1 2018-02-10 00:47:01	0|ossifrage|I just started up a master bitcoin-qt built a few hours ago and the column widths fro the debug window peers tab seems broken
  2 2018-02-10 00:48:15	0|ossifrage|I can't resize the columns and the default widths are strange (wide NodeId column, narrow node/service column)
  3 2018-02-10 00:52:48	0|fanquake|cfields what are your thoughts/plans re qt upgrade?
  4 2018-02-10 00:54:48	0|fanquake|There is #12316 open, but I dont think the bump is going to be that trivial.
  5 2018-02-10 00:54:49	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12316 | Upgrade depends/build system to use Qt 5.9.4 by thijstriemstra · Pull Request #12316 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
  6 2018-02-10 00:55:30	0|fanquake|Also wether we are going to bump sdk & clang at the same time.
  7 2018-02-10 01:13:43	0|Randolf|I wonder if someone could take a quick look at PR 12393 at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12393 for me.  The committer - practicalswift - indicated that they implemented a change that I suggested, but that change isn't appearing for me.  Am I missing something, or is there something else
  8 2018-02-10 01:14:31	0|Randolf|that the committer needs to do?  Thanks.
  9 2018-02-10 01:19:06	0|fanquake|Randolf The change is not on GitHub yet. practicalswift may have forgotten to push the changes after fixing.
 10 2018-02-10 01:20:06	0|Randolf|Okay.  Thanks.
 11 2018-02-10 01:20:14	0|Randolf|I'll let them know.
 12 2018-02-10 02:11:54	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15fanquake opened pull request #12402: [depends] expat 2.2.5, ccache 3.3.6, miniupnpc 2.0.20180203 (06master...06depends-02-2018) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12402
 13 2018-02-10 03:24:39	0|fanquake|Can someone confirm for me that 90dda8c7563ca6cd4a83e23b3c66dbbea89603a1675bfdb852897c2c9cc220b7 is the correct sha256sum for http://miniupnp.free.fr/files/miniupnpc-2.0.20180203.tar.gz
 14 2018-02-10 03:31:29	0|mlz|90dda8c7563ca6cd4a83e23b3c66dbbea89603a1675bfdb852897c2c9cc220b7  miniupnpc-2.0.20180203.tar.gz
 15 2018-02-10 03:31:29	0|mlz|$ sha256sum miniupnpc-2.0.20180203.tar.gz
 16 2018-02-10 03:32:18	0|mlz|looks matching, fanquake
 17 2018-02-10 03:35:10	0|fanquake|thanks mlz
 18 2018-02-10 04:15:34	0|ProfMac|I've been grepping for nExtraNonce and reading source.  I can't seem to comprehend where it is in the data structure source.
 19 2018-02-10 08:06:49	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15zablonbaraka85 opened pull request #12403: Updatecoin miner.cpp (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12403
 20 2018-02-10 08:15:45	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15fanquake closed pull request #12403: Updatecoin miner.cpp (06master...06patch-1) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12403
 21 2018-02-10 10:51:49	0|provoostenator|Can someone answer my new questions at #12401? I need a little bit more context to understand my own bugfix :-) I can update the PR based on that feedback.
 22 2018-02-10 10:51:51	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12401 | Reset pblocktree before deleting LevelDB file by Sjors · Pull Request #12401 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 23 2018-02-10 11:38:03	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 141687cb4 15Jorge Timón: Refactor: One CBaseChainParams should be enough
 24 2018-02-10 11:38:03	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/89005ddad1c4...948c29cc0d2d
 25 2018-02-10 11:38:04	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14948c29c 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12128: Refactor: One CBaseChainParams should be enough...
 26 2018-02-10 11:38:52	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #12128: Refactor: One CBaseChainParams should be enough (06master...06b16-baseparams-nohierarchy) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12128
 27 2018-02-10 13:50:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15Sjors opened pull request #12404: Prune more aggressively during IBD (06master...062018/02/ibd_prune_extra) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12404
 28 2018-02-10 14:15:16	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke opened pull request #12405: travis: Full clone for git subtree check (06master...06Mf1802-travisSubtree) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12405
 29 2018-02-10 14:50:12	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14464015f 15Sjors Provoost: [scripts] gitian-builder.sh: fix --setup doc, LXC is default
 30 2018-02-10 14:50:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/948c29cc0d2d...fe53d5f3636a
 31 2018-02-10 14:50:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fe53d5f 15MarcoFalke: Merge #12394: gitian-builder.sh: fix --setup doc, since lxc is default...
