1 2018-01-31 00:01:37	0|jtimon|btw, iirc libbitcoin implemented bip90 as an option despite the complains
  2 2018-01-31 00:02:43	0|jtimon|I don't think the option is very interesting (since the result will always be the same unless very bad things happen, just to further note is not bitcoin core specific)
  3 2018-01-31 00:03:41	0|michagogo|Hm, does anyone have any idea why my gitian build is crashing?
  4 2018-01-31 00:06:56	0|michagogo|http://paste.ubuntu.com/26492234/
  5 2018-01-31 00:07:13	0|michagogo|(tail -n10000 build.log)
  6 2018-01-31 00:18:30	0|MarcoFalke|Just noting that the 0.16 gh branch is not "protecte" like the other branches...
  7 2018-01-31 00:41:26	0|MarcoFalke|s/protecte/protected/
  8 2018-01-31 01:18:45	0|achow101|Uhh, so it seems like sendtoaddress can sometimes make an invalid/non-standard transaction.. Or maybe my coin selection code somehow messes with that
  9 2018-01-31 01:19:01	0|achow101|I'm very confused now
 10 2018-01-31 01:19:34	0|gmaxwell|invalid in what way?!?!?!?!???!??!?!?!?
 11 2018-01-31 01:19:46	0|achow101|64: non-mandatory-script-verify-flag (Signature must be zero for failed CHECK(MULTI)SIG operation)
 12 2018-01-31 01:20:23	0|achow101|that's the error I get when I try to sendrawtransaction with it
 13 2018-01-31 01:20:44	0|achow101|basically what I was doing was sendtoaddress, then gettransaction, then sendrawtransaction the hex
 14 2018-01-31 01:20:58	0|achow101|and then that error happened
 15 2018-01-31 01:39:29	0|achow101|so AFAICT that error means that the signature is being produced incorrectly
 16 2018-01-31 01:42:13	0|arubi|so there is a signature in the script \ witness at all?  are you signing something malformed?
 17 2018-01-31 01:47:57	0|achow101|There's a signature
 18 2018-01-31 01:48:12	0|achow101|the transaction _looks_ right, besides the fact that I can't mentally verify signatures
 19 2018-01-31 01:48:41	0|arubi|signrawtransaction along with the utxo in json should give a more verbose error about what's wrong
 20 2018-01-31 01:50:22	0|arubi|unless it's really all it is and the signature is invalid for the tx..  that's pretty scary
 21 2018-01-31 02:15:06	0|achow101|hmm. It looks like there's a signature hash mis-calculation
 22 2018-01-31 02:15:36	0|achow101|the signer signed one sighash but a different sighash was calculated when verifying before the send
 23 2018-01-31 02:15:57	0|achow101|I've only observed this on segwit, so I think this may actually be a blocker for 0.16
 24 2018-01-31 02:20:17	0|arubi|can you tell which of the hashes is the correct one?
 25 2018-01-31 02:24:17	0|achow101|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12307
 26 2018-01-31 02:27:10	0|arubi|oh cool
 27 2018-01-31 02:29:14	0|arubi|achow101, can you paste the payment to this tx please?
 28 2018-01-31 02:29:42	0|achow101|what do you mean "payment to"?
 29 2018-01-31 02:29:46	0|achow101|Like the input txs?
 30 2018-01-31 02:30:00	0|kallewoof|I'd like to see the raw tx hex as well
 31 2018-01-31 02:30:02	0|arubi|right, to know the amounts
 32 2018-01-31 02:30:23	0|kallewoof|oops it's there nvm
 33 2018-01-31 02:30:24	0|arubi|the raw hex for the spend is in the issue, but I wanna see what the sighash is supposed to be
 34 2018-01-31 02:32:07	0|arubi|oh it does show the amount for the failed one nValue=4.68120500 , probably stopped because it's the first one
 35 2018-01-31 02:32:37	0|arubi|ah no it's the output
 36 2018-01-31 02:33:05	0|achow101|there's a lot of inputs...
