< oharvey20> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< darkmage6> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< wloncom> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< vhasi22> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< Al_lA> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< zig> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< fanquake> sipa / wumpus / luke-jr ^
< lithammer> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< gwillen> fwiw I am a relatively experienced chanop, an op in #bitcoin and related channels, highlight on ! ops, and willing to ban people who need it, should this channel be desirous of more ops
< gwillen> although it seems that the network is mostly taking care of these particular ones as they appear
< alephnull2> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< bvitnik8> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< luke-jr> fanquake: I don't see a good ban mask that would work :/
<@gwillen> I think this is a legit botnet unfortunately, so there probably isn't one
<@gwillen> it's targeting freenode, not us
<@luke-jr> I suppose if it gets bad enough, we can just set the channel to only allow registered users : /
<@gwillen> a temporary +i, +k, +r would work
<@gwillen> yeah
<@gwillen> I would suggest setting +r for a few hours and then taking it off
<@gwillen> but also, spam in the middle of the night is really only messing up scrollback, so maybe it's not worth it
< gmaxwell> it's pretty harmless overall.
< gmaxwell> you can quiet unregisterd, though people tend to forget to turn it off
<@gwillen> *nods*
<@gwillen> elsewhere I have done "ban unregistered with exemptions" but that seems unmanageable at the size of this channel
< poopster17> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
< distantorigin> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
<@luke-jr> hm, if they only post one message, kicking may not be useful
<@luke-jr> how do we quiet unregistereds?
<@gwillen> let me find the syntax for that
<@gwillen> +q $~a
< nightfrog28> read about the new exciting pedo-friendly linux distribution https://exherbo.com/
<@luke-jr> gwillen: ops still see messages, right? so if someone wants to talk, we can make the exception?
<@gwillen> now we do
<@gwillen> (this is what +z does)
<@luke-jr> cool
<@gwillen> only people with channel mode +o though (@), not people with chanserv access
< wumpus> oh no
<@fanquake> wumpus bit of a pain
<@fanquake> in the mean time though, #15510 should be mergable.
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15510 | [rpc] deriveaddresses: add range to CRPCConvertParam by Sjors · Pull Request #15510 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< sipa> i'm confused; i'm sure i made that change in my PR
< sipa> maybe i accidentally undid it
< * wumpus> very confused too
< wumpus> must have imagined it was in there
< sipa> no, sjors commented on it, i remember fixing it, and then getting linter errors because i didn't do it in both places
< sipa> but i must have force push undid it afterwards
< wumpus> poor bitcoin-git bot
< wumpus> so the channel is talk-only-for-registered-users again? would it help to register bitcoin-git?
<@gwillen> wumpus: yes, that would fix it, if you can also get the bot to successfully identify itself when it connects
<@gwillen> but also I think we're planning to undo that as soon as the botnet goes away? I put it on my calendar to undo it in the morning.
<@gwillen> although the last bot was 30 minutes ago, so fingers crossed maybe they're done for the night
<@fanquake> clearly they are running on AU time, and have all knocked off for the day
<@gwillen> I think that will let the bot speak through the quiet without being identified
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #15514: docs: Update Transifex links (master...rebase-fixup-15406) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15514
< wumpus> yesss thanks
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #15406: docs: update transifex links (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15406
< midnightmagic> I believe you can build a quiets-except list in another channel and then join it to the +q quiets here with $j:#other_channel
<@gwillen> you can do that by putting the $j in the +e list but it's not necessary unless you want the list to be extremely large
<@gwillen> for only one entry you just can use +e directly in the intended way
<@gwillen> wumpus: np, I'm assuming that means it worked and you;re seeing them now
< wumpus> gwillen: yes I saw the PR that fanquake opened
<@gwillen> awesome
<@fanquake> <.<
< wumpus> FWIW, I have registered bitcoin-git as well, and added a password to the bot configuration
<@gwillen> :+1:
<@fanquake> A bit spammy at the moment sorry, just making some PRs mergable
< wumpus> no problem, it's good to give neglected PRs that have value otherwise the final push
<@fanquake> wumpus do you still think #15071 is worth adding to the docs?
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15071 | Docs: add gmake syntax to autoconf script by seth586 · Pull Request #15071 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<@fanquake> I'm ~ given we haven't had anyone else report. If you think it's still worthwhile I'll grab that change and put it across all *BSD docs.
< wumpus> I'd prefer not to make the change, it seems wrong
<@fanquake> The original issue in 14404 also hasn't received any more follow up.
< wumpus> it's necessary to work around a specific bug in automake/autoconf on BSD, but if it was solved I'd prefer not to "pollute" our docs with a strange work-around like this
<@fanquake> Fair enough. I'll close it for now, and might follow up in 14404
< wumpus> agree that's the best course of action for now
< wumpus> (for lack of further info)
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #15071: Docs: add gmake syntax to autoconf script (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15071
< wumpus> good, it worked; [bitcoin-git] is logged in as bitcoin-git
<@fanquake> Is #15453 a blocker for the 0.18 branch off? The issue should be constrained to self compiling with qt 5.7 (debian 9.x).
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15453 | Starting bitcoin-qt with -nowallet and then opening a wallet does not show the wallet · Issue #15453 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<@fanquake> Ideally any fix (potentially #15453) should be backportable.
