12016-10-28T00:00:01 <midnightmagic> my odroid xu4 has been sync'ing for .. mm.. four days now I guess. still going, "92%" complete.
22016-10-28T00:00:22 <midnightmagic> Dunno what the hell anyone saying an rpi is a good node is talking about.
32016-10-28T00:01:03 *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
42016-10-28T00:03:38 *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
52016-10-28T00:03:50 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: they probably never actually brought one up on it.
62016-10-28T00:03:56 <gmaxwell> Surely no one here has been saying that.
72016-10-28T00:04:06 <gmaxwell> (besides, pretty inadvisable to run on anything with less than 2GB ram)
82016-10-28T00:04:37 <sipa> luke-jr: uh
92016-10-28T00:04:48 <sipa> btcdrak: ^
102016-10-28T00:05:37 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: 72h ETA assuming current average verification rate. yikes.
112016-10-28T00:06:11 *** murch has quit IRC
122016-10-28T00:07:56 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: whats the server?
132016-10-28T00:08:05 *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
142016-10-28T00:10:21 <luke-jr> https://sendy.bitcoincore.org
152016-10-28T00:11:28 *** squidicuz has quit IRC
162016-10-28T00:11:53 *** squidicuz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172016-10-28T00:15:17 <owowo> midnightmagic: Get a Banana Pi with 9 core ;)
182016-10-28T00:15:28 *** jnewshoes has quit IRC
192016-10-28T00:15:33 <owowo> *8
202016-10-28T00:15:37 *** dcousens has quit IRC
212016-10-28T00:16:26 *** jnewshoes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222016-10-28T00:16:56 *** tulip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232016-10-28T00:17:39 <tulip> owowo: 4+4 core big.LITTLE processors aren't really ideal.
242016-10-28T00:17:53 <midnightmagic> owowo: I have an XU4 with 8 cores! It's pretty quick for a little credit-card-area sbc.
252016-10-28T00:18:37 <owowo> tulip, why not?
262016-10-28T00:20:13 <sipa> sbc?
272016-10-28T00:20:28 *** davec has quit IRC
282016-10-28T00:20:40 <gmaxwell> owowo: because they 'little' cores are power efficient but not fast, you normally don't use all 8 at one time.
292016-10-28T00:21:06 <tulip> it's unclear if the a83t in that Single Board Computer is actually big.LITTLE.
302016-10-28T00:21:06 *** skyraider has quit IRC
312016-10-28T00:21:21 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
322016-10-28T00:21:41 <luke-jr> regardless, POWER8 would still be better :p
332016-10-28T00:22:37 <tulip> ok, I stand corrected, it does actually have 8*a7 cores. in *general* 8 core ARM SoC have been big.LITTLE, which have 4 high power and 4 low power cores with different instruction sets.
342016-10-28T00:22:43 <owowo> but it works :D
352016-10-28T00:24:49 <owowo> and the HDD works too, though it crashed with the computer from about 1.6 meters.
362016-10-28T00:25:04 <owowo> about 5 years ago ;)
372016-10-28T00:38:27 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: ok, done
382016-10-28T00:44:38 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell: i restarted a node at ~tip of master
392016-10-28T00:44:52 <phantomcircuit> a huge number of inbound connections claim to be 0.13.1
402016-10-28T00:44:56 <phantomcircuit> which seems a bit fast
412016-10-28T00:45:14 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: preferential peering.
422016-10-28T00:48:51 <sipa> i see a large number of /BTCC:0.13.1/ with 00000001 service bits
432016-10-28T00:50:35 <gmaxwell> oh fake nodes, fake nodes.
442016-10-28T00:51:07 <gmaxwell> I think all of those ended up on my banlist previously for being fake and connecting to everyone.