 32 2018-02-10 14:50:54	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #12396: [Doc] Fix typo (060.16...060.16) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12396
 33 2018-02-10 14:51:04	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #12394: gitian-builder.sh: fix --setup doc, since lxc is default (06master...062018/02/gitian-build-setup-lxc) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12394
 34 2018-02-10 17:39:24	0|provoostenator|michagogo: regarding Ubuntu inside of Windows and scary instructions. I'm currently trying to upgrade a fresh install to 18.04 and then see if I can compile Bitcoin
 35 2018-02-10 17:40:07	0|provoostenator|If that works, I'll make a PR to point out that possibility.
 36 2018-02-10 17:46:28	0|jamesob_|is latestblock in rpc/blockchain.cpp supposed to correspond to the latest block on *any* chain, or on activeChain?
 37 2018-02-10 18:03:19	0|michagogo|provoostenator: Hm, does do-release-upgrade actually do anything?
 38 2018-02-10 18:04:00	0|michagogo|IIRC even upgrading 14.04-16.04 isn't supported, advice is to delete the environment and start fresh
 39 2018-02-10 18:41:33	0|provoostenator|michagogo do-release-upgrade -d
 40 2018-02-10 18:42:26	0|provoostenator|Probably not recommended of course. I just got a crash somewhere during the upgrade. We'll see...
 41 2018-02-10 18:43:20	0|provoostenator|Windows 10 uses 16.04, so that was my starting point.
 42 2018-02-10 18:43:46	0|provoostenator|And that in turn is running in a Virtual Box on my iMac, because: must go deeper:
 43 2018-02-10 18:45:11	0|arubi|what kernel is running in windows' linux subsystem?  not linux right?
 44 2018-02-10 18:45:57	0|arubi|oh it's not.  reading the wiki now..
 45 2018-02-10 18:46:02	0|sipa|"a linux-compatible kernel interface"
 46 2018-02-10 18:47:19	0|arubi|yea..  how exotic :)
 47 2018-02-10 18:52:41	0|provoostenator|https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/systemd/+bug/1748659
 48 2018-02-10 18:54:16	0|provoostenator|Their bug filing flow is pretty nice... It generates a report, uploads a bunch of stuff to some temporary place and gives you a short URL to open in a browser with most of the bug report filled out...
 49 2018-02-10 19:11:18	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15MarcoFalke closed pull request #12120: Add dev guideline limiting auto usage. (06master...062018-01-auto-devnotes) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12120
 50 2018-02-10 19:28:44	0|provoostenator|locales are always screwed up on the Windows 10 Ubuntu, this tends to help: sudo gunzip /usr/share/i18n/charmaps/UTF-8.gz
 51 2018-02-10 19:41:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15jamesob opened pull request #12407: Ensure nStatus is set properly for all invalid blocks (06master...06jamesob/2018-02-mark-headers-invalid) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12407
 52 2018-02-10 22:23:01	0|BlueMatt_|we need to improve the at-tip relay latency
 53 2018-02-10 22:27:43	0|provoostenator|I managed to get my Windows-in-a-VirtualBox build to throw: ERROR: AcceptBlockHeader: block 0000000000000000004c746b087820b517771e136d6776b21586c93c333da523 is marked invalid
 54 2018-02-10 22:28:15	0|provoostenator|That node suffered some above before, so it's probalby not a bug.
 55 2018-02-10 22:28:20	0|provoostenator|some abuse before
 56 2018-02-10 22:28:35	0|BlueMatt_|provoostenator: What sort of abuse?
 57 2018-02-10 22:28:59	0|provoostenator|I think it ran out of disk space last time I used it, about a month ago.
 58 2018-02-10 22:29:17	0|sipa|that still shouldn't happen
 59 2018-02-10 22:29:19	0|provoostenator|And now I copied a binary that I built using Gitian
 60 2018-02-10 22:29:21	0|BlueMatt_|That shouldn't leave the database in an inconsistent state
 61 2018-02-10 22:29:53	0|provoostenator|Right, I can upload debug.log, I think it still has previous stuff
 62 2018-02-10 22:31:38	0|grafcaps|=2
 63 2018-02-10 22:33:24	0|BlueMatt|provoostenator: note imposter
 64 2018-02-10 22:34:47	0|BlueMatt_|BlueMatt: ?
