01:02 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #21714: refactor: Drop CCoinControl::SetNull (master...2021-04-coincontrol) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21714

05:52 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/585cbe225753...8e69370b1506

05:52 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 44dab42 João Barbosa: qa: Test default include_mempool value of gettxout

05:52 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8e69370 MarcoFalke: Merge #21712: qa: Test default include_mempool value of gettxout

05:53 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #21712: qa: Test default include_mempool value of gettxout (master...2021-04-gettxout) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21712

09:05 < provoostenator> I didn't run into "notarization crap" when opening my own gitian signed DMG, but that's because I used SSH to put it on my Mac. You have to download it to trigger gatekeeper.

09:20 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8e69370b1506...f5e8bcf985df

09:20 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 63631be practicalswift: test: Remove intermittently failing and not very meaningful `BOOST_CHECK` ...

09:20 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f5e8bcf MarcoFalke: Merge #21689: test: Remove intermittently failing and not very meaningful ...

09:21 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #21689: test: Remove intermittently failing and not very meaningful `BOOST_CHECK` in `cnetaddr_basic` (master...remove-intermittently-failing-and-largely-meaningless-ipv6-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21689

09:34 < jonatack> We don't usually just drop coverage because of one or two reported issues after seven months of no issues. Should I close the fix that keeps the coverage and informational context?

10:54 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] klementtan opened pull request #21718: rpc: Improve error message for getblock invalid datatype. (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21718

11:08 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] klementtan closed pull request #21718: rpc: Improve error message for getblock invalid datatype. (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21718

11:09 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] klementtan reopened pull request #21718: rpc: Improve error message for getblock invalid datatype. (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21718

11:30 < bitcoin-git> [gui] MarcoFalke merged pull request #277: Do not use QClipboard::Selection on Windows and macOS. (master...210410-clip) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/277

11:30 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f5e8bcf985df...4a1751a929cc

11:30 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7f3a598 Hennadii Stepanov: qt: Do not use QClipboard::Selection on Windows and macOS.

11:30 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4a1751a MarcoFalke: Merge bitcoin-core/gui#277: Do not use QClipboard::Selection on Windows an...

14:44 < darosior> I keep getting mismatches when gitian building rc1. I deleted the depends cache, what else can i do?

14:59 < hebasto> darosior: which host?

15:06 < darosior> hebasto: using docker on a Debian host

15:07 < hebasto> I mean host gitian builds for

15:09 < hebasto> could you check that you are using gitian descriptors from 0.21 branch, not from master?

15:11 < darosior> I get a mismatch for every single target host (but the targz source of course). I'm using the descriptors from the v0.21.1rc1 tag

15:13 < hebasto> I think it's reasonable to submit your results as is to let others to take part in the investigation :)

15:14 < darosior> Ok, thanks for the feedback, doing one last round to be sure they are deterministic across builds and will PR it as such

15:39 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 16 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/4a1751a929cc...0dd7b234895b

15:39 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cced0f4 Carl Dong: miner: Pass in previous CBlockIndex to RegenerateCommitments

15:39 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d0abf0b Carl Dong: rpc/*,rest: Add review-only assertion to EnsureChainman

15:39 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d485e81 Carl Dong: rpc/blockchain: Use existing NodeContext

15:39 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #21391: [Bundle 5/n] Prune g_chainman usage in RPC modules (master...2020-10-libbitcoinruntime-v7) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391

18:04 < ja> why is release 0.9.5 both in the /bin folder and in the /bin/insecure folder?

18:05 < ja> https://bitcoin.org/bin/insecure/bitcoin-core-0.9.5/ https://bitcoin.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.9.5/

18:06 < hebasto> only source is in bin/ not compiled binaries

18:08 < ja> so are the releases safe if i compile them myself? and what does "bin" mean? i thought it was short for "binaries"

18:11 < hebasto> binaries with known vulnerabilities are placed to bin/insecure/

18:12 < sipa> it seems like that is really unmaintained

18:13 < sipa> oh, there are other insecure directories

18:22 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #21719: refactor: Add and use EnsureConnman in rpc code (master...2104-netConnman) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21719

18:22 < achow101> I think there was an attempt at having a meaningful directory structure but that seems to have stopped happening

18:49 < darosior> fwiw my previous issue with the gitian builds was due to my global gitconfig (verbose git log).. Sorry for the noise