452016-10-28T00:52:56 <aj> "fake nodes, fake nodes, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when they connect to you?" o/ o/
462016-10-28T00:53:13 <achow101> all those nodes are aws nodes too
472016-10-28T00:53:39 <sipa> yeah i think they're on my banlist
482016-10-28T01:02:17 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: lol
492016-10-28T01:02:26 <BlueMatt> didnt realize the btcc things were that fake
502016-10-28T01:04:32 *** LeMiner has quit IRC
512016-10-28T01:05:12 <achow101> the one with the chinese ip is probably the real one. The rest are all aws nodes which seems a little suspicious
522016-10-28T01:23:16 *** shangzhou has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
532016-10-28T01:23:35 <shangzhou> I have upgraded my node to 0.13.1
542016-10-28T01:23:51 <shangzhou> From China Suzhou
552016-10-28T01:32:56 *** PRab_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562016-10-28T01:34:28 *** PRab has quit IRC
572016-10-28T01:34:42 *** PRab_ is now known as PRab
582016-10-28T01:39:09 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
592016-10-28T01:51:00 *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602016-10-28T01:51:47 *** LeMiner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
612016-10-28T01:52:29 *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622016-10-28T01:53:39 *** fanquake has quit IRC
632016-10-28T02:05:05 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
642016-10-28T02:07:03 *** rebroad has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652016-10-28T02:10:52 *** owowo has quit IRC
662016-10-28T02:15:31 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672016-10-28T02:18:38 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
682016-10-28T02:23:56 *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692016-10-28T02:27:58 *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
702016-10-28T02:31:09 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
712016-10-28T03:05:28 *** rebroad has quit IRC
722016-10-28T03:10:28 *** aalex has quit IRC
732016-10-28T03:13:32 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
742016-10-28T03:13:41 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
752016-10-28T03:19:52 *** aalex has quit IRC
762016-10-28T03:23:39 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
772016-10-28T03:23:53 *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
782016-10-28T03:28:23 *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
792016-10-28T03:40:07 *** Ylbam_ has quit IRC
802016-10-28T03:41:37 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
812016-10-28T03:43:10 *** justan0theruser has quit IRC
822016-10-28T03:51:20 *** shangzhou has quit IRC
832016-10-28T03:59:43 *** aalex has quit IRC
842016-10-28T04:03:42 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
852016-10-28T04:16:59 *** moli has quit IRC
862016-10-28T04:18:18 *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
872016-10-28T04:18:48 *** aalex has quit IRC
882016-10-28T04:23:31 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
892016-10-28T04:31:39 <achow101> gmaxwell: for the alert key retirement, what about testnet's key?
902016-10-28T04:35:01 *** kangx has quit IRC
912016-10-28T04:35:51 *** molz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
922016-10-28T04:37:23 *** moli has quit IRC
932016-10-28T04:38:27 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
942016-10-28T04:38:59 *** andytoshi has quit IRC
952016-10-28T04:39:30 *** andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962016-10-28T04:40:36 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
972016-10-28T04:47:52 <phantomcircuit> achow101: is there even a separate key
982016-10-28T04:50:02 <achow101> phantomcircuit: there is. mainnet: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.11/src/chainparams.cpp#L51 testnet: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/0.11/src/chainparams.cpp#L148
992016-10-28T04:53:56 *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002016-10-28T04:54:45 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
1012016-10-28T04:56:46 *** rebroad has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022016-10-28T04:57:58 *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
1032016-10-28T04:59:13 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042016-10-28T05:04:10 *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1052016-10-28T05:05:47 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
1062016-10-28T05:07:58 <phantomcircuit> interesting
1072016-10-28T05:12:13 <midnightmagic> to.. uh. Whomever? Do you want me to open a new PR re: functional 0.13.1rc3 gitian sig update, or just update the pre-existing one.. or? I've rebuult (in total) the rc3 gitians and actually done a gverify on them against the others available now.
1082016-10-28T05:16:59 <midnightmagic> Well. I'll open a new one. Seems github makes that easier.
1092016-10-28T05:24:06 *** tunafizz has quit IRC
1102016-10-28T05:27:17 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
1112016-10-28T05:36:12 *** tunafizz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122016-10-28T05:40:09 *** tulip has quit IRC
1132016-10-28T05:42:57 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1142016-10-28T05:43:10 *** tulip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1152016-10-28T05:44:29 <tulip> rebroad: the peer in your issue about "already received" is one with a /ViaBTC/ subversion. in a misguided attempt to improve their stale block rate (which they do have, though their pool reports a false "0") they wrote a piece of software which hammers out blocks to peers that don't request it, burning bandwidth in the process.
1162016-10-28T05:48:24 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
1172016-10-28T05:50:42 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1182016-10-28T05:54:16 <phantomcircuit> uh
1192016-10-28T05:54:26 <phantomcircuit> so im not exactly 100% on c++ inheritance stuff
1202016-10-28T05:54:30 <phantomcircuit> but i feel like this should work
1212016-10-28T05:54:31 <phantomcircuit> https://0bin.net/paste/f9fapca8fsr46oed#Xkqs57RGuJRtBRJBoX25sqxzW7KAiKjIBZAotGks4gR
1222016-10-28T05:55:35 *** d_t has quit IRC
1232016-10-28T05:58:31 <gmaxwell> tulip: I've encountered a number of other nodes doing that, wastes a lot of bandwidth. now that we have BIP152 deployed, we should look to banning peers that send unsolicited full blocks.
1242016-10-28T05:59:26 <gmaxwell> perhaps unsolicited CB too (e.g. when they weren't selected to be high bandwidth peers)... though thats less awful.
