phantomcircuit: yes, sandboxing that code would be nice. Although arguably, against libc exploits, no one stands a chance. If bitcoin-qt doesn't get exploited itself some other service or process will, and they'll pwn the box anyway.
for segwit transactions types that are nested in P2SH (p2sh-p2wsh & p2sh-p2wpkh), is the intent that those are there primarily for un upgraded wallets to send bitcoin to upgraded wallets? Any other usage?
cfields: Good news: for osx, the dmg and -osx64.tar.gz stayed the same, just bitcoin-0.12.0-osx-unsigned.tar.gz changed. Same as you!
c713f82859a27e9e0f9e7fb926f074bef855e255bfbb1207ce6987534233137a for bitcoin-0.12.0-linux64.tar.gz
wumpus: cfields and I have been talking for a few months about an eventual replacement, basic idea is to be able to build a deterministic toolchain on any Linux distro, then use that to build things like Bitcoin.
[bitcoin] paveljanik opened pull request #7511: [WIP] New ax_pthread.m4 from upstream - draft 3 (not final), for testing on all platforms (master...20160211_WIP_test_new_ax_pthread) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7511
greg@greg-ThinkPad-T530:~/Documents/bitcoin$ Error: Prune: last wallet synchronisation goes beyond pruned data. You need to -reindex (download the whole blockchain again in case of pruned node)
Would it be possible to merge everything into master in the bitcoin-detached-sigs repo?
the ones I'm comparing are rc1. b0b27e04c5df96e7bcda47d977b970b4cffd4bbdc2b7ab16fe0f56fa4b049aa0 bitcoin-0.12.0-linux64.tar.gz vs fanquake: efb075cd298f484d90a01731471829b65ca39abb8fcc00cfa94ea452c157df8e bitcoin-0.12.0-linux64.tar.gz
how can bitcoin operate when r/bitcoin is banned and censored, on what basis would anyone find this community welcoming at all
these are difficult times for bitcoin
The unthinkable is happening with r/bitcoin being censored/banned, that affects all for it breaches all principles
Luke-Jr: yes. Otherwise, I was afraid it would trigger a verification of "Bitcoin Core", which of course doesn't exist as a corporate entity. That could've made the process drag on for a while, so I took the easy route this time and just fixed the sha256 issue, leaving all else the same
bitcoin/0.12 996c27d Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: add PR authors to release notes...
Honestly, the level of build reproducibility and verification that bitcoin core has is so far ahead of pretty much anything else that I don't worry about it too much.
anyhow, the canonical way of checking if bitcoin core executables are untampered with is by checking the GPG signature (which uses sha256), or checking the sha256 hash against the gitian signatures. The windows signing is pretty much because windows requires it.
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #6480: include the chaintip blockindex in the SyncTransaction signal, add signal UpdateTip() (master...2015/07/syncsignal_hight) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6480
bitcoin/master d222838 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #6480: include the chaintip blockindex in the SyncTransaction signal, add signal UpdateTip()...