< jonasschnelli>
where the bitcoin-cli tools would use --wallet=<walletid> to pass the request to /<walletid>
< jonasschnelli>
If we would select the wallet depending on the endpoint, we could just use something like bitcoin-cli --wallet=<walletid> getbalance
< GitHub79>
[bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #8788: [RPC] Give RPC commands more information about the RPC request (master...2016/09/rpc_container) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8788
< GitHub28>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8186: [0.12.2] backport: getblockchaininfo: make bip9_softforks an object, not an array. (0.12...Mf1606-rpcBip9Backport) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8186
< murch1>
completely off-topic, but Pidgin sucks for IRC • I used to have a decent client when I still used Linux, but I've only started using IRC for Bitcoin again recently. Any recommendation for a decent IRC client?
< murch1>
gmaxwell: Here is a question. For a very long time I thought that spending several outputs from the same address required only one signature. I recently saw an answer on Bitcoin.SE that said that spending transactions from the same address still uses a full signature each. Is the only concern privacy then?
< instagibbs>
this channel is for near-term bitcoin core development, your question is about an implementation of elements sidechain and/or future quantum advances
< instagibbs>
xinxi: maybe #bitcoin-wizards ?
< murch>
gmaxwell: Did you have something in particular in mind to try? We (sipa, you, instagibbs, me) did discuss this a few months ago already though. And I've also read your Bitcoin Wiki page on Coin Selection. :)
< murch>
sipa: E.g. Bitcoin Core uses an initial guess of the fee to restrict solutions in the selection pass through. It will only update the fee guess after the selection attempt if it didn't produce a satisfying result.
< BlueMatt>
murch: hmmm, i cant say i recall exactly what the behavior there is...its also very much based on what bitcoin core did at the time (and its non-fee anti-spam measures)
< murch>
gmaxwell: I was planning to provide it around Scaling Bitcoin. There was a few more things I wanted to do before publishing it. Trying other strategies is a case of inheritance and overriding a single function though.
< gmaxwell>
BlueMatt: you mean making the final utxo set 126 times larger than bitcoin core isn't good?
< sipa>
you can disable it by setting listenonion=0 in bitcoin.conf
< sipa>
BlueMatt: maybe a #!/bin/sh echo "The Bitcoin Core PPA no longer supports Ubuntu 12.04" would be better than just empty package?
< BlueMatt>
sipa: yea, if i get emails then #bitcoin is generally guaranteed to complain
< sipa>
BlueMatt: a few people in #bitcoin were confused by bitcoind disappearing
< jonasschnelli>
BlueMatt: while your here.. :), do you use the contrib/debian packaging dir for your bitcoin PPA?
< GitHub78>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #8536: [qa] Adjust poll interval for micro-optimization of run time (master...Mf1608-qaOptSync) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8536
< GitHub191>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8656: Trivial: Do not shadow global variable fileout (master...20160902_Wshadow_fileout) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8656
< GitHub170>
bitcoin/master cf5ebaa Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8656: Trivial: Do not shadow global variable fileout...
< GitHub170>
bitcoin/master 7c069a7 Pavel Janík: Do not shadow global variable
< wumpus>
I should likely put https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8249 on ice; having less effective ASLR is great compared to the alternative of crashing with stack protectors :)
< sipa>
wumpus: i guess i'm biased because i learned c++ from bitcoin's codebase :)
< GitHub143>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #8773: Trivial Bugfix: doc/gitian-building.md: Link to release-process needs to be updated (master...bugfix_link_20160921) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8773
< GitHub109>
bitcoin/master 52b5a87 MarcoFalke: Merge #8773: Trivial Bugfix: doc/gitian-building.md: Link to release-process needs to be updated...
< GitHub109>
bitcoin/master 6f933c6 Luke Dashjr: Trivial Bugfix: doc/gitian-building.md: Link to release-process needs to be updated...
