< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #21135: scripts: check for control flow instrumentation in security-check.py (master...security_check_cf_protection) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21135
< jonatack>
bitcoin conf : i2psam=127.0.0.1:7656 and i2pacceptincoming=1
< jonatack>
wumpus: idk, i2pd is the only one i've managed to have running with bitcoin
< jonatack>
wumpus: vasild: I've been using i2pd these past weeks, been working well for me. apt install i2pd / systemctl enable i2pd.service / systemctl start i2pd.service, update bitcoin.conf, done
< prayank>
luke-jr: sad but I will keep trying my best with my contribution and wumpus: Bitcoin Stackexchange is used as reference for lot of things/discussion including Bitcoin Core issues and PRs.
< michaelfolkson>
Right #bitcoin
< luke-jr>
prayank: Bitcoin's Stackexchange has a history of misinformation
< prayank>
wumpus: I think we were discussing about positives of Bitcoin Stackexchange few days back. Sad to see one of the moderators mentioning specific altcoins in answers when it could have been avoided. One of the altcoin mentioned in this answer has few people associated with it who spread misinformation about Bitcoin. And we have people with good reputation making these altcoins sound legit by mentioning in the answers.
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] vasild opened pull request #21129: fuzz: check that ser+unser produces the same AddrMan (master...fuzz_addrman_serunser) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21129
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/21121 | [test] Small unit test improvements, including helper to make mempool transaction by amitiuttarwar · Pull Request #21121 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< jnewbery>
sipa: ok, so you think it still needs review before merging into Bitcoin Core? Would it therefore make sense to split it into a separate PR?
< jnewbery>
To enter Bitcoin Core your PR must have this much <----------------->
< michaelfolkson>
I'll probably spend tomorrow looking at Erlay before the PR review club (on UK time so review club is evening for me). Will be on the bitcoin-core-pr-reviews channel trying to avoid the questions set for the review club session
< bioverse>
Anyway, do you think bitcoin can be used in the future for time-lock encryption?
< sipa>
this channel is for development; you may get better help on https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com (but search for relevant questions first)
< bioverse>
I have a nano ledger s with some bitcoin. I have the 24 words and wallet in a safe place. I went to https://iancoleman.io/bip39/ using a Ubuntu live from USB. I put the 24 mnemonic words and could not find any bitcoin address ever used. I freaked. I thought. Oh my god! I ordered a second brand new nano ledger s. Put the 24 words, using ledger live in a brand new laptop and my coins were there in the brand new ledger nano s. I am safe. But I have
< kallewoof>
can someone with bitcoin-core rights enable cirrus CI for btcdeb repo? i can't find the option so I assume I'm not allowed
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] amitiuttarwar opened pull request #21121: [test] Small unit test improvements, including helper to make mempool transaction (master...2021-01-unit-test-valid-tx) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21121
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #21112: ci: use Focal for macOS and Win cross builds (master...actually_use_focal_in_cirrus_ci) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21112
< wumpus>
shesek: these kind of proposals are as old as bitcoin itself but i don't think anyone ever solved the 'who to trust' issue, how can you have infrastructure that gives you a reasonable confidence in that a certain validation is correct, like you can probably just copy a friend's node and trust them but yo udefinitely don't want to YOLO it off the internet
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #21107: test: remove type: comments in favour of actual annotations (master...just_use_typing_directly) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21107
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #21081: test: fix the unreachable code at feature_taproot (master...taproot-test-return) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21081
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master cf26ca3 fanquake: Merge #21081: test: fix the unreachable code at feature_taproot
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 5e0cd25 Bruno Garcia: fix the unreachable code at feature_taproot
< Bobby123>
does anyone by chance know of a bitcoin nonce dataset?
2021-02-05
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] dhruv opened pull request #21090: Default to NODE_WITNESS in nLocalServices (master...default-to-node-witness-2021) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21090
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] dongcarl opened pull request #21089: guix: Add support for powerpc64{,le} (master...2021-02-guix-ppc64-support) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21089
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] dongcarl opened pull request #21088: guix: Jump forwards in time-machine and adapt (master...2021-02-bump-time-machine) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21088
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] dongcarl opened pull request #21087: guix: Passthrough BASE_CACHE into container (master...2020-12-guix-base-cache) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21087
< dongcarl>
copumpkin: Sure, happy to chat, we can also go to #bitcoin-builds, where bitcoin build systems people hang out :-)
< dongcarl>
Hi copumpkin, the main (by a large margin) reason is because of Guix's commitment towards bootstrappability at the time I was investigating it as a possible build system for Bitcoin. At that time I had used Nix for a couple of years, and would have preferred to use Nix due to familiarity, but unfortunately there was less of an effort to make it
< copumpkin>
is there a writeup somewhere on guix vs. nix from a bitcoin dev perspective?