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15453 | Starting bitcoin-qt with -nowallet and then opening a wallet does not show the wallet · Issue #15453 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< wumpus> no, I don't think that needs to block the 0.18 branch-off
< wumpus> it's always backportable if needed
< meshcollider> agree
< wumpus> I don't think I'm going to wait for #15486 and #15402 either
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15486 | [addrman, net] Ensure tried collisions resolve, and allow feeler connections to existing outbound netgroups by sdaftuar · Pull Request #15486 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15402 | Granular invalidateblock and RewindBlockIndex by sipa · Pull Request #15402 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< wumpus> looks like both still have very active review going on, haven't stabilized enough for merge
<@fanquake> ack - should both be backportable
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] darosior closed pull request #15511: RPC : More user-friendly services field in getnetworkinfo and getpeerinfo (master...services_for_humans) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15511
< wumpus> ok, going to branch off 0.18 in a minute
<@fanquake> wumpus \o/
< wumpus> * [new branch] 0.18 -> 0.18
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 commit to 0.18: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/37f236acc6de...742f7dd972fc
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.18 742f7dd Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: Bump version to 0.18.0
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/37f236acc6de...c9985c84f9c1
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c9985c8 Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: Bump version to 0.18.99
< instagibbs> \o/
< instagibbs> no idea what this message is about, but got it on 0.18 : 2019-03-02T14:22:33Z GUI: QXcbWindow: Unhandled client message: "_COMPIZ_TOOLKIT_ACTION"
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c9985c84f9c1...e47d8a1b7c8b
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 10c7642 marcuswin: docs: Update Transifex links
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e47d8a1 MarcoFalke: Merge #15514: docs: Update Transifex links
< wumpus> I think it's okay, that doesn't look like anything generated by our code at least, looks like simply an unhandled hint from the window manager to the client
< instagibbs> figured it was just debug clutter
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15514: docs: Update Transifex links (master...rebase-fixup-15406) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15514
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e47d8a1b7c8b...9e3122de054a
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8bb3e4c Sjors Provoost: [rpc] remove deprecated generate method
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 07cae52 Sjors Provoost: [wallet] remove unused GetScriptForMining
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9e3122d MarcoFalke: Merge #15492: [rpc] remove deprecated generate method
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15492: [rpc] remove deprecated generate method (master...2019/02/rpc-generate-remove) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15492
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9e3122de054a...80112b17e75b
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4320623 practicalswift: tests: Add script checking for deterministic line coverage
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 80112b1 MarcoFalke: Merge #15296: tests: Add script checking for deterministic line coverage i...
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15296: tests: Add script checking for deterministic line coverage in unit tests (master...test_deterministic_coverage) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15296
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/80112b17e75b...849f37fa22b0
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa1d400 MarcoFalke: cirrus ci: Inital config
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 849f37f MarcoFalke: Merge #15338: ci: Build and run tests once on freebsd
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15338: ci: Build and run tests once on freebsd (master...Mf1902-cirrusci) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15338
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/849f37fa22b0...789b0bbf2afc
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1a7ba84 Akio Nakamura: Fix lack of warning of unrecognized section names
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 789b0bb MarcoFalke: Merge #15335: Fix lack of warning of unrecognized section names
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15335: Fix lack of warning of unrecognized section names (master...conf_include_multi) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15335
< sipa> wumpus: do you intend for #15402 to be merged in master and backported.
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15402 | Granular invalidateblock and RewindBlockIndex by sipa · Pull Request #15402 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< sipa> ?
< provoostenator> That would make sense. It should also be backported to 0.16 which is where the unbounded growth was introduced.
< wumpus> sipa: yes
< sipa> cool
< wumpus> (at least to 0.18, which is why it's tagged 0.18, but could be backported to earlier versions if that's feasible)
< jnewbery> sorry - I missed the wallet meeting yesterday after requesting it on Thursday :(
< sipa> wumpus: yeah agree - we should backport as far as is feasible without major changes
< jnewbery> I wanted to raise one topic: add #15288 to high priority
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15288 | Remove wallet -> node global function calls by ryanofsky · Pull Request #15288 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< provoostenator> jnewbery ACK
< jnewbery> It's part of #10973 which has been open since August 2017. I think ryanofsky has rebased it a few hundred times by now
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10973 | Refactor: separate wallet from node by ryanofsky · Pull Request #10973 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< jnewbery> also a pre-req for #10102
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10102 | [experimental] Multiprocess bitcoin by ryanofsky · Pull Request #10102 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< jnewbery> I'd encourage anyone reviewing wallet PRs to look at it. It's a very easy review (well structured commits and mostly mechanical changes)
< jnewbery> I've added it to high priority. wumpus: obviously feel free to remove if you disagree
< meshcollider> It already has a lot of review which is great :)
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 10 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/789b0bbf2afc...2d46f1be0c3c
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 62e7add Jim Posen: util: Move CheckDiskSpace to util.
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9183d6e Jim Posen: validation: Extract basic block file logic into FlatFileSeq class.
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e2d2abb Jim Posen: validation: Refactor OpenDiskFile into method on FlatFileSeq.
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #15118: Refactor block file logic (master...flatfile) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15118