< GitHub151> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8801: [trivial] Switching from Boost for-each macros to C++11 for-each (master...tjps_foreach) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8801
< GitHub98> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/08cc5fd66645...9da7366be19b
< GitHub98> bitcoin/master 4b67402 Andrew Chow: Mandatory copyright agreement...
< GitHub98> bitcoin/master 9da7366 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8786: Mandatory copyright agreement...
< GitHub196> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8786: Mandatory copyright agreement (master...copyright-contributing) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8786
< GitHub66> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9da7366be19b...279bbadc8ba9
< GitHub66> bitcoin/master 3f58a28 Amir Abrams: [Doc] Add missing autogen to example builds
< GitHub66> bitcoin/master 279bbad Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8787: [Doc] Add missing autogen to example builds...
< GitHub105> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8787: [Doc] Add missing autogen to example builds (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8787
< MarcoFalke> Does the modal overlay work with -reindex?
< wumpus> is libconsensus work still underway in an active enough fashion to warrant a project in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects? I haven't heard of it in quite a while. It may have been because of sidetracking due to segwit ofcourse.
< GitHub25> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/279bbadc8ba9...bc9e3ab29f9b
< GitHub25> bitcoin/master faa91bc MarcoFalke: CONTRIBUTING: Mention not to open several pulls
< GitHub25> bitcoin/master bc9e3ab Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8771: CONTRIBUTING: Mention not to open several pulls...
< GitHub70> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8771: CONTRIBUTING: Mention not to open several pulls (master...Mf1609-ContributeDoc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8771
< GitHub183> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/bc9e3ab29f9b...b8d10fd4ef8f
< GitHub183> bitcoin/master edeaf24 Mitchell Cash: Fix future copyright year
< GitHub183> bitcoin/master b8d10fd Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8802: Fix future copyright year...
< GitHub62> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8802: Fix future copyright year (master...future_copyright) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8802
< GitHub49> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b8d10fd4ef8f...b694b0d5a5b4
< GitHub49> bitcoin/master fa16991 MarcoFalke: [travis] cross-mac: explicitly enable gui
< GitHub49> bitcoin/master b694b0d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8791: [travis] cross-mac: explicitly enable gui...
< GitHub175> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8791: [travis] cross-mac: explicitly enable gui (master...Mf1609-travisGui) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8791
< GitHub152> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b694b0d5a5b4...bae178f3ca78
< GitHub152> bitcoin/master b194872 fanquake: Remove old manpages from contrib/debian
< GitHub152> bitcoin/master bae178f Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8743: Remove old manpages from contrib/debian in favour of doc/man...
< GitHub12> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8743: Remove old manpages from contrib/debian in favour of doc/man (master...remove-old-manpages) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8743
< btcdrak> wumpus: a project would help significantly.
< wumpus> any idea which issues and pulls to add to it?
< jonasschnelli> wumpus: wait, ... is this an ELF executable attached to this issue: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8806
< wumpus> let me check
< jonasschnelli> The unzipped files has a header of "456C6646696C65"
< wumpus> I hadn't even seen it had a file attached. Booting up my analysis VM.
< jonasschnelli> Looks harmless. but I don't know this type of fileformat..
< wumpus> not an ELF file, as in the UNIX/Linux executable format, those start with 7f454c46. It indeed does say ElfFile though in the header
< jonasschnelli> Yes. Maybe a issue during zipping... or done by github
< jonasschnelli> Yes. Was also just stumpled over that page.
< jonasschnelli> So,.. false alarm. :)
< jonasschnelli> But I was suppriesed that you can upload a zip file to github containing a +x file
< wumpus> yep, but better be safe than sorry, it would not have been the first time someone tried to upload a questionable file to the repository with an issue
< wumpus> the annoying thing is that these get URLs like https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/files/491570/bitcoin.zip, as if we've uploaded them
< jonasschnelli> Yes. Thats bad!
< jonasschnelli> And I guess the issue author can always edit an old, closed issue to get one of these URLs.
< wumpus> indeed, and you have to contact github to get them removed
< jonasschnelli> sigh
< wumpus> you can remove the link, but that doesnt remove the file
< wumpus> in any case this user means no harm, but it's good to pay attention to this, it's a questionable github feature
< btcdrak> wumpus: let's ping jtimon
< GitHub161> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #8807: [univalue] Pull subtree from upstream (master...Mf1609-univalueSync) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8807
< btcdrak> wumpus: open tickets #8337 #8493 #7820 #7779 should go in the project
< btcdrak> also #8329 #7829
< btcdrak> and finally #6714
< wumpus> thanks!
