< GitHub128> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7280: [travis] Fail when documentation is outdated (master...MarcoFalke-2015-travisDoc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7280
< dcousens> Hey all, I'm submitting a TX to a bitcoind instance and getting back a mandatory-script-verify-flag-failed (unknown error) back, which, best I can tell, is an exception being thrown? Anyone have an insight into if I can find out more without recompiling the instance with some logging to determine more?
< dcousens> k, now i'm getting 'No error' :/ bah, haha
< dcousens> (64: non-mandatory-script-verify-flag (No error))
< dcousens> Previous error code was related to OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY being used instead of OP_CHECKSIG at the end of a script
< dcousens> k, pop_stack was throwing a runtime error, should that be mentioned in the error code?
< dcousens> If I made a PR for that as an error code, should be fine?
< GitHub20> [bitcoin] petertodd opened pull request #7281: Improve CheckInputs() comment about sig verification (master...2016-01-improve-checkinputs-comment) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7281
< petertodd> dcousens: link to PR?
< dcousens> Haven't made it, was asking if its worth making
< petertodd> dcousens: ah, yeah, might as well - I'm not sure I yet understand the issue 100% :)
< dcousens> and it'd be nice to get that information in the form a serror code
< dcousens> IMHO
< petertodd> dcousens: oh! that's not good, what called popstack()
< petertodd> ?
< petertodd> odd, that shouldn't be possible? we should check the stack above
< dcousens> it only checks for 2
< dcousens> but if the opcode is verify, it pops3
< petertodd> right, put we push to the stack just prior to that popstack
< dcousens> good point.
< dcousens> then how the... I'll investigate further, just re-IBDing my testnet so I could test it properly
< petertodd> yeah, there's something quite wrong if that's what's happening
< dcousens> well, I'm getting a "No error" upon changing the script, so, something is still wrong :S
< dcousens> I'll let you know when I find out more
< petertodd> thanks!
< CodeShark> dcousens, I've rebased #6747
< CodeShark> I had stopped working on it because of versionbits...but I'm now having second thoughts about versionbits in light of the new extensibility ideas unleashed by segwit
< CodeShark> but I'm sure about decoupling soft fork activation logic from the rest of the consensus code and #6747 is a good step in that direction, IMHO
< dcousens> CodeShark: I'll have to re-ACK it later :), forgot to include my previously reviewed commit hash so diff isn't a 1-step :(
< dcousens> SegWit won't always be possible via the segwit method though? I guess it does cover a lot of the cases though
< CodeShark> we can still use block version numbers to signal basic stuff (i.e. a new fork is about to activate)...but we're no longer limited to just the version number to provide specific information
< CodeShark> we can commit to hashes of BIP specs, i.e.
< CodeShark> in a block header witness
< CodeShark> completely eliminates bit assignment and collision issues
< CodeShark> without requiring a lot of extra bandwidth nor storage since all that needs to be transmitted is the diff (and recently used stuff can be cached)
< dcousens> true
< dcousens> petertodd: "non-minimally encoded script number
< dcousens> is what was throwing, but not being shown in a error code ;)
< dcousens> and that combined with the check2 fix by sipa is why it was showing "no error"
< CodeShark> I'm a little confused about the script num spec. we have these op codes OP_1 through OP_16 that push the literal value on the stack. But we can also perform the same operation using two bytes where the first indicates a one byte push, right?
< CodeShark> or...
< dcousens> CodeShark: indeed, I guess it saves a byte
< CodeShark> but at the cost of needing extra rules
< dcousens> yup
< CodeShark> and consuming 16 op codes
< dcousens> Just 1 more reason for SegWit and maybe an eventual soft-fork removal of *everything* else? :P
< CodeShark> if we're consensus-enforcing minimal encodings, then technically we should always be using OP_1 through OP_16 whenever we can
< CodeShark> so 0x0101 should fail, i.e.
< dcousens> I think it does
< dcousens> Hell, it is for me atm
< dcousens> but, I might be doing something wrong, only just started debugging it
< dcousens> nvm :), agreed it can be confusing
< dcousens> petertodd: thoughts on adding more error codes for the CheckLockTime, setting a serror for the nomatch/toearly/nonfinal cases respectively?
< dcousens> (I'll happily do it, just figured I'd ask if there was a reason not too)
< dcousens> s/too/to
< dcousens> if the idea was to keep the method encapsulated, maybe 0 for success, then <0 for the various errors and we set the error in the EvalScript respectively?
< GitHub181> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/be9a9a3d2253...d032b5b64b0d
< GitHub181> bitcoin/master 7ef8f3c Pieter Wuille: Report non-mandatory script failures correctly
< GitHub181> bitcoin/master d032b5b Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7276...
