SpellChecker_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
SpellChecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
zeropoint has quit [Quit: leaving]
andrewtoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
andrewtoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
achow101_ has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
achow101 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
achow101 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
lbia has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
lbia has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jarthur has quit [Quit: jarthur]
cmirror has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cmirror has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
SpellChecker has quit [Quit: bye]
SpellChecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
gribble has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
mcey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
mcey_ has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
TallTim has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] paplorinc closed pull request #30656: coins: Simplify std::move to ternary in `coins.cpp` (master...l0rinc/coins_move_ternary) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30656
TallTim has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
abubakarsadiq has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] paplorinc closed pull request #30035: test: Add a few more corner cases to the base58 test suite (master...paplorinc/base58-tests) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30035
aleggg has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aleggg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<vasild>
Sjors[m]11: pinheadmz: What about splitting CConnman in two: one lower level, protocol agnostic and one bitcoin-p2p-protocol specific, in such a way that the first part can be reused for stratumv2 and http?
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
pablomartin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
pablomartin has quit [Client Quit]
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Guyver2 has left #bitcoin-core-dev [Closing Window]
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
dermoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] hodlinator opened pull request #30660: test: Shut down framework cleanly on RPC connection failure (master...2024-08/test_node_rpc_connection_failure) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30660
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
andrewtoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
andrewtoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
andrewtoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
andrewtoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
twistedline has quit []
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
bitdex has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] hebasto closed pull request #30533: test: Do not write Python bytecode to source directory (master...240726-rpcauth-ro) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30533
bitdex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<pinheadmz>
vasild i think thats the idea -- pull out the common stuff like GenerateWaitSockets
<pinheadmz>
make an abstract client/server base class that conman, http, stratum can all inherit
<achow101>
I guess we should remove #22838 and @28417 since we've passed featre freeze
<gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22838 | descriptors: Be able to specify change and receiving in a single descriptor string by achow101 · Pull Request #22838 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
<vasild>
well, ok, git commit to create the single commit, this is better then merge-ing cmake-staging into my branch because the merged stuff does not play well with git rebase -i past the merge (my dev work commits)
<tdb3>
cfields: I built (successfully) on 30454. Would you like positive results reported in the PR as a comment?
<vasild>
c2d15d993e is the commit from master on which hebasto/cmake-staging is based
<cfields>
I guess it's worth pointing out that many PRs are going to need to be updated after merge. no avoiding that.
<cfields>
tdb3: sure :)
<cfields>
tdb3: but please give some details about your setup so we know what's actually working well
<achow101>
cfields: there are presumbly a great deal of silent conflicts?
<tdb3>
cfields: will do (os, compiler, etc)
<cfields>
achow101: Anything that adds/removes a file, mostly. Those shouldn't be silent.
<hebasto>
cmake branch do not touch main code base
<achow101>
drahtbot doesn't seem to think there's that many conflicts
<cfields>
vasild: what doesn't play nice with merge? just curious what the pain is because it's probably not unique to you.
<vasild>
it is a silent conflict because git will be happy but it will fail to compile, so the add/remove of the files has to be redone on the CMake stuff
<sipa>
it wouldn't be a silent merge conflict if the cmake PR also removed the Makefile.am files at the same time
<vasild>
cfields: merge commits past git rebase -i, I did not try that recently, but IIRC git rebase -i flattens the history
<cfields>
vasild: ah ok, that's because autotools still exists there.
<vasild>
sipa: right!
<cfields>
sipa: right, that'll be a very quick follow-up.
<cfields>
in fact, maybe we should just plan to do them in quick succession for that reason.
<sipa>
cfields: yeah, i'm aware that that's the plan, but wouldn't it make sense to add a "remove Makefile.am files" commit to the cmake PR already (not full autotools purging, just removing those files), to make sure we get observable merge conflicts with anything that needs changing?
<achow101>
is there a (draft) pr for deleting autotools?
<cfields>
sipa: I was thinking it'd be helpful to have a point in the history where both built in parallel. For the sake of finding that point earlier, I was assuming we'd do them in separate merges.
<cfields>
but I guess that's not really required as long as there's a commit that satisfies that.
<vasild>
hmm, we can have such a point even if it is done as one PR
<cfields>
right
<sipa>
right
<cfields>
sure, sounds good then.
<cfields>
hebasto: you have any issues with that?
<stickies-v>
perhaps it's possible to rename Makefile.am in 30454 and then delete in follow up?
SpellChecker has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
SpellChecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
amaurel has quit [Quit: Client closed]
bugs_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
gribble has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
achow101 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
jlest has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
l01 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jlest has quit [Changing host]
jlest has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] marcofleon opened pull request #30661: fuzz: Test headers pre-sync through p2p (master...2024/06/headers-sync-fuzztest) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30661
jlest has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<gmaxwell>
I find it really disrespectful that people won't even put in the effort to write a commit message, and instead fill it with chatgpt filler bull (regarding 30662)
Guest93 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<brunoerg>
gmaxwell: I suspect that the changes were also chatgpt'ed
<lightlike>
Feels like drive-by PRs like that have increased a lot over the last months - I think it's mostly due to token shitcoin airdrops to anyone with a merged commit.
Guest93 has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
<gmaxwell>
brunoerg: yes I agree-ish. or some other stupid tool. I only really commented because maybe someone else learns something.
<gmaxwell>
lightlike: oh right, that really sucks.
<gmaxwell>
I'm glad that I don't run any public open source projects today, LLMs have radically increased people's ability to waste time while making little to no meaningful contribution. ... and thing you have things like the XZ attacks.
<gmaxwell>
It's so easy to write code that looks like it does nothing of great consquence but exposes a vulnerablity-- potentially a vulnerablity that was already latent in the code but was currently blocked by the order that varrious tests are performed. :-/ and when idiots are sending in a bunch of drive by stuff to pad their resume or get scamcoin airdrops, that's a lot of noise to hide malicious PRs