< GitHub181>
[bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #8776: Wallet refactoring leading up to multiwallet (master...multiwallet_prefactor_wallet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8776
< GitHub30>
[bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #8775: RPC refactoring: Never access wallet directly, only via new CRPCRequestInfo (master...multiwallet_prefactor_rpc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8775
< GitHub124>
[bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #8774: Qt refactors to better abstract wallet access (master...multiwallet_prefactor_qt) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8774
< GitHub137>
[bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #8773: Trivial Bugfix: doc/gitian-building.md: Link to release-process needs to be updated (master...bugfix_link_20160921) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8773
< GitHub92>
[bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #8771: CONTRIBUTING: Mention not to open several pulls (master...Mf1609-ContributeDoc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8771
< wumpus>
"git push -f git@github.com:unsystemizer/bitcoin.git HEAD:patch-4" seems to have worked
< wumpus>
MarcoFalke: yes I was thining to difficult, I thought I had to push to some special pulls branch on bitcoin/bitcoin
< wumpus>
"Add more commits by pushing to the patch-4 branch on unsystemizer/bitcoin." ah
< jonasschnelli>
Luke-Jr: Yes. And sorry for "shooting" in the same direction with https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8764 I like your mutliwallet PR and really like to boost getting this in
< gmaxwell>
someone in #bitcoin with a gdb backtrace of a node that keeps crashing during sync running 0.13 ppa... crashing at assert(coins) in CheckTxInputs.
< gmaxwell>
tucker111: arubi: achow101: etc. please move to #bitcoin for further discussion. :)
< arubi>
tucker111, -> #bitcoin
< achow101>
so if your wallet.dat is gone (as it likely is) then you have lost your bitcoin
< achow101>
you don't have the private key so you can't get any of the Bitcoin that was associated with it
< GitHub113>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #8760: [init] Get rid of some ENABLE_WALLET (master...Mf1609-walletInitGuard) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8760
< GitHub99>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8701: [copyright] add MIT License copyright header to zmq_sub.py (master...zmq_sub-copyright) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8701
< GitHub122>
bitcoin/master 1cf11cc Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8701: [copyright] add MIT License copyright header to zmq_sub.py...
< GitHub122>
bitcoin/master 37a7fe9 isle2983: [copyright] add MIT License copyright header to zmq_sub.py
< GitHub25>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #8754: [Doc] Target protobuf 2.6 in OS X build notes. (master...osx-protobuf-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8754
< gmaxwell>
there are many things which people would like to, I'd suggest reading through the bitcoin core zurich meeting notes for things people are working on/planning on working on.
< jonasschnelli>
You might want to check the bitcoin-qt.m4 macro file
< GitHub3>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #8743: Remove old manpages from contrib/debian in favour of doc/man (master...remove-old-manpages) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8743
< GitHub14>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #8742: Specify Protobuf version 2 in paymentrequest.proto (master...proto2-vs-proto3) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8742
< BlueMatt>
argh ffs...can we all agree to not use github's fancy new review mode thing? it seems to be breaking github's emails as they are no longer threaded together for a single issue...hopefully they can fix in a day or two but they really broke my bitcoin-email workflow :(
< gmaxwell>
would it be unreasonable for us to keep a bitcoin-core keyring file that has the pgp keys of all the regulars around here in it?
< GitHub48>
[bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #8740: net: No longer send local address in addrMe (master...2016_09_addrfrom_version) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8740
< GitHub86>
[bitcoin] paveljanik opened pull request #8737: Trivial: UndoReadFromDisk works on undo files (rev), not on block files. (master...20160915_Undo_error_message_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8737
< GitHub156>
[bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #8735: [Wallet] add option for a custom extended master privat key (xpriv) (master...2016/09/hd_set_seed) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8735
< cfields_>
wumpus: lots of work remains. But, mingw depends build fully, and bitcoin build breaks with the same threading problems that have been reported, so it's enough to help with testing/debugging.
< GitHub54>
[bitcoin] rebroad opened pull request #8734: Send NOTFOUND when we don't have the block data. (master...NotfoundIfPruned) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8734
< rebroad>
if it's granular enough, then no one should need to add adhoc debug message as you are suggesting... there'd be a debug message already there that they can activate just by editing bitcoin.conf