< GitHub162> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7276: Report non-mandatory script failures correctly (master...nonmanrep) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7276
< GitHub73> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/76de36fd2e2bd733fcab68314f6d67704d2047d1
< GitHub73> bitcoin/0.12 76de36f Pieter Wuille: Report non-mandatory script failures correctly...
< GitHub189> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #6782: Master (0.8...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6782
< GitHub0> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d032b5b64b0d...08ab9069afaa
< GitHub0> bitcoin/master 33877ed fanquake: Add note to CoinControl Dialog workaround
< GitHub0> bitcoin/master 08ab906 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7256...
< GitHub153> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7256: Add note to coin control dialog QT5 workaround (master...remove-qt5-fix-ccontrol) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7256
< GitHub113> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/08ab9069afaa...e289807e5a2c
< GitHub113> bitcoin/master 5fdf32d fanquake: Replace some instances of formatWithUnit with formatHtmlWithUnit...
< GitHub113> bitcoin/master 6fd0a07 fanquake: Remove hardcoded fee from CoinControl ToolTip
< GitHub113> bitcoin/master e289807 Jonas Schnelli: Merge pull request #7255...
< GitHub49> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #7255: Replace some instances of formatWithUnit with formatHtmlWithUnit (master...bitcoinunits-format) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7255
< GitHub193> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e289807e5a2c...eb2b74526a5b
< GitHub193> bitcoin/master fa09562 MarcoFalke: [gitian] Set reference date to something more recent
< GitHub193> bitcoin/master eb2b745 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7251...
< GitHub113> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7251: [0.12] gitian: Set reference date to something more recent (0.12...MarcoFalke-2015-gitianTime-0.12) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7251
< GitHub118> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7245: [0.12] Backport: Torcontrol debug msg (0.12...MF/0.12/merge/debugMsg) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7245
< GitHub78> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/2d6a493493a799a030944db37279341b1df8ae74
< GitHub78> bitcoin/0.12 2d6a493 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7245...
< GitHub66> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/5ba42bad6d69c5a3e17254b15818d45d6bad1478
< GitHub66> bitcoin/0.12 5ba42ba Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: periodic translations pull from transifex
< GitHub66> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/136abda59728708ab4dffeac6fb08e0abf7e3b27
< GitHub66> bitcoin/master 136abda Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: periodic translations pull from transifex
< GitHub90> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #7282: [Qt] fix coincontrol update issue when deleting a send coins entry (master...2016/01/qt_cc_fee) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7282
< GitHub157> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/136abda59728...c17301382159
< GitHub157> bitcoin/master fae7a36 MarcoFalke: [debian] Bump manpages and only mention -?...
< GitHub157> bitcoin/master fa6ce44 MarcoFalke: [debian] Update bitcoind manpage description...
< GitHub157> bitcoin/master c173013 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7274...
< GitHub66> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7274: [debian] Bump manpages and only mention -? (master...MarcoFalke-2015-debianManpages) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7274
< GitHub46> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/e70fc6f8420b2e9b4f50c93b885016d60dc5d5f2
< GitHub46> bitcoin/0.12 e70fc6f MarcoFalke: [debian] Bump manpages and only mention -?...
< GitHub81> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c17301382159...ac982a16e07d
< GitHub81> bitcoin/master a5a0831 21E14: Double semicolon cleanup.
< GitHub81> bitcoin/master ac982a1 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7263...
< GitHub104> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7263: Double semicolon cleanup (master...doubles) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7263
< MarcoFalke> I think you forgot to "backport" this one
< MarcoFalke> Or was this intentional?
< GitHub116> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #7252: [gitian] Default reference date to commit author date (master...MarcoFalke-2015-gitianTime-0.13) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7252
< MarcoFalke> ^ This one was for 0.13 :)
< wumpus> MarcoFalke: oh, right
< GitHub174> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7283: [gitian] Default reference_datetime to commit author date (master...MarcoFalke-2016-gitianTimeDefault) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7283
< wumpus> so how did I manage to merge it into master?
< wumpus> shouldn't that normally give tons of conflicts?
< sipa> what did you do?
< MarcoFalke> the merge script does not check what github tells you to merge to
< sipa> it does
< sipa> ah
< MarcoFalke> No, there are no conflicts
< MarcoFalke> And it didn't break anything (I hope)
< sipa> this can have merged version number things into master
< wumpus> this is really confusing: let's not make too many pull requests for 0.12, the normal way of working is to first make a pull for master then backport
< MarcoFalke> No, I based it on 0.11.99
< sipa> the scriot should indeed check what branch it is for
< wumpus> this makes sure that everything hits master first
< sipa> but thay requires accessing the JSON API, which is hard from bash
< wumpus> porting the script to python is on my todo somewhere
< sipa> a rewrite in python or so would be easier and more powerful
< sipa> jinx
< wumpus> I remember there was also an earlier change which got reverted which was almost impossible to do with bash
< sipa> a better commit message
< sipa> indeed
< petertodd> wumpus: quick q: rough eta on v0.12.0rc1?