 65 2018-02-10 22:35:25	0|spudowiar|echeveria: The other BlueMatt has arrived
 66 2018-02-10 22:35:26	0|provoostenator|BlueMatt BlueMatt_ while you figure out the identity crisis.... https://gist.github.com/Sjors/d79600df491d2190a97aa03a08fb6834
 67 2018-02-10 22:35:45	0|spudowiar|provoostenator: Catch me up here (I just joined)
 68 2018-02-10 22:35:49	0|spudowiar|Never mind, this channel is logged
 69 2018-02-10 22:36:45	0|echeveria|spudowiar: I don't have ops in this channel. just note that BlueMatt_ was kicked from #bitcoin for being an impostor.
 70 2018-02-10 22:37:13	0|BlueMatt_|echeveria: Rude.
 71 2018-02-10 22:37:16	0|BlueMatt|provoostenator: what kind of hardware...first error is "ERROR: ConnectBlock: CheckQueue failed" seemingly on that block
 72 2018-02-10 22:42:08	0|provoostenator|I believe the January log was created by version a8f9e20, which was an intermediate version of this: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11991#issuecomment-355746951
 73 2018-02-10 22:42:38	0|provoostenator|Most likely pretty similar to whatever master was on January ~6
 74 2018-02-10 22:42:40	0|BlueMatt|by far the most likely is a hardware error
 75 2018-02-10 22:42:52	0|BlueMatt|cpu hot?
 76 2018-02-10 22:42:52	0|provoostenator|The log from today is rc3 plus my prune changes.
 77 2018-02-10 22:43:05	0|provoostenator|Hardwise wise: iMac running Virtual Box running Windows 10
 78 2018-02-10 22:43:19	0|BlueMatt|I mean it wrote out that the block was invalid due to a script failure when it first hit that error and will never reconsider a block automatically
 79 2018-02-10 22:43:22	0|provoostenator|Parent machine runs all sorts of stuff, but seems fine.
 80 2018-02-10 22:43:27	0|BlueMatt_|.
 81 2018-02-10 22:43:28	0|BlueMatt_|..
 82 2018-02-10 22:43:29	0|BlueMatt_|...
 83 2018-02-10 22:43:30	0|BlueMatt_|..
 84 2018-02-10 22:43:31	0|BlueMatt_|.
 85 2018-02-10 22:43:32	0|BlueMatt|what about cpu temps?
 86 2018-02-10 22:43:44	0|provoostenator|Where do I find that?
 87 2018-02-10 22:43:59	0|BlueMatt|errr, on osx no idea
 88 2018-02-10 22:44:08	0|spudowiar|provoostenator: Open the case, stick hand inside
 89 2018-02-10 22:44:28	0|provoostenator|One does not simply ... open an iMac case
 90 2018-02-10 22:44:56	0|BlueMatt_|.
 91 2018-02-10 22:44:56	0|BlueMatt_|..
 92 2018-02-10 22:44:56	0|BlueMatt_|...
 93 2018-02-10 22:44:56	0|BlueMatt_|........
 94 2018-02-10 22:44:56	0|BlueMatt_|.........
 95 2018-02-10 22:44:57	0|BlueMatt_|...
 96 2018-02-10 22:44:57	0|BlueMatt_|........
 97 2018-02-10 22:44:58	0|BlueMatt_|.
 98 2018-02-10 22:44:58	0|BlueMatt_|..
 99 2018-02-10 22:45:16	0|sipa|?
100 2018-02-10 22:45:21	0|provoostenator|Isn't a compiler error more likely? Is there a command to make it retry / redownload that block?
101 2018-02-10 22:45:23	0|BlueMatt|sipa: plz ban imposter...
102 2018-02-10 22:45:54	0|BlueMatt|provoostenator: I'd think not? we have an impressive ability to break peoples' hardware
103 2018-02-10 22:46:02	0|BlueMatt|provoostenator: maybe try running a memtest?
104 2018-02-10 22:46:04	0|spudowiar|provoostenator: You could add the raw block over RPC
105 2018-02-10 22:46:13	0|BlueMatt|irc command is reconsiderblock
106 2018-02-10 22:46:20	0|spudowiar|oh, well there's that :)
107 2018-02-10 22:46:52	0|provoostenator|The thing is, this block is exactly the next one in line since I restarted it.