1252016-10-28T06:07:01 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262016-10-28T06:08:11 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
1272016-10-28T06:10:14 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1282016-10-28T06:10:47 *** aalex has quit IRC
1292016-10-28T06:13:52 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302016-10-28T06:14:56 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
1312016-10-28T06:18:33 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322016-10-28T06:20:55 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell: any ideas
1332016-10-28T06:21:14 <aj> phantomcircuit: you're trying to access a protected member in an instance of the /base/ class
1342016-10-28T06:21:25 <aj> phantomcircuit: if it were an instance of the child class you could do it
1352016-10-28T06:22:32 <phantomcircuit> aj: right so i have to actually replace the CWallet object with a CWalletAccountingTests object
1362016-10-28T06:24:44 <aj> phantomcircuit: or you could declare CWalletAccounttests a friend class? i don't see any other ways...
1372016-10-28T06:25:44 <phantomcircuit> hmm
1382016-10-28T06:26:06 <phantomcircuit> now i need to find where pwalletMain is intialized during testing
1392016-10-28T06:26:44 <aj> wallet/test/wallet_test_fixture.cpp?
1402016-10-28T06:27:05 <aj> but you might be able to use reinterpret_cast in a way that's not too horrific
1412016-10-28T06:27:28 *** Cory has quit IRC
1422016-10-28T06:28:05 <phantomcircuit> yeah
1432016-10-28T06:31:02 <aj> phantomcircuit: http://0bin.net/paste/xjooaSxyMVgrJfAe#-BDbENY7Ld4HMIkB7O3nIAuSdSQpIuDo03jLJh1MnU8 maybe
1442016-10-28T06:36:47 <phantomcircuit> yeah i can do that but....
1452016-10-28T06:37:16 <aj> ...you don't like the taste of vomit? :)
1462016-10-28T06:44:51 *** BashCo has quit IRC
1472016-10-28T06:45:16 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
1482016-10-28T06:51:45 <phantomcircuit> aj: indeed
1492016-10-28T07:05:28 *** jnewshoes has quit IRC
1502016-10-28T07:08:50 *** jnewshoes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1512016-10-28T07:08:53 *** kadoban has quit IRC
1522016-10-28T07:13:34 *** harrymm has quit IRC
1532016-10-28T07:15:20 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1542016-10-28T07:21:42 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1552016-10-28T07:26:43 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
1562016-10-28T07:28:57 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1572016-10-28T07:29:17 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1582016-10-28T07:36:49 *** harrymm has quit IRC
1592016-10-28T07:50:46 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602016-10-28T07:51:09 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1612016-10-28T08:07:25 *** nickler has quit IRC
1622016-10-28T08:09:10 *** nickler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632016-10-28T08:09:24 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642016-10-28T08:09:24 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1652016-10-28T08:21:28 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1662016-10-28T08:21:54 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1672016-10-28T08:24:13 *** aalex has quit IRC
1682016-10-28T08:24:59 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1692016-10-28T08:28:29 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702016-10-28T08:29:19 *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1712016-10-28T08:34:48 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
1722016-10-28T08:35:05 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732016-10-28T08:35:37 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1742016-10-28T08:35:37 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1752016-10-28T08:35:37 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1762016-10-28T08:37:12 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
1772016-10-28T08:42:00 <phantomcircuit> the problem is more so that pwalletMain is a thing i guess
1782016-10-28T08:50:12 *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1792016-10-28T08:56:58 *** harrymm has quit IRC
1802016-10-28T08:58:36 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812016-10-28T09:07:13 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1822016-10-28T09:40:41 *** Victor_sueca is now known as Victorsueca
1832016-10-28T09:53:41 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1842016-10-28T09:54:29 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1852016-10-28T09:58:06 *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1862016-10-28T09:59:18 *** mkarrer_ has quit IRC
1872016-10-28T10:19:38 *** aalex has quit IRC
1882016-10-28T10:20:09 *** tulip has quit IRC
1892016-10-28T10:21:16 *** rebroad has quit IRC
1902016-10-28T10:21:35 *** DigiByteDev has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1912016-10-28T10:22:48 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1922016-10-28T10:23:27 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1932016-10-28T10:29:44 *** aalex has quit IRC
1942016-10-28T10:33:24 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1952016-10-28T10:40:03 *** molz has quit IRC
1962016-10-28T10:44:50 *** Bi_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1972016-10-28T10:45:52 <Bi_> Hi. Can someone please help me to understand one of the unit tests / script_tests
1982016-10-28T10:45:58 <Bi_> Its then one
1992016-10-28T10:46:21 <Bi_> that is called "Basic P2WSH"
2002016-10-28T10:46:48 <Bi_> My main question is: is the script expected to fail or pass?