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 506e658 Jon Atack: gui: display plain "Inbound" in peer details
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 6c61408 Jonas Schnelli: Merge bitcoin-core/gui#203: Display plain "Inbound" in peer details
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20267: Disable and fix tests for when BDB is not compiled (master...tests-opt-sqlite-bdb) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20267
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 3641597 Andrew Chow: tests: Don't make any wallets unless wallet is required
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master b9b88f5 Andrew Chow: Skip legacy wallet reliant tests if BDB is not compiled
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 6f36242 Andrew Chow: tests: Set descriptors default based on compilation
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] WillyTheCat opened pull request #21086: ResetBlockFailureFlags did not remove the invalidity flag in other chain (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21086
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] Saibato opened pull request #21085: test: enable self.chain = 'main' to work in python bitcoin test framework (master...mainettests) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21085
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20646: doc: refer to BIPs 339/155 in feature negotiation (master...signet-keep-post-verack-sendaddrv2-peers) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20646
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 3931732 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20646: doc: refer to BIPs 339/155 in feature negotiation
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master e1e6714 Jon Atack: doc: refer to BIPs 339/155 in feature negotiation
< sipa>
you're right of course that using the same key in schnorr and ecdsa should be discouraged (i personally expect it is not less secure than just ecdsa with that key, but i also don't think anyone has formally analyzed this)... but in the context of bitcoin script signing, this advice is sort of preempted by the fact that you shouldn't be reusing keys _at all_ for whatever purpose
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] brunoerg opened pull request #21084: test: fix timeout decrease in feature_assumevalid (master...fix-timeout-assumevalid) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21084
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #21083: wallet: Avoid requesting fee rates multiple times during coin selection (master...createtx-same-feerate) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21083
< gribble>
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20962 | Alter the ChaCha20Poly1305@Bitcoin AEAD to the new specification by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #20962 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #21080: fuzz: Configure check for main function (take 2) (master...2101-fuzzTake2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21080
< jnewbery>
it's nice that we can export all the metadata into bitcoin-gh-metadata, but it's only moderately useful until there are other bug trackers/review platforms that can import it and reconstruct all of the cross-references.
< wumpus>
"works offline: in a plane or under the sea? Keep reading and writing bugs!" is nice, sure we can do this sort of by cloning bitcoin-gh-metadata but only in one way
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #20715: util: Add ArgsManager::GetCommand() and use it in bitcoin-wallet (master...2012-argsCmd) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20715
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 7777105 MarcoFalke: refactor: Move all command dependend checks to ExecuteWalletToolFunc
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #21078: guix: only download sources for hosts being built (master...guix_selective_download) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21078
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #21065: build: make macOS HOST in download-osx generic (master...correct_host_download_osx) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21065
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 5f18080 fanquake: Merge #21065: build: make macOS HOST in download-osx generic
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master f22a3ec fanquake: build: make macOS HOST in download-osx generic
< jonatack>
sorry, the irc channel is #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
< jonatack>
hi cguida, thanks for having a look. the review club IRC channel is ##bitcoin-core-pr-reviews. would you like to open a pull request with your proposed edits here? at https://github.com/bitcoin-core-review-club/website
< sdaftuar>
cguida: #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews seems like the appropriate channel to comment, as i believe that's where the original discussion would have happened (and that's the irc home of the pr review club)
< luke-jr>
bitcoin-core/leveldb branch bitcoin-fork-new might be best to rename over bitcoin-fork or soemthing?
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] Saibato opened pull request #21073: wallet: check when create wallets for the reserved name "wallets" (master...sanitycheck) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21073
< ghost43>
luke-jr: I have "rpcbind=0.0.0.0:8332" in bitcoin.conf, and passing "-rpcallowip=::/0" on CLI. it is all part of a non-trivial docker setup; so it is not actually exposed to the internet
< sanket1729>
Where libsecp256k1 library is built in bitcoin core build process? I can't find it in src/.libs
< miketwenty1>
Between Noon and 5 pm EST on March 30th (Tuesday).. There will be a remote speaking opportunity for a bitcoin core developer at a "Open Source 101" event. The idea would be someone who can explain about how the project is maintained, how people can contribute, why it's important, etc. Less about the bitcoin tech and more about the project and contribution to the project. I imagine history would also be a very interesting piece
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] practicalswift opened pull request #21068: Add GitHub Codespaces integration to allow for easy onboarding of future generations of contributors (master...github-codespaces) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21068