 37 2018-01-31 02:33:26	0|achow101|I can drop the wallet file instead and you can go find the transactions yourself
 38 2018-01-31 02:33:40	0|arubi|sounds good
 39 2018-01-31 02:35:09	0|achow101|updated the issue
 40 2018-01-31 02:35:20	0|arubi|cheers
 41 2018-01-31 02:52:18	0|kallewoof|newbie question but how would you dump the wallet info from that? :]
 42 2018-01-31 02:52:49	0|arubi|I'm getting ba89d6d01bdfd4b611757e38802c5a09255659ae7d2d42ae3f0729e7f261de1f as sighash for the first input..
 43 2018-01-31 02:53:06	0|arubi|(not 0.16)
 44 2018-01-31 02:53:41	0|arubi|kallewoof, you can 'gettransaction' for the txids in the inputs to the one posted
 45 2018-01-31 02:54:00	0|arubi|pretty much only need the amounts from there
 46 2018-01-31 02:54:11	0|kallewoof|Oh.. I tried listunspent but it was empty. Thanks
 47 2018-01-31 02:56:43	0|kallewoof|I'm getting Invalid or non-wallet transaction id. I'm just starting a regtest instance with -datadir set to one containing that wallet.dat file, though.
 48 2018-01-31 02:57:46	0|achow101|You have to use 0.16 or mater
 49 2018-01-31 02:57:49	0|achow101|*master
 50 2018-01-31 02:58:20	0|achow101|arubi: that's what the verifier got. it's just byteswapped
 51 2018-01-31 02:58:22	0|kallewoof|This is master.. (well, as of jan 24)
 52 2018-01-31 02:58:47	0|arubi|ah!
 53 2018-01-31 02:59:03	0|achow101|usual byteswap stuff
 54 2018-01-31 02:59:27	0|achow101|kallewoof: really? It should be in the wallet
 55 2018-01-31 02:59:53	0|achow101|use decoderawtransaction on the tx hex and then fetch the input tx with gettransaction
 56 2018-01-31 03:00:19	0|arubi|I'm running this on pre-0.16 on regtest too
 57 2018-01-31 03:00:30	0|kallewoof|dumpwallet gave me a ton of stuff, but yeah. I did decoderaw and tried to gettx the first input (cf0996c1b356bf7df7ef81d65c6741d5db6058826be47842ab45e18afd36dd03)
 58 2018-01-31 03:01:21	0|arubi|should work.  sure you're using gettransaction and not getrawtransaction?
 59 2018-01-31 03:01:24	0|achow101|arubi: if you're using a version of master after september or som ething it should be fine
 60 2018-01-31 03:01:57	0|kallewoof|Yes, I'm using gettransaction.
 61 2018-01-31 03:02:21	0|achow101|strange
 62 2018-01-31 03:02:23	0|arubi|I'm using jl2012's latest bip114 client (vault branch)
 63 2018-01-31 03:03:20	0|arubi|ah, it's from september
 64 2018-01-31 03:03:42	0|cfields|achow101: regtest?
 65 2018-01-31 03:03:56	0|achow101|cfields: yes. from the test framework (which is what my simulator does)
 66 2018-01-31 03:04:00	0|achow101|s/does/uses
 67 2018-01-31 03:04:23	0|cfields|achow101: we'll need your chain data :)
 68 2018-01-31 03:04:32	0|achow101|oh, duh
 69 2018-01-31 03:05:31	0|achow101|cfields: updated in the issue
 70 2018-01-31 03:06:09	0|kallewoof|Doh. I put wallet.dat in datadir/ not datadir/regtest/wallets/. Works now.
 71 2018-01-31 03:15:38	0|achow101|oh shit. I fucked up my coin selection stuff
 72 2018-01-31 03:15:42	0|achow101|that's the problem, the amount is wrong
 73 2018-01-31 03:18:01	0|arubi|phew :)
 74 2018-01-31 03:24:04	0|achow101|I guess this is why I shouldn't suppress exceptions :/
 75 2018-01-31 06:47:22	0|michagogo|Dammit. The compiler just keeps segfaulting, somewhere else every time
 76 2018-01-31 06:47:41	0|gmaxwell|memtest86 time
 77 2018-01-31 06:47:51	0|michagogo|D:
 78 2018-01-31 06:48:18	0|michagogo|Hm, I wonder if shutting down the VM and starting it again might help
 79 2018-01-31 06:56:29	0|michagogo|gmaxwell: (on the physical machine, right? Or can running it in the VM also be relevant?)