2012016-10-28T10:50:12 <Bi_> Because in script_tests.json file I see "OK" for this test vector. But looking how the script gets executed (from script_tests.cpp) I see it actually failing. But the test itself is passing, like it was expecting the script to fail
2022016-10-28T10:50:45 *** aalex has quit IRC
2032016-10-28T10:53:25 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042016-10-28T10:54:53 *** Ylbam_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2052016-10-28T10:54:55 <phantomcircuit> Bi_: there are tests which pass when the test fails intentionally
2062016-10-28T10:55:20 <Bi_> phantomcircuit, yes I know it
2072016-10-28T10:55:49 <Bi_> Bus is this such a one?
2082016-10-28T10:56:20 <phantomcircuit> no idea
2092016-10-28T10:56:23 <phantomcircuit> it should say
2102016-10-28T10:58:08 <Bi_> Well, in the jason file it says "OK" - so I'd assume it's expecting OK from the script function
2112016-10-28T10:58:26 <Bi_> But that's not what I see it getting from the script function
2122016-10-28T10:59:05 *** aalex has quit IRC
2132016-10-28T10:59:28 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2142016-10-28T11:00:42 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
2152016-10-28T11:16:14 *** cdecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2162016-10-28T11:17:55 *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2172016-10-28T11:33:40 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2182016-10-28T11:33:41 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2192016-10-28T11:35:08 *** fengling has quit IRC
2202016-10-28T11:50:20 <GitHub119> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fea5e05a6380...0dcb888266ea
2212016-10-28T11:50:20 <GitHub119> bitcoin/master 169bdab instagibbs: Return useful error message on ATMP failure
2222016-10-28T11:50:21 <GitHub119> bitcoin/master 0dcb888 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9016: Return useful error message on ATMP failure...
2232016-10-28T11:50:36 <GitHub28> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9016: Return useful error message on ATMP failure (master...atmperror) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9016
2242016-10-28T12:00:20 *** cryptapus_afk is now known as cryptapus
2252016-10-28T12:09:16 *** gijensen92 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262016-10-28T12:10:02 *** gijensen has quit IRC
2272016-10-28T12:10:03 *** gijensen92 is now known as gijensen
2282016-10-28T12:10:10 *** aalex has quit IRC
2292016-10-28T12:13:24 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2302016-10-28T12:15:39 <GitHub65> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8989: [Qt] overhaul smart-fee slider, adjust default confirmation target (master...2016/10/qt_slider) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8989
2312016-10-28T12:16:01 <GitHub166> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 4 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0dcb888266ea...d2143dc937e3
2322016-10-28T12:16:02 <GitHub166> bitcoin/master 004168d Jonas Schnelli: CoinControl: add option for custom confirmation target
2332016-10-28T12:16:02 <GitHub166> bitcoin/master 6f02899 Jonas Schnelli: [Qt] Hide nTxConfirmTarget behind WalletModel
2342016-10-28T12:16:03 <GitHub166> bitcoin/master cfe77ef Jonas Schnelli: [Qt] overhaul smart-fee slider, adjust default confirmation target
2352016-10-28T12:20:01 <GitHub64> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #9036: wallet: Change default confirm target from 2 to 6 (master...2016_10_txconfirmtarget) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9036
2362016-10-28T12:20:44 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
2372016-10-28T12:20:44 *** roasbeef has quit IRC
2382016-10-28T12:20:44 *** murr4y has quit IRC
2392016-10-28T12:21:38 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2402016-10-28T12:35:54 *** roasbeef has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2412016-10-28T12:36:28 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2422016-10-28T12:36:33 *** murr4y has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2432016-10-28T12:52:12 *** PatBoy has quit IRC
2442016-10-28T12:54:20 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2452016-10-28T12:56:52 *** PatBoy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2462016-10-28T12:57:17 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472016-10-28T12:57:59 *** tinkerbell11_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482016-10-28T12:58:49 <tinkerbell11_> lots of places shouting about november 15th startdate for checking flags.. but dates are meaningless.. anyone know the first blockheight where checking will begin??
2492016-10-28T12:58:56 <tinkerbell11_> eg 440,000?
2502016-10-28T13:08:56 <aj> probably block 441504 would be the first block where the 95% test could theoretically pass; so around dec 3rd for earliest conceivable lockedin?
2512016-10-28T13:11:06 <btcdrak> New blog post by aj on Segwit Costs: https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/10/28/segwit-costs/
2522016-10-28T13:12:18 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: do you know why do we still change payTxFee globally in the GUI when there's a perfectly usable fOverrideFeeRate in coincontrol?
2532016-10-28T13:14:14 <wumpus> seems like an unnecessary source of potential conflicts
2542016-10-28T13:14:52 <wumpus> btcdrak: great!
