:56:33 0|meshcollider|wumpus: yes indeed, I'm just wondering whether there is any point in adding a list of `available` wallets inside the walletdir to the `listwallets` RPC
17 2017-10-11 08:56:49 0|promag|wumpus what is the real use case for that?
18 2017-10-11 08:57:08 0|wumpus|promag: for listing available wallets? would be nice in the GUI at least
19 2017-10-11 08:57:24 0|wumpus|otherwise peopel have to remember the names
20 2017-10-11 08:57:46 0|wumpus|which is okay for the first version or whatever, but in the long run would be nice to select from a list instead
21 2017-10-11 08:57:54 0|wumpus|there's no urgency in having it though
22 2017-10-11 08:57:58 0|promag|But the app is configured with the wallets, and there is no way to create wallets
23 2017-10-11 08:58:01 0|meshcollider|because the only clean-ish way I can think of to find wallets in the walletdir is looking for .dat extensions right?
24 2017-10-11 08:58:29 0|meshcollider|promag dynamic loading/unloading of wallets will be coming soon right?
25 2017-10-11 08:58:30 0|wumpus|check for berkeleydb databases
26 2017-10-11 08:59:07 0|wumpus|(requiring .dat naming is fine with me too, but not all .dats are bdb databases unfortuantely)
27 2017-10-11 08:59:13 0|promag|I feel that's not the right path
28 2017-10-11 08:59:20 0|promag|not all berkeleydb files are wallets
29 2017-10-11 08:59:31 0|wumpus|in the wallet directory they can be assumed to be
30 2017-10-11 08:59:42 0|wumpus|but if you want to add an additional check on loading, fine
31 2017-10-11 08:59:49 0|wumpus|there's some keys that are only in wallets...
32 2017-10-11 08:59:53 0|wumpus|(like the wallet version)
33 2017-10-11 09:00:38 0|wumpus|I'm more afraid of users copying valid wallets from other forks though :(
34 2017-10-11 09:01:01 0|wumpus|so if we want to add more robustness to wallet loading, yeah, we'd have to consider that...
35 2017-10-11 09:01:09 0|meshcollider|The easiest way to check if a file is a bdb file is with magic bytes like ryanofsky suggested here? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11466#discussion_r143730935
36 2017-10-11 09:01:14 0|wumpus|meshcollider: yes
37 2017-10-11 09:01:43 0|wumpus|certainly that's the way to do it without getting berkeleydb involved
38 2017-10-11 09:01:50 0|meshcollider|I think I'll take that commit out of my current PR and make a new one
39 2017-10-11 09:01:55 0|meshcollider|this will be too much to discuss
40 2017-10-11 09:01:59 0|wumpus|but why do you need this now?
41 2017-10-11 09:02:29 0|meshcollider|I was going to do the `listwallets` change as part of #11466
42 2017-10-11 09:02:31 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11466 | [WIP] Specify custom wallet directory with -walletdir param by MeshCollider ÷ Pull Request #11466 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
43 2017-10-11 09:02:31 0|wumpus|I think we need listing available wallets yet, yes lease separate that out
44 2017-10-11 09:02:42 0|meshcollider|yep ðŸâÂ
45 2017-10-11 09:02:52 0|promag|I would open the wallet, keep it open, but not load the transactions
46 2017-10-11 09:03:23 0|wumpus|I mean I *don't* think we need listing available wallets yet
47 2017-10-11 09:03:51 0|promag|listwallets change in a different PR will make your PR faster to review and merge meshcollider
48 2017-10-11 09:03:55 0|wumpus|we need to enforce some naming convention on wallets in that case (we don't even require .dat at the moment) as well as make sure wallets are somehow tagged as bitcoin wallet
49 2017-10-11 09:04:05 0|wumpus|e.g. by having a key in them that identifies them as being such
50 2017-10-11 09:04:10 0|promag|*.wlt :troll:
51 2017-10-11 09:05:04 0|meshcollider|Yep its more complicated than i initially thought, seperating it out now
52 2017-10-11 09:05:10 0|wumpus|promag: if you want to go that way it's better to go full out and use .bitcoinwallet - to rule out overlap with forks etc
53 2017-10-11 09:05:29 0|wumpus|and altcoins
54 2017-10-11 09:06:03 0|wumpus|this is a discussion topic when the wallet format is changed
55 2017-10-11 09:06:17 0|promag|I was kidding :P but maybe .bitcoin-core-wallet
56 2017-10-11 09:06:18 0|wumpus|from berkeleydb to something custom, for example
57 2017-10-11 09:06:39 0|wumpus|we certainly don't want to stick with .dat then
58 2017-10-11 09:07:41 0|promag|well, I think a good implementation will open the whatever-file-is and use/validate the content
59 2017-10-11 09:08:26 0|wumpus|I'm all for being more robust when actually opening wallets
60 2017-10-11 09:08:35 0|wumpus|but when scanning for available wallets please don't get bdb involved
61 2017-10-11 09:09:02 0|wumpus|if you need to look at magics etc, a quick read-only scan should be enough
62 2017-10-11 09:09:04 0|promag|listing an available but invalid wallet is stupid?