 80 2018-01-31 07:03:16	0|kallewoof|michagogo: i get that if I don't bump the RAM of the VM. esp if i use -j with make.
 81 2018-01-31 07:03:41	0|michagogo|I thought about that
 82 2018-01-31 07:04:04	0|michagogo|Took it down from -j5 to -j3, and had htop open
 83 2018-01-31 07:04:24	0|michagogo|I don’t think it reached 3GB
 84 2018-01-31 07:04:36	0|michagogo|(The VM has almost 6)
 85 2018-01-31 09:36:11	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f0295becbf3e...216f9a42e689
 86 2018-01-31 09:36:12	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 144c85517 15Alex Vear: Add NetBSD build instruction links
 87 2018-01-31 09:36:12	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ee5e896 15Alex Vear: Organise Linux build instructions to be categorised by distro
 88 2018-01-31 09:36:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14216f9a4 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12306: Docs: Improvements to UNIX documentation...
 89 2018-01-31 09:37:14	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #12306: Docs: Improvements to UNIX documentation (06master...06fix-docs) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12306
 90 2018-01-31 10:29:29	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #12308: contrib: Add support for out-of-tree builds in gen-manpages.sh (06master...062018_01_genmanpages_outoftree) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12308
 91 2018-01-31 11:28:12	0|michagogo|Oh, good, it worked.
 92 2018-01-31 11:28:51	0|michagogo|Don’t know if it was rebooting the VM, updating vbox, rebooting the host, or some combination
 93 2018-01-31 11:30:58	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj opened pull request #12309: doc: Explain how to update chainTxData in release process (06master...062018_01_release_process_chaintxstats) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12309
 94 2018-01-31 11:50:30	0|wumpus|ah yes VMs, aren't they delightful, combining the flakyness of hardware with the labyrinthine complexity of software
 95 2018-01-31 11:51:05	0|michagogo|Uh, WTF? Build-windows.md has instructions that I’m pretty sure will completely hose any Xenial system
 96 2018-01-31 11:51:40	0|michagogo|Namely, adding the apt repo for a newer release
 97 2018-01-31 11:52:08	0|wumpus|unfortunately there is no way to cross-build to windows from xenial otherwise
 98 2018-01-31 11:52:43	0|michagogo|Maybe there’s a way to just get the new versions of the relevant packages, I don’t know
 99 2018-01-31 11:52:50	0|wumpus|the mingw-gcc in that ubuntu release is hosed. THere used to be a warning to simply not do that, but to some people that wasn't good enough...
100 2018-01-31 11:53:03	0|michagogo|But those instructions will trash the system
101 2018-01-31 11:53:21	0|michagogo|They tell you to apt-get upgrade. With the wrong repos.
102 2018-01-31 11:54:09	0|michagogo|wumpus: yeah, I know about that issue
103 2018-01-31 11:54:11	0|wumpus|maybe they'd rather break their system than simply admit something is not possible and use a different release
104 2018-01-31 11:54:22	0|michagogo|Maybe
105 2018-01-31 11:54:33	0|michagogo|But the problem is that we’re telling people to do that
106 2018-01-31 11:54:34	0|wumpus|I mean it's windows users, they're doing this in a sandbox that can be nuked and re-instated with one button push
107 2018-01-31 11:54:54	0|michagogo|With a little footnote saying “this might cause issues”
108 2018-01-31 11:55:04	0|wumpus|also they're probably not doing anything else in these VMs than building bitcoin
109 2018-01-31 11:55:09	0|michagogo|Rather than “this is guaranteed to completely break the system”
110 2018-01-31 11:55:26	0|wumpus|anyhow, feel free to add proper warnings to the document, I've given up on that
111 2018-01-31 11:55:50	0|wumpus|it's not that I didn't mention that in reviews but who listens to me, maybe they listen to you
112 2018-01-31 11:56:03	0|michagogo|Is there a way to safely get just the newer compiler packages?
113 2018-01-31 11:56:19	0|michagogo|Some ppa, backports, something like that?
