b10c has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
earnestly has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Guest50 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest50 has quit [Client Quit]
gnaf has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
jarthur has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<bitcoin-git>
[gui] luke-jr closed pull request #230: Support backup to new text-based database dump format (master...gui_backup_formats) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/230
bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev [#bitcoin-core-dev]
cmirror has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<prayank>
Does removing this information from logs affect any functionality?
<sipa>
no, it's a log...
<sipa>
logs don't have functionality
<sipa>
apart from logging what's going on
<laanwj>
it affects the functionality of: being able to debug that functionality of the mempool by checking the logs
<prayank>
I mean is someone using them and any projects depend on it?
<laanwj>
i think you should start from the start, why do you want to remove it
<michaelfolkson>
Debuggers rely on debug logs to locate bugs
<laanwj>
exactly
<laanwj>
it's troubleshooting information not more
<prayank>
Privacy. I don't think others need to know about my replacement details. X replaced Y. This is not available on blockchain and a user who starts running node today won't be able to get it for past transactions. It's available for only wallet transactions using gettransaction.
<michaelfolkson>
So don't share your debug log with anyone
<laanwj>
there's a lot of debug functionality that can be enabled that is potentially privacy sensitive
<prayank>
It's not something you control
<prayank>
Debug logs are available for all running nodes
<laanwj>
only if the 'mempool' flag is enabled in this case right
<laanwj>
which you wouldn't enable unless you want to see mempool internals
<prayank>
Okay let me rephrase my question
<laanwj>
just be really careful with giving bitcoin debug logs to people, they're never "safe" from a privacy perspective, if possible only post a relevant excerpt and if you post to public forums, censor information you don't want known
<sipa>
debug=net will list every network message received
<sipa>
e.g.
<laanwj>
there is nothing especially bad about this message in that regard?
<michaelfolkson>
You don
<prayank>
If we change "replacing tx <original txid>" to "replacing tx <>". Does this affect any debugging or any projects?
<laanwj>
yes, it make it pointless
<michaelfolkson>
Yes if someone is trying to debug a problem with RBF
<laanwj>
the specific information is what you need to trace problems, why debug logging exists
<laanwj>
say, if some specific transaction gets mis-handled, it is good to see when/what
<sipa>
there may also be functional tests that rely on debug messages, though i'm not sure that's the case specifically for this one
<laanwj>
yes
<sipa>
in any case: if you don't want mempool details in your logs, don't enable mempool debug logs
<prayank>
It's not about my logs. Others can see replacement done by me in their logs.
<laanwj>
well it's public information
<sipa>
ooh, now i understand
<sipa>
well, yes, it's public information
<prayank>
I wish we could remove it. Maybe I will experiment more with it and see if anything can be changed. I think this is similar to confidential transactions in which amounts are hidden which can affect verification of supply or other debugging.
<sipa>
no
<sipa>
in CT the information is secret
<laanwj>
confidential transactions is completely different, it means peers *don't have* this information, so can't log it if they wanted, playing hide and seek with log messages is not going to make anyone more safe
<sipa>
just because information isn't logged doesn't mean it isn't there; anyone who actually cares about it can still log it
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<laanwj>
yes; as far as we know, spy nodes do not generally run bitcoin core at all, or if they do, i'd expect them to use a heavily patched version that logs all kinds of extra stuff
saranshsharma has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
r-ush has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<laanwj>
besides, it's an unencrypted P2P network, information about transaction propagation can be sniffed passively
Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guyver2 has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
<laanwj>
crippling our own debugging capability in any way for a false sense of privacy seems a bad trade-off
vnogueira has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
goatpig has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
<laanwj>
should we tag 22.0 final ?
lucaferr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
lucaferr has quit [Client Quit]
lucaferr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<hebasto>
everything looks done for 22.0 final
<laanwj>
yes-just removed #22681 from the milestone, there's #22857 but I don't think it has anything critical that needs an extra rc, could just as well be 22.1 items?
lkqwejhhgasdjhgn has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
prayank[m] has quit [Quit: You have been kicked for being idle]
gnaf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
gleb7 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<achow101>
ryanofsky: I see. The reason I asked is that #19602 currently makes new CWallets from within a CWallet. I'll try to rework that to not be a member function then.
<ryanofsky>
I think the part of 19602 that makes new cwallets in a cwallet method looks fine. It's just the part that messes with the vpwallets array should be pulled out to the caller
<ryanofsky>
i.e. CWallet::MigrateToDescriptor could simply return the new CWallets instead of adding them to ::vpwallets
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<jonatack>
sipa: feel free to ignore, but while you're there, i hesitated to add a release note about the addr rate limiting in "P2P and network changes" (and the additional getpeerinfo fields in "Updated RPCs")
<laanwj>
sipa: something went wrong with your PR
yanmaani1 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
yanmaani1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sipa>
jonatack: mentioning the new fields seems fine, that's standard practice
<sipa>
laanwj: hmm, will fix soom
<laanwj>
just briefly mentioning them is good, you don't actually need (or should) write documentation in the release notes
bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev [#bitcoin-core-dev]
yanmaani1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
gnaf has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
<sipa>
laanwj: fixed; seems i just hadn't pulled in the latest upstream/22.x
bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] mjdietzx opened pull request #22924: refactor: merge ScriptPubKeyToUniv and ScriptToUniv into a single function (master...refactor_ScriptToUniv) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22924
bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev [#bitcoin-core-dev]
sipsorcery has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
gleb7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
gnaf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
gnaf has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
<dongcarl>
sipa: I will take a look at the branch right now, apologies I missed the release notes in the wiki stage
bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev [#bitcoin-core-dev]
gleb7 has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guyver2 has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
gnaf has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
gnaf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
<dongcarl>
Wondering how our lock annotations interact with inheritance. Let's say I have "class A { virtual int foo() EXCLUSIVE_LOCK_REQUIRED(cs_a) = 0; }", and "class B { int foo() override EXCLUSIVE_LOCK_REQUIRED(cs_b) { return 1 }; }", would calling B::foo lock both cs_a and cs_b?
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #22926: doc: Set PYTHONUTF8=1 for functional tests on Windows (master...210908-utf) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22926
bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev [#bitcoin-core-dev]
<emzy>
\o/
sipsorcery has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<cfields>
dongcarl: I kinda doubt clang is smart enough to figure that out. It's very picky about requiring exact variables and iirc isn't able to follow copies or anything complicated...
<cfields>
that said, it should be easy enough to whip up a quick test-case and see :)
<dongcarl>
cfields: Yeah I did a quick test and you right
<dongcarl>
It's a dumb mechanism, oh well
<cfields>
dongcarl: could maybe use CRTP if static polymorphism is enough :)
Guyver2 has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
<cfields>
(assuming it could even figure out that much)
<dongcarl>
Huh... Will read up on CRTP
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
gene has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
gnaf has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
yanmaani1 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
bitdex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
sipsorcery has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
saranshsharma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
saranshsharma has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]