< wumpus> phew, "git diff e289807 eb2b745" shows no adverse changes
< wumpus> petertodd: end of this week
< petertodd> wumpus: great, thanks!
< sipa> we need to start fixing up the release notes
< wumpus> I'll handle the automatically generated part :)
< petertodd> wumpus: had some requests for a v0.12.0rc1 full-rbf port
< petertodd> wumpus: had to remind people that rc1 isn't out yet :)
< jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: just started the build: https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/pulls/7283/
< MarcoFalke> Awesome!
< jonasschnelli> release notes needs a part for the mempool limiting stuff
< sipa> and floating relay fee that results from it
< sipa> and we need notes about optin RBF
< GitHub1> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/f6c8c1242b34eafdbee912544a071d2b58484ea8
< GitHub1> bitcoin/0.12 f6c8c12 MarcoFalke: [gitian] Set reference date to something more recent...
< jonasschnelli> uh.. yes. Lots of things to add..
< jonasschnelli> I'll try to write the "GUI" part.
< jonasschnelli> wallet also needs info about "pruning and wallet"
< sipa> oh yes
< jonasschnelli> Uh.. and the whole banning stuff is also missing
< jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: after updating gitian-builder, gbuild asks for a ubuntu@localhost password. Is there a quick fix for this?
< MarcoFalke> Oh.
< MarcoFalke> Blame me, I changed it to use rsa
< jonasschnelli> Saw that in the git logs... some easy steps to solve this?
< MarcoFalke> You'd need to make a new ubuntu-trusty base image
< jonasschnelli> okay... thanks. will do so.
< GitHub94> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ac982a16e07d...49a735cba4f7
< GitHub94> bitcoin/master fa0a974 MarcoFalke: [qa] Move gen_return_txouts() to util.py
< GitHub94> bitcoin/master 49a735c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7250...
< GitHub29> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7250: [qa] Move gen_return_txouts() to util.py (master...MarcoFalke-2015-rpcUtilReturnTxouts-0.12) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7250
< GitHub77> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/bdd0f9e286e8ad28eb724d076275c3cd1734553f
< GitHub77> bitcoin/0.12 bdd0f9e MarcoFalke: [qa] Move gen_return_txouts() to util.py...
< GitHub169> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/49a735cba4f7...45d13abf4ea1
< GitHub169> bitcoin/master 0d59589 Luke Dashjr: Bugfix: update-translations: Allow numerus translations to omit %n specifier (usually when it only has one possible value)
< GitHub169> bitcoin/master 45d13ab Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7253...
< GitHub22> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7253: Bugfix: update-translations: Allow numerus translations to omit %n specifier (usually when it only has one possible value) (master...numerus_omit_n) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7253
< GitHub13> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a75a03a5f2fe386d953e52839a1c5492975c93cf
< GitHub13> bitcoin/0.12 a75a03a Luke Dashjr: Bugfix: update-translations: Allow numerus translations to omit %n specifier (usually when it only has one possible value)...
< GitHub184> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/3cb066c62b98acac3c9323082094ccc6ae8f0bd7
< GitHub184> bitcoin/0.12 3cb066c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Update translations after #7253...
< vojtik> hi , cna you help me with technical problem?
< murch> Hey. I think it would be best if you just described your issue. There are plenty capable people in this channel.
< vojtik> i have bitcoin core, and it generate me adress for income bitcoin, but in this moment i can this adress find, cant find money, anythink,,, just have link for block chain
< MarcoFalke> Is your node syncing?
< vojtik> i think, that yes
< MarcoFalke> Looks like it's this issue: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7235
< GitHub134> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7286: Misc. non-critical cleanup (master...Mf1601-trivial8) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7286
< GitHub191> [bitcoin] jtimon opened pull request #7287: Consensus: Remove calls to error(), FormatStateMessage() and FormatMoney() (master...consensus-decouple-util-0.13.99) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7287
< GitHub131> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #7289: [WIP] Make arguments reconfigurable at runtime via RPC (master...rpc_setarg) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7289
< GitHub108> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7290: [init] Add missing help for args (master...Mf1601-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7290
< GitHub179> [bitcoin] EthanHeilman opened pull request #7291: Add CNetAddr and CService tests demonstrating constructor differences (master...cservice) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7291
< morcos> BlueMatt: ping?
< GitHub199> [bitcoin] sdaftuar opened pull request #7292: [RPC] Expose ancestor/descendant information over RPC (master...add-chain-info) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7292
< GitHub151> [bitcoin] sdaftuar closed pull request #7222: [WIP] RPC: Indicate which transactions are signaling opt-in RBF (master...add-optin-info) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7222
< GitHub1> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7293: [wallet] Add regression test for vValue sort order (master...Mf1601-wallet-vValue) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7293