< October 2023 >
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1234 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
2019-03-21
< gwillen>
"the bitcoin core code signing association thinks Windows should not yell when running this binary"
< luke-jr>
"this is bitcoin core" *should* be meaningless really
< jonasschnelli>
It only tells users it was signed by an organisation called "Bitcoin Core Code Signing Association"
< sipa>
or "this is bitcoin core"
< luke-jr>
jonasschnelli: obviously there would have to be some reasonable policy on what gets signed (eg, gitian builds of Bitcoin-compatible software)
< jonasschnelli>
There is another association I'm currently building up (with a proper structure) called "Bitcoin Developer and Researcher Association" (BitDRA) which should aim to finance real work/projects
< gwillen>
yes I am happy to formally donate to the Bitcoin Core Code Signing Association, someone should tell me an amount and where to mail a check :-)
< jonasschnelli>
Bitcoin Core Code Signing Association (based in Switzerland)
< warren>
oh I missed the win signature discussion, will it be something other than Bitcoin Foundation in the future?
< wumpus>
surprisingly much of the infrastructure and stuff around bitcoin is hanging together by a few threads, and single individuals that happily still care about it
< wumpus>
thanks to the Linux Foundation too, then! it wouldn't be crazy for them to drop bitcoin-dev if it's such a hot potato
< warren>
It's worth noting despite trying to deprecate the old mailman2 server they've tried to keep it online for us and a few other dev communities who had a hard time moving, and most of their downtime trouble was due to DoS attacks targeting only bitcoin-dev.
< wumpus>
in principle it's even off topic in the bitcoin core meeting, the bitcoin-dev mailing list is outside it's scope, not that I mind
< jonasschnelli>
Would also be good to get a sponsor for the Bitcoin Core Code Signing Association at some point (raise your hand if your willing)
< jonasschnelli>
cfields: should we register a new one via the Bitcoin Core Code Signing Association?
< promag>
again, this is really very unlikely, you have to run bitcoin-qt -server
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15614 | 0.18: gui: Defer removeAndDeleteWallet when no modal widget is active by promag · Pull Request #15614 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15614 | 0.18: gui: Defer removeAndDeleteWallet when no modal widget is active by promag · Pull Request #15614 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15614 | 0.18: gui: Defer removeAndDeleteWallet when no modal widget is active by promag · Pull Request #15614 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15614 | 0.18: gui: Defer removeAndDeleteWallet when no modal widget is active by promag · Pull Request #15614 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15614 | 0.18: gui: Defer removeAndDeleteWallet when no modal widget is active by promag · Pull Request #15614 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15614 | 0.18: gui: Defer removeAndDeleteWallet when no modal widget is active by promag · Pull Request #15614 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< wumpus>
so apparently there's some funding initiative by Twitter/Square for core devs (I only learn of this through twitter now), https://twitter.com/jimmysong/status/1108500506106843137 - anyhow, if you're actively involved in Bitcoin Core's development and need this funding, and would like me to write a recommendation for you, let me know
< echeveria>
fanquake: I can confirm that this is an attack site (as if it wasn't obvious). depending on the links you follow, you either get the legit binaries, or "bitcoin.exe".
2019-03-20
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #15632: Remove ResendWalletTransactions from the Validation Interface (master...no_resend_wallet_txs) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15632
< dongcarl>
ryanofsky: I see. When we have multiprocess bitcoin, will it be an interface violation for optionsmodel.cpp to include net.h?
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #15629: init: Throw error when network specific config is ignored (master...1903-InitErrorConf) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15629
< dongcarl>
nothingmuch: basically, instead of having an actual IP, you have (0xFD + sha256("bitcoin")[0:5] + sha256(hostname))[0:16], which is useful in cases where you don't actually care about the IP, but the hostname, e.g. for seeds
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 054d01d Pieter Wuille: Do not relay banned IP addresses
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 81f732b Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #15617: p2p: Do not relay banned IP addresses
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] practicalswift opened pull request #15625: refactor: Remove unused function (master...remove-unused-function) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15625
2019-03-19
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #15623: refactor: Expose UndoReadFromDisk in header (master...1903-UndoReadFromDiskHeader) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15623
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] practicalswift opened pull request #15622: Remove globals: Avoid using the global namespace if possible (master...globals-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15622
2019-03-18
< harding>
moneyball: are you using the version with ./bitcoin-cli embedded? You need the one where the lines start with "setban"
< moneyball>
i used bitcoin-cli listbanned to determine i have 474 banned, all of which are manually added. greg's list has 670. so i am wondering why my ban list is less (likely due to error aborting prematurely?). i am also still wondering about the "already banned" error message since i have none in the ban list that are shown as automatic.