63 2017-10-11 09:09:11 0|wumpus|but rare!
64 2017-10-11 09:09:19 0|promag|ok then
65 2017-10-11 09:09:20 0|wumpus|opening with berkeleydb is heavy
66 2017-10-11 09:09:36 0|promag|why? does it load everything?
67 2017-10-11 09:09:36 0|wumpus|also involves potential writing, you don't want the program to write to files it's not told to touch
68 2017-10-11 09:09:38 0|wumpus|yes
69 2017-10-11 09:09:46 0|wumpus|it does various things
70 2017-10-11 09:09:47 0|promag|ok, I rest
71 2017-10-11 09:10:26 0|meshcollider|hah i dont think i can checkout a new branch while building the current one
72 2017-10-11 09:10:33 0|meshcollider|ill have to use my tablet instead
73 2017-10-11 09:10:46 0|wumpus|meshcollider: you can use git worktrees
74 2017-10-11 09:11:03 0|wumpus|and check out different branches in different directories
75 2017-10-11 09:11:17 0|meshcollider|ooh really? That's cool, I've never even heard of that being possible before
76 2017-10-11 09:11:22 0|meshcollider|I'll look it up
77 2017-10-11 09:11:22 0|wumpus|it's awesome, especially with large projects like linux where you really don't want to have multiple full clones
78 2017-10-11 09:11:31 0|meshcollider|Yeah :D
79 2017-10-11 09:15:14 0|promag|yes, thank god sipa introduced that to me a couple of months ago
80 2017-10-11 09:18:58 0|promag|wumpus: easy one #10941, just improves test suite
81 2017-10-11 09:19:00 0|wumpus|it also helps for some things to do out-of-tree builds, though mostly to keep you git tree clean, and be able to build for different architectures from one source tree - it doesn't allow you to switch the branch while building
82 2017-10-11 09:19:01 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10941 | Add blocknotify and walletnotify functional tests by promag ÷ Pull Request #10941 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
83 2017-10-11 09:20:32 0|promag|I think it's time give #11006 a chance?
84 2017-10-11 09:20:33 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11006 | Improve shutdown process by promag ÷ Pull Request #11006 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
85 2017-10-11 09:26:46 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 4 new commits to 06master: 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fef65c4f5e59...364da2c52942
86 2017-10-11 09:26:47 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 149c72a46 15John Newbery: [tests] Tidy up forknotify.py
87 2017-10-11 09:26:47 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14df18d29 15João Barbosa: [tests] Add -blocknotify functional test
88 2017-10-11 09:26:48 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14857b32b 15João Barbosa: [tests] Add -walletnotify functional test
89 2017-10-11 09:27:12 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10941: Add blocknotify and walletnotify functional tests (06master...062017-07-blocknotify-functional-test) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10941
90 2017-10-11 09:40:07 0|promag_|wumpus: regarding the eye icon, are there designers contributing? or are the used icons open source?
91 2017-10-11 09:41:23 0|wumpus|what's wrong with the eye icon we alread have?