108 2018-02-10 22:47:04	0|provoostenator|So I suspect if there was a CPU fire, it was last month.
109 2018-02-10 22:47:20	0|provoostenator|I'll try the reconsider thing
110 2018-02-10 22:47:31	0|BlueMatt|err, s/irc/rpc/
111 2018-02-10 22:48:00	0|BlueMatt|huh? yes, your bitcoind rejected a block, it then stored on disk the fact that it thinks that block is invalid
112 2018-02-10 22:48:13	0|BlueMatt|and then will always and forevermore refuse to reconsider that block
113 2018-02-10 22:48:16	0|BlueMatt|unless you do so manually
114 2018-02-10 22:48:24	0|provoostenator|That definately did something
115 2018-02-10 22:48:32	0|BlueMatt|(which I'm really starting to think we need to start automatically do....)
116 2018-02-10 22:48:36	0|BlueMatt|(which I'm really starting to think we need to start automatically doing....)
117 2018-02-10 22:49:16	0|provoostenator|Yeah, reconsidering the last N blocks at launch if they're invalid, in cases like this?
118 2018-02-10 22:49:29	0|sipa|we could make it retry a block one second time if validation fails
119 2018-02-10 22:49:46	0|sipa|and if it then succeed, tell the user they need non-broken hardware?
120 2018-02-10 22:49:56	0|BlueMatt|no, just if you find a block to be invalid, eg due to script checks, always re-run the scripts single-threaded and if it passes then then put a file on disk that says my-hardware-is-broken and refuse to start
121 2018-02-10 22:50:01	0|provoostenator|It's chugging along nicely now, although QT doesn't update the count after Synching Headers.
122 2018-02-10 22:50:06	0|spudowiar|When will reconsidering a block work? (unless you invalidated it manually)
123 2018-02-10 22:50:12	0|spudowiar|(except for hardware issues)
124 2018-02-10 22:50:15	0|BlueMatt|yea, what sipa said
125 2018-02-10 22:50:26	0|sipa|spudowiar: if the signature checks failed due to hardware failure the first time
126 2018-02-10 22:50:36	0|sipa|in particular, it won't work if your UTXO set is corrupted
127 2018-02-10 22:50:38	0|BlueMatt|problem is I've seen one report of a rejected block from a node on a server vm
128 2018-02-10 22:50:42	0|BlueMatt|which is frightening
129 2018-02-10 22:50:55	0|provoostenator|In fact, getblockchaininfo rpc still has the headers stuck at 499615, while blocks are now at 499686 and increasing
130 2018-02-10 22:51:06	0|spudowiar|Would it be useful to log the reason the block validation failed?
131 2018-02-10 22:51:18	0|spudowiar|I feel like one out of 9000 cases could be something scary :)
132 2018-02-10 22:51:29	0|BlueMatt|well in this case we see the sciript check failure
133 2018-02-10 22:51:30	0|sipa|spudowiar: there's nothing interesting to report
134 2018-02-10 22:51:35	0|sipa|"script validation failed"
135 2018-02-10 22:51:37	0|BlueMatt|it may be useful to log the scriptPubKey being spent from
136 2018-02-10 22:51:41	0|sipa|(almost always)
137 2018-02-10 22:51:53	0|BlueMatt|as it would indicate if the utxo set is corrupted vs hardware failed to run the script right
138 2018-02-10 22:52:40	0|sipa|you'd need to report the full spending TX as well
139 2018-02-10 22:52:48	0|sipa|(as it affects sighash)
140 2018-02-10 22:53:01	0|BlueMatt|well that isnt a utxo thing
141 2018-02-10 22:53:58	0|BlueMatt|I'm casually starting to worry there is some stupidly-rare race in leveldb or so...so at least we'd have better info on the possibility of that
142 2018-02-10 22:54:06	0|provoostenator|I do remember from last month that that Windows VM managed to completely crash my iMac. I don't remember if that was while QT was running, but that's quite possibly.
143 2018-02-10 22:54:37	0|sipa|is it working now after the reconsider?
144 2018-02-10 22:56:05	0|provoostenator|sipa: it's sycning yes, although the header count doesn't update unless I restart, after which it again doesn't update. Block count does
145 2018-02-10 22:56:25	0|sipa|hmm, that sounds like an unrelated bug
146 2018-02-10 22:56:41	0|sipa|but maybe specific to reconsiderblock
147 2018-02-10 22:58:04	0|provoostenator|The "marked invalid" thing indeed happened last month.