114 2018-01-31 11:58:39	0|wumpus|you could build your own toolchain, I'm partial to crosstool-ng myself as it comes with a nice menu configuration tool
115 2018-01-31 12:00:10	0|wumpus|you need some patience but at least you can configure anything you'd ever wanted (and not wanted) to configure about the toolchain, and you're not bound to a certain version of binutils, gcc, libc, etc, that happens to come with your distro
116 2018-01-31 12:01:22	0|wumpus|I use this for ARM boards all the time as ubuntu's default cross compilers only target a specific sw/hw combo, but i think it can do mingw-something as well.
117 2018-01-31 12:06:04	0|wumpus|of course for a guide it's much easier to just say 'use ubunu 16.10 or higher', but I digress, that's what we already tried...
118 2018-01-31 12:07:03	0|wumpus|at least we'll hopefully have 18.04 soon so there's a new LTS that can (hopefully) build working windows executables
119 2018-01-31 12:30:56	0|michagogo|Yeah
120 2018-01-31 12:31:13	0|michagogo|Btw, someone in #ubuntu pointed out that zesty is EOL...
121 2018-01-31 12:31:20	0|michagogo|So even those instructions won’t work
122 2018-01-31 12:31:43	0|michagogo|I wonder how much trouble it would be to get mingw backported
123 2018-01-31 12:32:02	0|anil_|hello
124 2018-01-31 12:32:17	0|michagogo|Hi.
125 2018-01-31 12:33:32	0|anil_1524|What is the easiest way to install the Berkeley DB dependencies on Debian Stretch?
126 2018-01-31 12:34:35	0|wumpus|contrib/install_db4.sh
127 2018-01-31 12:35:41	0|wumpus|michagogo: just use 17.10 then...
128 2018-01-31 12:36:10	0|wumpus|it will be EOL july 2018, but by that time you can upgrade to 18.04
129 2018-01-31 12:36:56	0|anil_1524|wumpus: thanks
130 2018-01-31 12:38:17	0|wumpus|I've heard of people here using the 18.04 pre-release dailies but that's really living on the edge
131 2018-01-31 12:44:58	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift closed pull request #10975: [script] Return early if no valid opcodes found in CountWitnessSigOps(...) (06master...06return-early-in-CountWitnessSigOps) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10975
132 2018-01-31 13:09:50	0|provoostenator|I'm one of those people living on the edge with 18.04 pre-release. I sometimes fall off the edge :-)
133 2018-01-31 13:10:11	0|provoostenator|(in a VM, that I don't really need)
134 2018-01-31 13:10:29	0|wumpus|well someone needs to do the testing :)
135 2018-01-31 13:11:28	0|provoostenator|Oh and with production c-lightning :-)
136 2018-01-31 13:11:34	0|wumpus|the danger of succesfully discouraging people from using pre-release software is that the released software will be less well-tested and thus increases risk for the rest.
137 2018-01-31 13:12:00	0|wumpus|this is, FWIW, why I'm not super enthusiastic about #12300
138 2018-01-31 13:12:01	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12300 | [Build] Adding --enable-mainnet configuration option for running mainnet by jeffrade · Pull Request #12300 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
139 2018-01-31 13:13:23	0|wumpus|yes let's not get started about production c-lighting :)
140 2018-01-31 13:13:59	0|provoostenator|That PR does seem a bit pedantic. Anyone who compiles from source should know what they're doing. But adding a flag isn't a show-stopper either.
141 2018-01-31 13:15:30	0|wumpus|no, it's not, though having experience from having to type --with-incompatible-bdb 20 times a day (okay, overstating a bit) do we want another flag we always need :-)
142 2018-01-31 13:15:39	0|provoostenator|What would be more useful for me is being able to have testnet=1 in bitcoin.conf and then launch with -mainnet, because I do make that mistake quite often on my dev account.
143 2018-01-31 13:16:20	0|wumpus|I think the long-term idea is to have a -network=<bla> or -chain=<bla> instead of separate options for testnet, mainnet, regtest
144 2018-01-31 13:16:34	0|wumpus|this resolves the case of conflicting options while specifying multiple
145 2018-01-31 13:17:03	0|provoostenator|I also want to be able to configure them differently, I believe there's a PR for that, e.g. I don't care about pruning testnet.
146 2018-01-31 13:17:10	0|wumpus|I mean if you specify -regtest -testnet -mainnet who is the code to know what you really want?
147 2018-01-31 13:17:42	0|provoostenator|That should be an error. Generally commandline flags override options in a config file, right?