92 2017-10-11 09:42:39 0|wumpus|(I edited th4e post)
93 2017-10-11 09:45:45 0|promag_|oh there is an eye icon already
94 2017-10-11 09:45:59 0|wumpus|if you want a new icon you'd have to find an icon that has the correct license (ideally MIT or public design) or an artist that wants to create such an icon under the appropriate license
95 2017-10-11 09:46:09 0|wumpus|jonasschnelli designed most of the current ones
96 2017-10-11 09:46:30 0|promag_|this eye? src/qt/res/icons/eye.png
97 2017-10-11 09:46:34 0|wumpus|yes :)
98 2017-10-11 09:46:52 0|promag_|ok, lgtm
99 2017-10-11 09:47:51 0|wumpus|s/public design/public domain
100 2017-10-11 10:12:34 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11479: [Docs] Update README.md to add Freenode links (06master...06master) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11479
101 2017-10-11 10:20:17 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15pedrobranco opened pull request #11483: Fix importmulti bug when importing an already imported key (06master...06bugfix/fix-importmulti-bug) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11483
102 2017-10-11 10:35:12 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15pedrobranco opened pull request #11484: Optional update rescan option in importmulti RPC (06master...06enhancement/optional-update-rescan-on-importmulti) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11484
103 2017-10-11 11:25:03 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MeshCollider opened pull request #11485: [WIP] Add `available` field to listwallets RPC (06master...06201710_listwallets_available) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11485
104 2017-10-11 12:25:59 0|Chris_Stewart_5|Does anyone have an idea why I wouldn't be able to generate a CPubKey from a CKey after calling k.MakeNewKey(true)
105 2017-10-11 12:26:18 0|Chris_Stewart_5|the error: test_bitcoin: key.cpp:153: CPubKey CKey::GetPubKey() const: Assertion `ret' failed.
106 2017-10-11 12:26:26 0|Chris_Stewart_5|it seems to be failing in secp256k1
107 2017-10-11 12:35:03 0|Chris_Stewart_5|the line it fails on: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/f90603ac6d24f5263649675d51233f1fce8b2ecd/src/key.cpp#L153
108 2017-10-11 12:47:48 0|wumpus|Chris_Stewart_5: that can only fail if the private key is not in the valid range
109 2017-10-11 12:51:36 0|Chris_Stewart_5|wumpus: Hmm, is there any reason that calling .MakeNewKey(true) would generate one that is invalid?
110 2017-10-11 12:52:08 0|Chris_Stewart_5|because assert(fValid) passes on line 135
111 2017-10-11 12:52:19 0|Chris_Stewart_5|line 148*
112 2017-10-11 13:14:45 0|wumpus|no, I don't know, it would help to print the generated key I guess
113 2017-10-11 13:16:06 0|Chris_Stewart_5|wumpus: wif: KwDiBf89QgGbjEhKnhXJuH7LrciVrZi3qYjgd9M7rFU73Nd2Mcv1
114 2017-10-11 13:25:08 0|arubi|it's 0
115 2017-10-11 13:25:14 0|arubi|0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 rather
116 2017-10-11 13:25:45 0|Chris_Stewart_5|hmmm... so that indicates .MakeNewKey() isn't being called?
117 2017-10-11 13:26:04 0|wumpus|indeed, and a private key of zero is not valid, should be at least one
118 2017-10-11 13:26:24 0|wumpus|either you must be doing something wrong or there's a bug
119 2017-10-11 13:27:08 0|Chris_Stewart_5|Eh, I'm playing with #8469
120 2017-10-11 13:27:12 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8469 | [POC] Introducing property based testing to Core by Christewart ÷ Pull Request #8469 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
121 2017-10-11 13:27:41 0|Chris_Stewart_5|I'm generating various standard tx types (p2pk,p2pkh,multisig) etc and then running them through the interpreter to assert our interpreter/wallet code base are consistent
122 2017-10-11 13:28:03 0|Chris_Stewart_5|When I'm generating a std::vector<CKey> this bug appears, but does not appear when I generate a single CKey
123 2017-10-11 13:28:16 0|Chris_Stewart_5|arubi: Thanks by the way
124 2017-10-11 13:28:43 0|arubi|oh cheers
125 2017-10-11 13:28:44 0|wumpus|right, next step would be to figure out why it returns the zero key. I'm happy secp256k1 catches this at least.
126 2017-10-11 13:30:45 0|Chris_Stewart_5|wumpus: Agreed! It is weird because if I try to explicitly call .MakeNewKey(true) (again) before I convert it to a pubkey secp256k1 gives this error
127 2017-10-11 13:31:06 0|wumpus|yes I was still in the process of trying to convert that key to raw bytes - a google would have been faster in this case :)
128 2017-10-11 13:31:11 0|Chris_Stewart_5|[libsecp256k1] illegal argument: seckey != NULL
129 2017-10-11 13:31:40 0|Chris_Stewart_5|perhaps my generator is generating a valid 0 byte key, which is *technically* a valid key right?