2552016-10-28T13:15:48 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2562016-10-28T13:19:03 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2572016-10-28T13:20:34 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2582016-10-28T13:21:03 *** ryanofsky has quit IRC
2592016-10-28T13:21:19 <aj> wumpus: fwiw bitcoin 0.13.1 is in debian unstable now too.
2602016-10-28T13:21:36 <wumpus> aj: okay
2612016-10-28T13:21:57 <timothy> archlinux too
2622016-10-28T13:22:33 <btcdrak> Viva la revolución!
2632016-10-28T13:34:29 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2642016-10-28T13:38:44 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
2652016-10-28T13:39:06 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2662016-10-28T13:39:11 *** tinkerbell11_ has quit IRC
2672016-10-28T13:46:08 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2682016-10-28T13:47:16 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
2692016-10-28T13:50:45 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702016-10-28T13:53:07 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2712016-10-28T13:56:57 *** molz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2722016-10-28T13:59:59 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
2732016-10-28T14:01:27 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742016-10-28T14:01:39 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2752016-10-28T14:02:37 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2762016-10-28T14:15:14 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2772016-10-28T14:23:45 *** Bi_ has quit IRC
2782016-10-28T14:38:46 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2792016-10-28T14:39:29 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802016-10-28T14:43:33 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2812016-10-28T14:50:08 *** Ylbam_ has quit IRC
2822016-10-28T14:52:06 <BlueMatt> wtf is pnodeLocalHost?
2832016-10-28T14:52:08 *** rebroad has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2842016-10-28T14:52:50 <BlueMatt> looks like we maintain a persistent connection to ourselves?
2852016-10-28T14:53:05 <BlueMatt> cfields_: ^?
2862016-10-28T15:03:07 <BlueMatt> lol, fibre test network reliable much? https://imgur.com/a/W3dhx
2872016-10-28T15:03:13 <BlueMatt> flat top to the graph is amazing
2882016-10-28T15:06:58 <kanzure> axis labels plz
2892016-10-28T15:09:44 <BlueMatt> oops, heh, cut off the explination text
2902016-10-28T15:11:07 <BlueMatt> anyway, left axis is ms from first-recv to which the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc node received the block...so T1-T4 (the bottom 4 lines) are pretty noisy because it depends on where things entered the network....T5 is super flat, meaning the network is highly reliable in terms of time take to transmit around the globe
2912016-10-28T15:11:47 <sipa> it's an exponential scale
2922016-10-28T15:11:48 <BlueMatt> note log scale, but its still super flat ignoring that...just under 180ms almost always, with peaks reaching 190/195
2932016-10-28T15:11:57 <sipa> ok
2942016-10-28T15:16:32 <aj> BlueMatt: which lines correspond to the right hand axis?
2952016-10-28T15:17:00 <BlueMatt> honestly i have nfc wtf the right axis is, none of the lines correspond to it
2962016-10-28T15:17:04 <BlueMatt> would have to go read the source
2972016-10-28T15:17:09 <aj> haha, awesome
2982016-10-28T15:19:14 <cfields_> BlueMatt: yea, we do. I've never gotten around to asking why, kept assuming i'd bump into the reason. Still haven't though.
2992016-10-28T15:19:51 <BlueMatt> wtf....
3002016-10-28T15:20:36 <cfields_> BlueMatt: i've always assumed the intent was to be able to query our own node state in the same place as the others
3012016-10-28T15:21:05 <BlueMatt> that sounds like some satoshi-era bullshit right there :p
3022016-10-28T15:21:19 <cfields_> BlueMatt: well it's completely made up, just my best guess :)
3032016-10-28T15:21:24 <cfields_> but yes, let's kill it
3042016-10-28T15:22:08 <cfields_> BlueMatt: i'll nuke it after the PR that changes message sending around? Otherwise killing it would stomp on that i believe
3052016-10-28T15:22:23 <BlueMatt> yes, agreed, no rush there
3062016-10-28T15:22:25 <BlueMatt> reviewing that one now :)
3072016-10-28T15:22:30 <BlueMatt> (thats why i saw it)
3082016-10-28T15:22:37 <cfields_> figured
3092016-10-28T15:22:44 <cfields_> BlueMatt: need to double-check all accounting to make sure it doesn't +1 something important
3102016-10-28T15:22:58 <BlueMatt> yea
3112016-10-28T15:32:47 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3122016-10-28T15:33:23 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
3132016-10-28T15:34:39 <phantomcircuit> kanzure: he's lying it's kittens/time
3142016-10-28T15:35:20 <kanzure> thank you.
3152016-10-28T15:35:36 <BlueMatt> that is a strange unit
3162016-10-28T15:37:29 <phantomcircuit> kittens over time?
3172016-10-28T15:37:58 <BlueMatt> kittens strangled? kittens hugged? kittens adopted?