148 2018-01-31 13:17:47	0|wumpus|it *is* an error
149 2018-01-31 13:18:05	0|wumpus|(at least specifying -regtest and -testnet at the same time)
150 2018-01-31 13:18:11	0|provoostenator|At least that's how -changetype behave now
151 2018-01-31 13:18:25	0|wumpus|but with -chain=... you could use simple override and it would simply work without having to special case them
152 2018-01-31 13:18:54	0|provoostenator|Yes, I agree -chain=testnet is more sensible than -testnet=1
153 2018-01-31 13:19:39	0|Sentineo|+1 on that :) I remember I was confused the first time I saw it
154 2018-01-31 13:21:01	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15rutkov opened pull request #12311:  build: bump version to 0.15.0 (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12311
155 2018-01-31 13:22:07	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15fanquake closed pull request #12311:  build: bump version to 0.15.0 (06master...06master) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12311
156 2018-01-31 13:22:33	0|wumpus|bump version to 0.15.0? have I traveled back in time?
157 2018-01-31 13:51:28	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 147f968ae 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Explain how to update chainTxData in release process...
158 2018-01-31 13:51:28	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/216f9a42e689...895fbd768f0c
159 2018-01-31 13:51:29	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14895fbd7 15MarcoFalke: Merge #12309: doc: Explain how to update chainTxData in release process...
160 2018-01-31 13:52:28	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #12309: doc: Explain how to update chainTxData in release process (06master...062018_01_release_process_chaintxstats) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12309
161 2018-01-31 14:28:05	0|promag|jamesob: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12305/files#diff-321303fddcf725df060981d626a05df9R38 paths or path?
162 2018-01-31 14:30:13	0|jamesob|promag: I'm fine with either
163 2018-01-31 14:30:32	0|cfields|jonasschnelli: ping
164 2018-01-31 14:30:40	0|promag|jamesob: remove https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12305/files#diff-3b23ce4d86903a432863cfb3a1f1e547R10?
165 2018-01-31 14:31:10	0|jamesob|promag: but the fs namespace is used in that file?
166 2018-01-31 14:33:38	0|promag|jamesob: it is, but it's an unnecessary change in your PR. I mean, there are tons of other "missing" includes I guess
167 2018-01-31 14:34:09	0|promag|jamesob: if by any chance you have to amend, consider removing it
168 2018-01-31 14:35:41	0|jamesob|promag: will do, thanks. If others have similar feelings I'm happy to - just hard to tell when to make small improvements. I figured since this is a fairly low-risk, small change that an addition like that couldn't hurt, but maybe I'm wrong about that.
169 2018-01-31 14:36:12	0|jamesob|s/change/changeset
170 2018-01-31 14:39:24	0|promag|jamesob: I know that feeling. Usually I do secondary changes "near" the primary changes. I avoid unrelated changes (even simple changes). Maybe submit them in other pulls..
171 2018-01-31 14:40:20	0|jamesob|promag: just don't want to become the guy who opens PRs for #include changes (more than I already am ;)
172 2018-01-31 14:41:19	0|promag|jamesob: right, just don't do it then :) unless you have to
173 2018-01-31 14:41:34	0|arubi|seems that dumpwallet puts base58 addresses in the dump when the wallet is set to bech32 (getnewaddress returns bech32)
174 2018-01-31 14:58:48	0|DDDev|Hi there, guys!
175 2018-01-31 14:59:09	0|DDDev|Have you ever seen deleted transaction in the blockchain?
176 2018-01-31 15:00:54	0|DDDev|For instance, you sent 10BTC and your transaction was unconfirmed for a long period of time. And after that the transaction became removed from the blockchain
177 2018-01-31 15:02:27	0|AndyS2|It's not even on the blockchain if it is unconfirmed. It's just in the mempool to be potentially added. There's #bitcoin-dev for more general development questions, btw. This channel is more so for development of Bitcoin Core (an implementation of the protocol).
178 2018-01-31 15:05:29	0|DDDev|Thank you, AndyS2
179 2018-01-31 15:36:25	0|provoostenator|I just noticed this by chance: #12312
180 2018-01-31 15:36:27	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12312 | QT ignores -changetype=bech32 when coin control features are enabled · Issue #12312 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
181 2018-01-31 16:19:12	0|arubi|does making dumpwallet use bech32 for the addresses if addresstype is bech32 or p2sh-segwit and base58 if it's legacy sound ok?