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #15615: Add log output during initial header sync (master...2019/03/hdr_sync) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15615
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] promag opened pull request #15614: 0.18: gui: Defer removeAndDeleteWallet when no modal widget is active (0.18...2019-03-wallet-modal-widget) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15614
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] pstratem opened pull request #15613: net: Simplify PONG handler, improve readability of the processing logic. (master...2019-03-17-net-processing-pong) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15613
< Guest41284>
peers of this type pretend to be running various versions of Bitcoin software, but are not. they respond with compact blocks handshakes, pings and pongs, but never respond to headers, get blocks, or inventory messages. the addr messages they push are stuffed with like-peers, and in general seem to be over represented in outgoing connections of normal nodes.
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #15609: scripts and tools: Set 'distro' explicitly (master...20190314-set-distro) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15609
< warren>
I apologize for not participating in gitian for a while. debootstrap has not worked on Fedora for a few years now. I'm hoping people can help https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15277 so we have a deterministic buildsystem to replace gitian.
< harding>
Yeah, I'd think the same. In my test, if I try running on a read-only file (ext4 fs), bitcoin-wallet says it can't open and asks if the file is in use by another process.
< harding>
As part of testing RC1, I was using the new bitcoin-wallet with its "info" command to inspect some backups, but I noticed that it changes the file write times (and won't work if I run on a read-only wallet file). Does it actually need write access to print basic wallet info? I'd really prefer inspections be read only (and work with read-only files).
< wumpus>
(e.g.the qt library not just bitcoin-qt)
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #15604: [docs] release note for disabling reject messages by default (master...release_notes_bip61) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15604
< webuser3254>
"Cannot send to nick/channel: #bitcoin"
< webuser3254>
hello, I have a question regarding pruned mode and importprivkey. I have just imported hundreds of privkeys from my electrum wallet to bitcoin gold core pruned wallet but I can't see any addresses or balances. I can't seem to be able to do rescan on pruned mode. Is there a way to see my balance or move ALL the coins to a new address?
< webuser3254>
I appologise for posting it here but I can't do it #bitcoin for some reason :/
< pierre_rochard>
"I think his desire is to allow people to immediately start using LND and the LN wallet using BIP157 filters served from his node while their Bitcoin Core node syncs."
< gmaxwell>
So then I guess the confusion there would be that what he'd really want as the alternative is 'hybrid spv mode' in the ln wallet? not in bitcoin core.
< sipa>
only partially related, i think there is a lot of confusion about what "bip157" means; there is (a) the spec, allowing software to implement the filters in a private protocol like wasabi does (b) support for it in bitcoin core via RPC (what the current PRs do) (c) exposing it in core and other software via P2P for trusting peers to use (d) exposing it in core via P2P for non-trusting peers (e) a
< moneyball>
My understanding is that pierre_rochard is focused on onboarding new Bitcoin users via Lightning (with his Lightning Powered Users), and he would like as many of them as possible to run full nodes, but he wants them to be able to use Bitcoin immediately so wants to support BIP157 style light clients. He's also saying if Core doesn't merge support for BIP157, he'd maintain a version of Core with it merged, and run
< harding>
gmaxwell: pierre_rochard maintains an installer that installs Bitcoin Core, LND, and a LN wallet that's capable of using BIP157/158. I think his desire is to allow people to immediately start using LND and the LN wallet using BIP157 filters served from his node while their Bitcoin Core node syncs. That is, I don't think he's talking about hybrid SPV in Bitcoin Core by hybrid SPV via LND/Neutrino/some other wallet.
< gmaxwell>
(someone in #bitcoin tried asking me my opinion about that debate earlier, and I thought it would be nice to actually understand it before responding...)
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #15602: [p2] Enable reject messages by default (0.18...reject_message_by_default) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15602
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/0.18 a01925c Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Pre-rc2 translations update
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #15600: lockedpool: When possible, use madvise to avoid including sensitive information in core dumps or forked process memory spaces (master...lockedpool_dontdump) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15600
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] pstratem opened pull request #15597: Generate log entry when blocks messages are received unexpectedly. (master...2019-03-12-net-unexpected-block) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15597
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 335931d fanquake: rpc: return a number for estimated_feerate in analyzepsbt
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 8e1704c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #15559: doc: correct analyzepsbt rpc doc
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] practicalswift closed pull request #15589: tests: Teach lint-whitespace.sh to detect missing newline at end of file (master...lint-newline-at-eof) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15589
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] practicalswift opened pull request #15589: lint: Teach lint-whitespace.sh to detect missing newline at end of file (master...lint-newline-at-eof) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15589
< newbie2019258_>
One more question please: After I added the rpcauth=... line into the config file (bitcoin.conf) how to need activate/accept, I mean maybe need to reload some service(s) or something like that? (I want to use the PHP wrapper to manage bitcoind over RPC)
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] Sjors closed pull request #15567: Make OutputType consistent with Descriptor and return it (master...2019/03/descriptor-output-type) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15567
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #15588: Log the actual wallet file version and no longer publicly expose the "version" record (master...rm-wallet-nfileversion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15588