memset has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
memset has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
cmirror has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cmirror has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
l0rinc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
l0rinc has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Guest73 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
entropyx has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
entropyx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
entropyx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest73 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
<bitcoin-git>
[gui] VolodymyrBg opened pull request #878: Fix broken navigation link to files documentation in README_doxygen.md (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/878
mcey_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
emcy__ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
Guest24 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest24 has quit [Client Quit]
dongcarl has quit [Quit: Ping timeout (120 seconds)]
<bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 6c2538d Cory Fields: depends: Bump boost to 1.88.0 and use new CMake buildsystem
<bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 5170ec1 merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32665: depends: Bump boost to 1.88.0 and use new CMa...
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #32665: depends: Bump boost to 1.88.0 and use new CMake buildsystem (master...boost_shrink) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32665
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #32804: Fix build on macOS when `qt@6` is installed (29.x...250624-29.x-multi-qt) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32804
Cory63 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
Cory63 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] willcl-ark opened pull request #32818: Add read-only mode to sqlite db and use in `bitcoin-wallet` (master...wallet-tool-indempotent) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32818
Cory63 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
Cory63 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
memset has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
memset has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
memset has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
memset has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
hardtotell has quit [Quit: Ping timeout (120 seconds)]
<achow101>
There is one preproposed meeting topic this week, any last minute ones to add?
<stickies-v>
hi
<pinheadmz>
Hi
<Murch[m]>
Hi
<instagibbs>
hi
<sr_gi[m]1>
hi
<darosior>
hi
<achow101>
#topic Erlay WG Update (sr_gi, gleb)
<furszy>
hi
Guest34 has quit [Client Quit]
Guest34 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<sr_gi[m]1>
I went back to look at the code and see if I could find why the propagation times were too good to be true, and I may have found the underlaying issue. Some transaction were being announced via reconciliation before those peers should have been aware of it, which may have made Erlay faster. I patched that yesterday and I'm currently working on re-simulate it to make sure
<sr_gi[m]1>
I'll report back once I have some results
<Murch[m]>
sr_gi: Alternatively, you should also make sure that you didn’t accidentally invent faster-than-light communication! ;)
<sr_gi[m]1>
lol
<Murch[m]>
j/k, makes sense
<sr_gi[m]1>
Transaction are actually traveling back in time :P
Guest34 has quit [Client Quit]
<sr_gi[m]1>
That's it for me, hopping to have some results by next week
<achow101>
#topic Kernel WG Update (TheCharlatan)
<TheCharlatan>
Been talking to some people about splitting up cs_main and allowing net_processing to call validation functions without being blocked on their return. Been trying out a few approaches for this, but I feel like this will take some time before I can share results on one approach or the other.
<sipa>
glozow: i'm writing a simulation fuzz test for it, it almost works
<instagibbs>
glozow ah you're doing it? I won't duplicate effort then :)
<sipa>
(everything except LimitOrphans, which is just a minor detail right)
<instagibbs>
sipa ez
<glozow>
sipa: hahaha. thanks!
<glozow>
instagibbs: just trying to decipher the description atm
<glozow>
Do we want this bench inside the PR?
<sipa>
i think it should be in the PR, can use bench.epochs(1) to avoid measuring the setup time
<glozow>
I originally dropped all of them because they were just for feeling out worst cases, not for demonstrating speedups
<instagibbs>
can drop the non-evict bench if the epochs(1) thing works
<sipa>
not making worst cases worse is also interesting
<glozow>
sure 👍 I can bring back the EraseForBlock ones too then
<instagibbs>
also informs any constant changes in future
<sipa>
glozow: the example instagibbs posted is the one we worked out when designing the dos score idea
<sipa>
though with more concrete numbers for what is actually implemented now
<glozow>
ah, wait how does it differ from the one I implemented?
<instagibbs>
We can chat offline
<sipa>
i have no idea, i did not review the benchmarks :)
<glozow>
okok
<achow101>
#topic QML GUI WG Update (jarolrod, johnny9dev)
<johnny9dev>
Back from BTCPrague now. Presented a demo of the wallet during the Dev/Hack/Day and it went well. General feedback was that this seems like an obvious thing to build so that was encouraging. Currently working on getting PRs setup to update the gui-qml repo with all of the features that were added for the demo.
<johnny9dev>
Afterwards, focus is going to be on rebase, submoduling, and figuring out what CI and release might look like for this project.
<achow101>
#topic Script Validation WG Update (fjahr)
<fjahr>
nothing significant to share, kind of waiting for an update on the secp batch PR and need to ask for an update there
<brunoerg>
Hi, just a quick update! Some time ago I announced bitcoincore.space, but we just integrated mutation testing into corecheck, so I’m not going to update that anymore. You can see Core mutation testing report at corecheck.dev/mutation. This report is updated once a week. We’re working to make the whole process more efficient and soon we will expand it to more part of the codebase. Based on the last run,
<brunoerg>
there are 326 unkilled mutants. Of course, we can ignore some of them, but there are many interesting cases that we should address in our tests. Thanks @m3dwards for making it happen.
<achow101>
neat!
<achow101>
Any other topics to discuss this week?
<stickies-v>
very nice dashboard, thanks brunoerg !
<fjahr>
Just a note that didn’t seem worth a topic: Since the embedded ASMap PR is making progress I think there is necessity to discuss the asmap org which houses the data we are using (as it is currently planned). I think there should be some access sharing just in case of emergency because I am the only owner right now. But I think this can wait until the PR is merged and I think the next in-person meeting would be good to
<fjahr>
discuss this unless there are objections, i.e. people see this as a blocker to merging the PR.
<sipa>
the current PR doesn't enable it by default yet, but it does incorporate the community-built asmap data into the release binary
<sipa>
i think it may make sense to transfer the asmap-data repo at least to the bitcoin-core org
<fjahr>
Right, happy to do that now or after the PR is merged.
<sipa>
we can discuss on the PR i think
<achow101>
#endmeeting
<corebot>
achow101: Meeting ended at 2025-06-26T16:26+0000