182 2018-01-31 16:33:09	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15Schallabeer opened pull request #12313: 0.16 (06master...060.16) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12313
183 2018-01-31 16:40:45	0|promag|tag #12312 as bug?
184 2018-01-31 16:40:46	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12312 | QT ignores -changetype=bech32 when coin control features are enabled · Issue #12312 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
185 2018-01-31 17:11:06	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15fivepiece opened pull request #12315: Bech32 addresses in dumpwallet (06master...06dumpwallet-bech32) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12315
186 2018-01-31 18:17:46	0|gmaxwell|ugh. I really dislike 12300.
187 2018-01-31 18:18:26	0|gmaxwell|If we want to reduce screw up risk we should make the github default branch a release branch; not boobytrap the prerelease software.
188 2018-01-31 18:21:36	0|gmaxwell|for the original ask, a developer that doesn't want to mess up their own wallets, could be just as well addressed with a --disable-mainnet configure option that they could setup to normally use.
189 2018-01-31 18:39:13	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15thijstriemstra opened pull request #12316: Upgrade depends/build system to use Qt 5.9.4 (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12316
190 2018-01-31 18:44:07	0|jonasschnelli|gmaxwell: agree
191 2018-01-31 18:46:08	0|gmaxwell|achow101: so your belief is that for some input conditions the signer is producing an invalid signature?
192 2018-01-31 18:50:22	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jnewbery opened pull request #12317: Document method for reviewers to verify chainTxData (06master...06verify_chainTxData) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12317
193 2018-01-31 18:52:58	0|cfields|gmaxwell / jonasschnelli: I agree as well. If anything, I think that's kinda dangerous as downstreams can just quietly remove the ifdef, and users think they're shielded from mainnet
194 2018-01-31 18:54:52	0|cfields|i can see the need for some kind of switch like that, but I'd rather do it in the appropriate place. ie If exposing the wallet to mainnet is scary, then add something there.
195 2018-01-31 18:56:49	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #12313: 0.16 (06master...060.16) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12313
196 2018-01-31 21:15:17	0|jtimon|what is this label supposed to mean? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/labels/good%20first%20issue
197 2018-01-31 21:16:21	0|phantomcircuit|jtimon, i assume things someone can work on as their first pr
198 2018-01-31 21:16:48	0|jtimon|oh, I see, thanks
199 2018-01-31 21:45:51	0|mryandao|are there any plans to implement compact filters for bitcoin-core?
200 2018-01-31 21:46:05	0|mryandao|to deprecate bip37 bloom filter service?
201 2018-01-31 21:50:10	0|achow101|gmaxwell: I just screwed up BnB, that's all
202 2018-01-31 21:51:58	0|jtimon|review begging for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12128/files I think it's a simple to review but nice simplification (sorry for the redundancy)
203 2018-01-31 22:08:41	0|gmaxwell|achow101: whew. what did you screw up?
204 2018-01-31 22:09:10	0|achow101|gmaxwell: amounts. I was using the effective value of the utxo when signing instead of its actual value
205 2018-01-31 22:09:40	0|gmaxwell|doh
206 2018-01-31 22:22:52	0|jimpo|mryandao: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12254. Could use some review if you have time. :-)
207 2018-01-31 22:24:17	0|gmaxwell|achow101: I'm super glad you're working on BnB again.
208 2018-01-31 22:52:53	0|mryandao|how often should I follow up on a pending PR to get it closed?
209 2018-01-31 22:54:03	0|mryandao|jimpo: cool! good to see that there'll be less spying going on eventually.
210 2018-01-31 22:59:06	0|midnightmagic|What's BnB? :-)
211 2018-01-31 23:04:39	0|gmaxwell|Branch and Bound.  Solvers that can construct changeless transactions.
212 2018-01-31 23:17:58	0|midnightmagic|nice.
213 2018-01-31 23:18:01	0|midnightmagic|\o/
214 2018-01-31 23:34:56	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15Empact opened pull request #12319: Add size checking to CPubKey::IsValid, and prefer key/sig size const references (06master...06pubkeysize) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12319