< wumpus> btcdrak: something like https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/6 ?
< btcdrak> wumpus: looks good to me
< GitHub168> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/bae178f3ca78...37871f216e0d
< GitHub168> bitcoin/master 3650668 MarcoFalke: Squashed 'src/univalue/' changes from f32df99..daf1285...
< GitHub168> bitcoin/master 9bf41af MarcoFalke: Merge commit '3650668cdbbf369dd8f30c8e8eb5bb883325942d' into HEAD
< GitHub168> bitcoin/master 37871f2 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8807: [univalue] Pull subtree from upstream...
< GitHub139> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8807: [univalue] Pull subtree from upstream (master...Mf1609-univalueSync) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8807
< morcos> cfields_: jeremyrubin: Is there room for some speedup by using move semantics on CCoinsCacheEntry inside of CCoinsViewCache:BatchWrite? We're always deleting the cache version anyway.
< sipa> morcos: i've been thinking for a while about another coinsclviewcache like structure, that contains updates which are likely written... which writes the changes directly to the parent, and the old value in the subcache, only to be used whenreverting
< morcos> sipa: hmm.. interesting. is this in lieu of a potential switch to a non-txid based structure, or just an easier change for now
< morcos> sipa: i think we have a slew of performance improvements which aren't too far off from PR'ing.. one is based on keeping a consistent hot cache on top of pcoinstip... i think if the changes to that are just moves to pcoinstip, it should be fast, b/c the time to populate it is amortized. the trick is not erasing all the rest of it
< sipa> morcos: yeah, i don't have time to work on any of this, so don't let it interfere with ongoing work
< sipa> just throwing it out there as an idea
< morcos> sipa: do you think the move idea has any merit? seems like it might not be a large change, just c++11 i'm not very familiar with
< sipa> morcos: no idea what it refers to, i haven't been following the past days (busy with moving)
< sipa> but if it's simple and it helps, i'm all for it
< morcos> sipa: i was just suggesting above, that if we make a way to std:move CCoinsCacheEntry's we can do that inside of BatchWrite instead of swapping the the underlying coins
< sipa> morcos: that simplifies the code, but it doesn't have much of a performance impact
< sipa> swap and move assign are often the same thing
< morcos> sipa: ok, that's what i was wondering.
< morcos> the erasing of the old cache is just so painful (performance wise)..
< luke-jr> whoa, univalue got updated? :p
< GitHub25> [bitcoin] paveljanik opened pull request #8808: Do not shadow variables (gcc set) (master...20160925_Wshadow_gcc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8808
< Chris_Stewart_5> Is there a better way to test serialization symmetry for something that implementions SerializationOp? This seems like a hacky way to do it
< wumpus> luke-jr: I was as surprised as you are :)
< luke-jr> hehe
< paveljanik> one ping per week for four weeks...
< GitHub186> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #8809: [qt] sync-overlay: Don't show redundant information (master...Mf1609-qtSyncInf) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8809
< GitHub2> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #8810: tests: Add exception error message for JSONRPCException (master...2016_09_tests_rpc_error) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8810
< MarcoFalke> wumpus: Can you enable travis on https://github.com/bitcoin-core/univalue?
< wumpus> yes, I think so
< wumpus> should be enabed now...
< MarcoFalke> thx. I was asking because I noticed https://github.com/jgarzik/univalue/pull/27 fail the osx builds on your pull
< wumpus> strange
< wumpus> thought it was a trivial improvement
< MarcoFalke> Could be just travis having messed up the osx environment. (Seems to happen regularly)
< luke-jr> MarcoFalke: the BIP process does not actually allow for amending BIP 1
< wumpus> I think it does, BIP1 doesn't have final status
< MarcoFalke> In the text of BIP1 it says it is never meant to be completed, so you can always change it
< wumpus> yes
< MarcoFalke> If it says somewhere in BIP1 that it is not allowed to amend, just remove that line :P. Chicken-egg problem solved
< wumpus> I'm quite sure it doesn't say that
< GitHub70> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #8811: rpc: Add support for JSON-RPC named arguments (master...2016_09_rpc_named_arguments) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8811