3182016-10-28T15:38:31 <phantomcircuit> so in all seriousness
3192016-10-28T15:38:35 <phantomcircuit> pwalletMain
3202016-10-28T15:38:41 <BlueMatt> needs to die?
3212016-10-28T15:38:55 <phantomcircuit> that isn't used internally in CWallet or CWalletDB is it?
3222016-10-28T15:38:57 <phantomcircuit> (also yes)
3232016-10-28T15:39:37 <phantomcircuit> i went to wrap CWallet in a class for the tests so i can make a bunch of methods protected and ran into pwalletMain being global for tests and normal use
3242016-10-28T15:42:59 <BlueMatt> it shouldnt be? is it really?
3252016-10-28T15:51:19 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt: yeah...
3262016-10-28T15:51:23 <phantomcircuit> wallet.h
3272016-10-28T15:51:40 <BlueMatt> thats not "used", just defined
3282016-10-28T15:51:44 <BlueMatt> move the definition?
3292016-10-28T15:52:01 <phantomcircuit> it's used in accounting_tests.cpp
3302016-10-28T15:52:37 <phantomcircuit> and is initialized in wallet_test_fixture.cpp
3312016-10-28T15:54:21 <phantomcircuit> afaict those are the only things which even use the CDB::MakeMock stuff
3322016-10-28T15:54:27 <phantomcircuit> and they aren't really
3332016-10-28T16:01:48 <BlueMatt> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/59rlgq/ubuntu_bitcoin_core_ppa_updated_to_0131/d9bjp5z/
3342016-10-28T16:01:59 <BlueMatt> anyone got an idea why the fuck that assert would trigger???
3352016-10-28T16:06:19 *** jannes has quit IRC
3362016-10-28T16:06:51 *** BashCo has quit IRC
3372016-10-28T16:07:26 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3382016-10-28T16:11:43 *** BashCo has quit IRC
3392016-10-28T16:13:47 <wumpus> no clue,my guess would be database corruption
3402016-10-28T16:14:10 <gmaxwell> It's a common place where DB corruption manifests. Perhaps we should change that from an assert to be something telling you to reindex.
3412016-10-28T16:14:14 <gmaxwell> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/5670
3422016-10-28T16:14:34 <gmaxwell> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7258
3432016-10-28T16:14:46 <gmaxwell> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/6196
3442016-10-28T16:14:48 <wumpus> probably
3452016-10-28T16:15:54 <wumpus> I think it ends up there if things are missing in the block index
3462016-10-28T16:16:28 <BlueMatt> cfields_: ok, reviewed 8708
3472016-10-28T16:16:32 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: heh, ok
3482016-10-28T16:16:37 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3492016-10-28T16:19:30 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: did you see my comment from last night that perhaps we should be banning peers that send us an unsolicited block message now that we have compact blocks? (perhaps also unsolicited CB when that peer is not requested for HB mode, but I think thats less important)... there are a number of peers on the network which 'helpfully' send blocks without asking, causing some n-fold bandwidth inc
3502016-10-28T16:19:36 <gmaxwell> rease (esp for blocks only nodes).
3512016-10-28T16:20:07 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: i did not, but I'm not against it particularly
3522016-10-28T16:21:53 <BlueMatt> I'd like to nominate https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9026 (well, a variant of it, because that is gonna end up adapting to some reorgs that are in-progress) for 0.13.2
3532016-10-28T16:23:47 <gmaxwell> With 9026 will peers still get banned if the block fails the stateless checks (e.g. bad pow)?
3542016-10-28T16:23:59 <BlueMatt> i think that is the intention?
3552016-10-28T16:24:25 <gmaxwell> k
3562016-10-28T16:24:29 <BlueMatt> not with the current implementation, i think, but could be done
3572016-10-28T16:24:38 <BlueMatt> and i think maybe should
3582016-10-28T16:25:15 <BlueMatt> anyway, i think sdaftuar might be waiting for #8969 and the commits i posted based on it yesterday to tweak it, since it simplifies it
3592016-10-28T16:26:19 <cfields_> BlueMatt: https://github.com/theuni/bitcoin/commits/connman-const
3602016-10-28T16:26:24 <BlueMatt> though if we backport it....
3612016-10-28T16:27:29 <cfields_> BlueMatt: i agree with your nits about locking, so I whipped up the changes in the branch above. I didn't want that PR to creep on forever though, so I was going to add them as a next step. Would you be more comfortable if i tacked them on?
3622016-10-28T16:27:42 <BlueMatt> cfields_: that looks sane to me? though i havent audited where we have those strange threading bugs
3632016-10-28T16:28:19 <cfields_> BlueMatt: well if they're const, they can't be racy. No need to make things atomic if they can't change.