148 2018-02-10 22:58:08	0|provoostenator|2018-01-10 15:45:12 ERROR: ConnectBlock: CheckQueue failed
149 2018-02-10 22:58:22	0|sipa|yeah, that's just script validation failure
150 2018-02-10 22:59:11	0|provoostenator|After that it it start banning peers, though not sure if that's causal (BAN THRESHOLD EXCEEDED)
151 2018-02-10 22:59:30	0|sipa|it may well be
152 2018-02-10 22:59:50	0|provoostenator|That would make sense, lots of bans in a row, preceded by ERROR: AcceptBlockHeader: prev block invalid
153 2018-02-10 23:00:01	0|sipa|yup
154 2018-02-10 23:00:10	0|provoostenator|It should probably go into "maybe I'm insane" mode
155 2018-02-10 23:00:12	0|sipa|but interestingly your UTXO set seems unaffected
156 2018-02-10 23:00:22	0|sipa|just one signature validation that failed
157 2018-02-10 23:00:36	0|sipa|so it seems likely it was just faulty RAM or overheating CPU
158 2018-02-10 23:00:50	0|provoostenator|Also notably no crash around that time. Wouldn't a CPU issue kill the host machine?
159 2018-02-10 23:01:05	0|sipa|no
160 2018-02-10 23:01:12	0|sipa|it's just a bit flip somewhere, probably
161 2018-02-10 23:01:17	0|provoostenator|And why has this never happened to my other bitcoind nodes on the same machine?
162 2018-02-10 23:01:37	0|sipa|CPU bugs are rare, even in overheating systems
163 2018-02-10 23:01:45	0|provoostenator|I've done almost a dozen full IBD's on it.
164 2018-02-10 23:02:01	0|sipa|on normally functioning CPU bitflips occur as well
165 2018-02-10 23:02:06	0|sipa|but only once per decade or so
166 2018-02-10 23:02:14	0|sipa|(of continuous load)
167 2018-02-10 23:04:18	0|provoostenator|Alright, I'm off to bed. I'll let the VM continue to sync. Will let you know if it's still misbehaves when that's done.
168 2018-02-10 23:04:29	0|grubles|anything in dmesg?
169 2018-02-10 23:14:25	0|provoostenator|By the way, QT didn't give any useful hint that this was going on, other than just not making any progress in syncing and very little P2P activity.
170 2018-02-10 23:15:32	0|provoostenator|Not sure what the UI could say, some translation of "Either you're being sybil attacked by a dozen nodes or something is wrong with your machine. Call sipa."
171 2018-02-10 23:18:30	0|BlueMatt|provoostenator: if you're rejecting the chain and all your peers have high-work chain which you think is invalid, its more than just a sybil
172 2018-02-10 23:19:29	0|provoostenator|One thing the node could try is to "reconsider" an older block that it already knows is valid. If that's suddenly invalid, it knows the machine is broken. If it's valid, it can "reconsider" the block it thought was invalid but all it peers insist is valid.
173 2018-02-10 23:20:10	0|BlueMatt|sipa: yea, i once saw a very large miner get their node to reject their chain while they were sleeping, resulting in them building a like 4-block-long chain....their utxo set after a reconsiderblock was fine, but it seems that the utxo set in memory got corrupted
174 2018-02-10 23:20:23	0|BlueMatt|provoostenator: its too nondeterministic
175 2018-02-10 23:20:55	0|BlueMatt|even if your ram is maybe a bit sketchy you'll still only fail blocks with very low probability
176 2018-02-10 23:21:18	0|provoostenator|Well it should give up if the behavior is too non deterministic, but at least some retying makes sense, right?
177 2018-02-10 23:21:45	0|provoostenator|Especially if these type of issues can only lead to false negatives, though I don't know if that's true.
178 2018-02-10 23:23:57	0|provoostenator|Meanwhile the windows node now says "Number of blocks left: 6000" and getblockchaininfo now shows the correct header count.
179 2018-02-10 23:26:31	0|sipa|provoostenator: i think we'd be better off just continuously spending 1% of the time doing some elliptic curve operations with known results
180 2018-02-10 23:26:34	0|sipa|and if they fail, complain