< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] Empact opened pull request #12937: Handle witness version and OP_N results as an unsigned char (master...unsigned-char-witnessversion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12937
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] Empact opened pull request #12938: Overload CScript::IsWitnessProgram with a test-only version (master...test-only-iswitnessprogram) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12938
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] Empact opened pull request #12942: rpc: Drop redundant testing of signrawtransaction prevtxs args (master...redundant-type-check-signtransaction) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12942
< jonasschnelli>
If nScriptCheckThreads is == 0, CCheckQueueControl is initiated with no queue which looks like no script verification are done... though I guess it only means no concurrency.
< jonasschnelli>
Though I fail to see where the script are getting checked if nScriptCheckThreads == 0...
< jonasschnelli>
nm: found the part (validation.cpp / } else if (!check()) {)
< kallewoof>
achow101: Would you be up for reviewing #12257, considering your work on the coin selection code?
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master ece88fd Pieter Wuille: Introduce BigEndian wrapper and use it for netaddress ports
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 7b6041d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12916: Introduce BigEndian wrapper and use it for netaddress ports...
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12916: Introduce BigEndian wrapper and use it for netaddress ports (master...201804_beport) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12916
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] instagibbs opened pull request #12944: [wallet] ScanforWalletTransactions should mark input txns as dirty (master...scandirty) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12944
< provoostenator>
Just noticed on macOS 10.13.4 I had to use the depends system to build (--without-gui --disable-tests --disable-bench). That's new for me...
< provoostenator>
*to be build 0.15.1 and older
< fanquake>
provoostenator What do you mean? You can't build bitcoin-qt with homebrew installed dependencies after 0.15.1 ?
< provoostenator>
I didn't build QT.
< provoostenator>
I mean I can build v0.16.0 and master just fine with the homebrew stuff on my machine, but not the older versions.
< provoostenator>
So I guess some recent update in a homebrew package wasn't backwards compatible.
< fanquake>
Do you know which dependency is the issue?
< fanquake>
Homebrew the package manager itself should still have *some* support back to osx 10.7, there are 10.7 changes in the 1.6.0 release notes.
< fanquake>
As for the actual packages, I'm unsure.
< fanquake>
Apparently they will now also warn if the Xcode on your machine is too old to install a certain formula, so basically, upgrade to a newer macOS.
< instagibbs>
someone with deeper wallet knowledge check on 12944? I'm having trouble reproducing my bug in regtest, curious if someone else can figure it out
< fanquake>
I'm sure every-time I go to retrieve a Qt patch it gets slightly more convoluted and difficult to do
< fanquake>
At least the whitespace linter no longer complains about .patches, otherwise I really would be groaning in a minute.
< wumpus>
at least the requirement for new linters is that they should serve to find potential bugs, not style issues
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12937: Handle witness version and OP_N results as an unsigned char (master...unsigned-char-witnessversion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12937
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12912: Minor readability/maintainability changes to warnings.cpp (master...warnings) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12912
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #10619: [rpc]Avoid possibility of NULL pointer dereference in getblockchaininfo(...) (master...fix01) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10619
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] instagibbs opened pull request #12947: Wallet hd functional test speedup and clarification (master...wallet_hd_speedup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12947
< instagibbs>
re:12944, nevermind it's still valid but basically impossible to test, I think, removed errant test
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #12950: bitcoin-tx: Flatten for loop over one element (master...Mf1804-bitcoinTxUnusedLoop) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12950
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jamesob opened pull request #12951: [doc] Fix comment in FindForkInGlobalIndex (master...2018-04-11-findforkinglobalindex-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12951
< cfields>
feel a bit out of the loop. Did the parallel tests change end up borking everything? Several PRs atm that seem unrelated to the actual changes.
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 05c03d1 joemphilips: rpc: fix type mistmatch in listreceivedbyaddress
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 7c06171 MarcoFalke: Merge #12837: rpc: fix type mistmatch in `listreceivedbyaddress`...
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12837: rpc: fix type mistmatch in `listreceivedbyaddress` (master...fix_listreceivedbyaddress_type) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12837
< cfields>
wumpus: I restarted that job and it failed again. I'm stumped as to why.
< wumpus>
cfields: maybe flush the cache
< cfields>
good idea. I'd kinda hate it if that fixed it, though
< wumpus>
same, though I'd prefer a cosmic ray having corrupted the cache to the trivial build system change in #12899 mysteriously corrupting the excutable enough to fail the util test
< cfields>
wumpus: do you happen to have the travis-cli thing handy? The webui only shows caches for so many PRs, and 12899 isn't one of 'em :\
< wumpus>
yep
< cfields>
thanks
< wumpus>
deleted all caches for PR.12899
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] conscott closed pull request #12930: WIP Refactor large transaction generation for tests and make generic (master...CRS_tests_flexible_tx_size) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12930
< cfields>
great, thanks again. restarted one.
< promag>
I'd love to have some feedback in #12929, ty
< fanquake>
cfields wumpus I noticed the same on 12899, looks like wiping the cache hasn't fixed the issue either.. I'll open a new issue with some info.
< dongcarl>
Looking at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3171 here, wondering about the specifics: Should we bootstrap and measure every time an RC release is tagged? Would this be on some bare metal cloud instance? How would this be funded?