130 2017-10-11 13:32:07 0|Chris_Stewart_5|and secp256k1 just says 'you really don't want to be doing this...'
131 2017-10-11 13:35:41 0|wumpus|not sure about "technically" in this case - I think it's mathemtically undefined
132 2017-10-11 13:35:55 0|arubi|it's not a valid key in secp256k1, but it's base58 encoding is valid
133 2017-10-11 13:36:00 0|wumpus|right ^^
134 2017-10-11 13:36:02 0|arubi|so something generated it..
135 2017-10-11 13:36:58 0|wumpus|so are you expecting a random key?
136 2017-10-11 13:40:44 0|Chris_Stewart_5|wumpus: Yes... here is the sequence I am using to generate one: https://github.com/Christewart/bitcoin/blob/af2f6f2a639d94945a73e63f9f4203071caad984/src/test/gen/crypto_gen.h#L18
137 2017-10-11 13:40:53 0|Chris_Stewart_5|do you see something inherently wrong with it?
138 2017-10-11 14:01:51 0|jnewbery|meshcollider: sorry - missed the discussion earlier. I think updating listwallets to list available wallets would definitely be a useful feature, but it's by no means necessary for #11466.
139 2017-10-11 14:01:55 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11466 | Specify custom wallet directory with -walletdir param by MeshCollider ÷ Pull Request #11466 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
140 2017-10-11 14:02:51 0|jnewbery|promag: Both your alternative schemas in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11485#issuecomment-335813034 are fine. I'm not too concerned about the exact format, but I think it's useful for users to be able to access the information somehow
141 2017-10-11 14:04:19 0|Chris_Stewart_5|wumpus: For what it is worth it is unrelated to anyting in core. I wasn't capturing a variable correctly in a lambda
142 2017-10-11 14:04:31 0|promag|Right, I just think there is no strong use case for that
143 2017-10-11 14:06:10 0|promag|I kind of like findwallets because it can return "invalid" wallets where as listwallets is returning valid and loaded wallets
144 2017-10-11 14:07:15 0|promag|at the moment listwallet can return available "invalid" wallet that cannot be loaded
145 2017-10-11 14:08:09 0|promag|btw, do you think we should have the inverse of -experimentalrpc=?
146 2017-10-11 14:08:47 0|promag|so 0.15 introduced listwallets but to use it it should be enabled like so
147 2017-10-11 14:09:47 0|promag|sorry, **the inverse of -deprecaterpc**
148 2017-10-11 14:10:24 0|promag|therefore all experimental rpc can change
149 2017-10-11 14:11:47 0|jnewbery|The use case is being able to find and load wallets dynamically at run-time. If you have any concept feedback on that, the PR is 10740
150 2017-10-11 14:13:20 0|jnewbery|re: -experimentalrpc - I don't think that's necessary. Release notes for multiwallet stated 'Note that while multi-wallet is now fully supported, the RPC multi-wallet interface should be considered unstable for version 0.15.0, and there may backwards-incompatible changes in future versions.
151 2017-10-11 14:33:35 0|promag|ok and ok
152 2017-10-11 15:56:33 0|promag|wumpus: you deleted the comment in #11476?
153 2017-10-11 15:56:35 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11476 | Avoid opening copied wallet databases simultaneously by ryanofsky ÷ Pull Request #11476 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
154 2017-10-11 16:11:49 0|wumpus|no?
155 2017-10-11 16:19:39 0|timothy|little-OT: do you think bitcoin gold have enough time to implement replay protection?
156 2017-10-11 16:20:19 0|timothy|if no, it may be a big problem for (some) bitcoin users too due to replay attack
157 2017-10-11 16:22:15 0|jnewbery|timothy: #bitcoin please. This channel is for discussing Bitcoin Core development
158 2017-10-11 16:24:11 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/364da2c52942...892809309c1b
159 2017-10-11 16:24:12 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14619bb05 15MarcoFalke: Squashed 'src/univalue/' changes from 16a1f7f6e..fe805ea74...
160 2017-10-11 16:24:12 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14faaeeb0 15MarcoFalke: Bump univalue and fix json formatting in tests...