3642016-10-28T16:28:28 <BlueMatt> indeed
3652016-10-28T16:28:51 <cfields_> ok, I'll add them to the PR. Thanks for the review.
3662016-10-28T16:28:55 <BlueMatt> cfields_: I'd be ok if they're next-step, i think, though i didnt bother to audit if they were possibly correct, it just looked very wrong and i gave up and pointed it out
3672016-10-28T16:29:03 <BlueMatt> i dont think you need to
3682016-10-28T16:29:07 <BlueMatt> i agree I'd prefer to move the pr forward
3692016-10-28T16:29:24 <BlueMatt> i can go audit more fully to figure out if there are any actual bugs introduced
3702016-10-28T16:29:45 <cfields_> ok. Well, you can take the branch above as proof that they don't change :)
3712016-10-28T16:30:23 <cfields_> BlueMatt: ok, yes, that'd be easier. I was wanting to get gmaxwell/sipa's opinion on deterministic siphash for node nonce first anyway.
3722016-10-28T16:31:35 <Victorsueca> gmaxwell: wouldn't that potentially lead to a split network with the nodes that ban peers that send unsolicited blocks on one side and the peers that don't know they're not supposed to send unsolicited blocks on the other?
3732016-10-28T16:33:14 <BlueMatt> cfields_: heh, thanks for pointing out that nVersion is already const - your SetVersion violates C++ spec :p
3742016-10-28T16:33:57 <BlueMatt> cfields_: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8708/files#r85565594
3752016-10-28T16:34:09 <cfields_> BlueMatt: same hack we use for serializing tx/block, so i figured i could get away with it :)
3762016-10-28T16:34:26 <BlueMatt> cfields_: sipa has open prs to fix it for tx/block :p
3772016-10-28T16:34:48 <BlueMatt> soo....no
3782016-10-28T16:34:49 <BlueMatt> :p
3792016-10-28T16:35:14 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3802016-10-28T16:35:15 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3812016-10-28T16:35:40 *** gluytium has quit IRC
3822016-10-28T16:35:41 <cfields_> BlueMatt: must exist non-const? I'm going to have to call you on that. Going to either learn something or look like an idiot :)
3832016-10-28T16:36:19 <BlueMatt> cfields_: i dont recall the exact wording, it either must exist somewhere as non-const reference (so possibly the constructor is enough), or it must exist afterwards as non-const
3842016-10-28T16:36:35 <BlueMatt> I'm sure there is something like this in the spec, just not sure if the setting in the constructor qualifies
3852016-10-28T16:39:15 <BlueMatt> sipa: might recall better than I
3862016-10-28T16:40:05 *** binns has quit IRC
3872016-10-28T16:40:06 *** btcdrak has quit IRC
3882016-10-28T16:40:07 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
3892016-10-28T16:40:37 *** timothy has quit IRC
3902016-10-28T16:41:04 *** binns has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3912016-10-28T16:41:36 *** btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3922016-10-28T16:42:02 *** adiabat has quit IRC
3932016-10-28T16:42:44 *** helo has quit IRC
3942016-10-28T16:42:49 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3952016-10-28T16:43:03 *** helo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3962016-10-28T16:43:10 <cfields_> BlueMatt: thanks, on phone, will take a look in a sec
3972016-10-28T16:44:41 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3982016-10-28T16:48:51 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3992016-10-28T16:52:00 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4002016-10-28T16:53:32 <BlueMatt> cfields_: stack overflow, as well as how i read the notes section on cppreference, indicate this is undefined...so folks are stating it clearly as anything defined with const cannot be const_cast'ed, cppreference says "Modifying a const object through a non-const access path...results in undefined behavior"
4012016-10-28T16:58:38 *** ghtdak has quit IRC
4022016-10-28T16:59:19 <jtimon> am I doing something obviously wrong to get memory access violations in the market lines here https://0bin.net/paste/3ytYmDeGLDb+tlZy#sQXtt4ZyeODcf2u-wuibKPFEr9LsL8hr/bRHSIEVoVr ?
4032016-10-28T17:00:56 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4042016-10-28T17:01:40 <BlueMatt> jtimon: secp context not set up?
4052016-10-28T17:01:54 <BlueMatt> (ie no ECC_Start call)
4062016-10-28T17:03:16 <jtimon> I thought that was done globally for the tests in test_bitcoin.cpp, but let me try
4072016-10-28T17:03:25 <BlueMatt> oh, in tests? dunno
4082016-10-28T17:07:06 <jtimon> oh, I need to do the BOOST_FIXTURE_TEST_SUITE thing if I want to reuse that ECC_Start, if I do my own it seems to cause conflicts with the other call
4092016-10-28T17:07:17 <jtimon> thanks a lot!