161 2017-10-11 16:24:13 0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 148928093 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11420: Bump univalue subtree and fix json formatting in tests...
162 2017-10-11 16:24:40 0|wumpus|if you get any linker errors while building master, you probably need to clean your tree after #11420 (it seems that some changes to univalue are not detected by the build system)
163 2017-10-11 16:24:42 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11420 | Bump univalue subtree and fix json formatting in tests by MarcoFalke ÷ Pull Request #11420 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
164 2017-10-11 16:24:50 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11420: Bump univalue subtree and fix json formatting in tests (06master...06Mf1709-bumpUnivalue) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11420
165 2017-10-11 16:30:55 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #11445: [qa] 0.15.1 Backports (060.15...06Mf1710-0151qaBackports) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11445
166 2017-10-11 16:59:43 0|Chris_Stewart_5|Does ProduceSignature have the capability to sign a p2sh(multisig) tx? Here is how I am trying to use it https://gist.github.com/Christewart/3d930327e7b27e6a897fa6d2744ec569
167 2017-10-11 17:00:00 0|Chris_Stewart_5|if not, is there capability for this else where in the code base?
168 2017-10-11 17:05:03 0|sipa|Chris_Stewart_5: yes, it does
169 2017-10-11 17:05:24 0|sipa|but you need to have the redeemscript in the keystore
170 2017-10-11 17:06:06 0|Chris_Stewart_5|I believe I did this https://gist.github.com/Christewart/3d930327e7b27e6a897fa6d2744ec569#file-produce_signature_p2sh-cpp-L14
171 2017-10-11 17:06:10 0|Chris_Stewart_5|sipa: ^
172 2017-10-11 17:06:28 0|sipa|your redeemscript is just a key?
173 2017-10-11 17:06:50 0|sipa|or what is spk_keys
174 2017-10-11 17:06:53 0|Chris_Stewart_5|tuple
175 2017-10-11 17:07:02 0|Chris_Stewart_5|std::tuple<CScript,std::vector<CKey>>
176 2017-10-11 17:07:12 0|sipa|and what's the script?
177 2017-10-11 17:07:47 0|Chris_Stewart_5|one of the following: P2PK CScript, P2PKH CScript, Multisig CScript
178 2017-10-11 17:07:54 0|Chris_Stewart_5|It is randomly choosing one of those
179 2017-10-11 17:09:04 0|Chris_Stewart_5|then creating a p2sh script
180 2017-10-11 17:10:05 0|sipa|looks right to me
181 2017-10-11 17:10:11 0|sipa|what is the problem?
182 2017-10-11 17:10:24 0|Chris_Stewart_5|the assert fails on this line -- it should return complete right? https://gist.github.com/Christewart/3d930327e7b27e6a897fa6d2744ec569#file-produce_signature_p2sh-cpp-L20
183 2017-10-11 17:10:34 0|Chris_Stewart_5|*theoretically* haha
184 2017-10-11 17:11:33 0|sipa|yes
185 2017-10-11 17:12:12 0|sipa|i don't see anything obviously wrong
186 2017-10-11 17:12:21 0|Chris_Stewart_5|I'll dig more -- it is probably something stupid I am doing else where. I just wanted to confirm produce signature has the capability before I go deeper
187 2017-10-11 19:07:45 0|morcos|I'm just trying to catch up on old review by looking at what was merged.. In #11113 , what is the use case of responding to these strange getheaders requests with no locator at all? Or at the very least shouldn't we only respond if the hashStop is on our main chain
188 2017-10-11 19:07:47 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11113 | [net] Ignore getheaders requests for very old side blocks by jimpo ÷ Pull Request #11113 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
189 2017-10-11 19:08:06 0|morcos|Not objection to merging the PR, it seems like a strict improvement, but just trying to understand why that functionality even exists
190 2017-10-11 20:02:54 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15mess110 opened pull request #11486: [tests] Add uacomment tests (06master...06test_uacomment) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11486
191 2017-10-11 21:26:23 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15TheBlueMatt opened pull request #11487: Check that new headers are not a descendant of an invalid block (06master...062017-10-acceptblock-validity-check) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11487
192 2017-10-11 23:57:28 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15C0deAi opened pull request #11488: Codeai fixes: remove dead code, prevent possible division by zero. (06master...06codeai-fixes) 02 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11488