4102016-10-28T17:07:55 <sipa> BlueMatt: correct... though i'm sure we already violate that elsewhere
4112016-10-28T17:08:15 <sipa> BlueMatt: in particular in CTransaction, which i have a PR for to fix
4122016-10-28T17:08:28 <BlueMatt> sipa: still, best not to introduce more :p
4132016-10-28T17:09:11 <sipa> agree.
4142016-10-28T17:10:31 * BlueMatt is available to trade reviews
4152016-10-28T17:10:39 <BlueMatt> still trying to get 8969 in
4162016-10-28T17:11:11 <BlueMatt> :p
4172016-10-28T17:11:42 *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
4182016-10-28T17:12:27 *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4192016-10-28T17:12:38 *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4202016-10-28T17:21:05 <sipa> BlueMatt: can you have a look at 8580?
4212016-10-28T17:21:10 <cfields_> BlueMatt: i'll look through again and ack in a min
4222016-10-28T17:21:27 <BlueMatt> sipa: lol, needs rebase again :p
4232016-10-28T17:21:33 <BlueMatt> but I can look, is that your preferred version?
4242016-10-28T17:22:12 *** rebroad has quit IRC
4252016-10-28T17:22:16 *** harrymm has quit IRC
4262016-10-28T17:22:24 <sipa> BlueMatt: i expect the rebase to be trivial
4272016-10-28T17:22:35 *** rebroad has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4282016-10-28T17:22:52 <cfields_> BlueMatt: mm, how can you move a class with a const member, then? I assumed a const_cast there was correct. Looks like I need to read up.
4292016-10-28T17:22:55 <BlueMatt> sipa: k, will look
4302016-10-28T17:23:33 <BlueMatt> cfields_: move doesnt specify that the originating object must be invalidated, only that it may be and any future access is undefined?
4312016-10-28T17:24:31 <cfields_> BlueMatt: yes, but the target object's const member must be re-assigned
4322016-10-28T17:25:11 <BlueMatt> cfields_: hmm? I may be missing what you're referring to with move here
4332016-10-28T17:25:30 <cfields_> BlueMatt: nm, not relevant.
4342016-10-28T17:26:27 <cfields_> BlueMatt: i'll just give nVersion a const accessor and leave the assert in Set(). I just hope there aren't a million users of pnode->nSendVersion
4352016-10-28T17:26:40 <BlueMatt> make it private?
4362016-10-28T17:26:40 <cfields_> *i'll just give nSendVersion.
4372016-10-28T17:26:43 <cfields_> yea
4382016-10-28T17:27:36 <cfields_> oh wait, it already is. that was easy :)
4392016-10-28T17:27:42 <BlueMatt> heh
4402016-10-28T17:30:56 <sipa> BlueMatt: move must bring the moved-from object in a valid, but not further soecified state
4412016-10-28T17:31:34 <sipa> BlueMatt: it *is* allowed to reuse a moved from object if you first use a call that fixes all its observable behaviour again
4422016-10-28T17:31:36 <BlueMatt> sipa: yea, thats what i said?
4432016-10-28T17:32:00 <sipa> ah, i didn't read the whole conversation
4442016-10-28T17:32:11 <BlueMatt> hum, yea, i cant claim to be a C++11 person yet
4452016-10-28T17:32:12 <sipa> cfields_: you cannot move an object with a const member
4462016-10-28T17:32:18 <BlueMatt> you cant?
4472016-10-28T17:32:35 <sipa> well, you can if you fon't modify the source
4482016-10-28T17:32:44 <BlueMatt> well, yes, that was my comment
4492016-10-28T17:32:51 <sipa> but that would make it a copy
4502016-10-28T17:33:01 <BlueMatt> only for that member
4512016-10-28T17:33:05 <sipa> right
4522016-10-28T17:33:10 <sipa> seems i'm not fully awake yet
4532016-10-28T17:33:26 <cfields_> sipa: yes, I see that now. I've always just setup a move operator that does a const_cast and changes. In some places that makes perfect sense. Seems it's not actually to spec, though.
4542016-10-28T17:33:54 <cfields_> (again, like our current tx serializers)
4552016-10-28T17:34:25 <sipa> cfields_: see 8580 :)
4562016-10-28T17:34:31 <cfields_> heh, right
4572016-10-28T17:34:35 <BlueMatt> bbl, lunch
4582016-10-28T17:34:51 <sipa> there is an annoying confusion between observably constant and representation constness in c++
4592016-10-28T17:35:03 <cfields_> i suppose i should review/ack that too, then. adding it to the list.
4602016-10-28T17:35:51 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4612016-10-28T17:35:59 <cfields_> sipa: mind explaining the distinction?
4622016-10-28T17:48:02 *** harrymm has quit IRC
4632016-10-28T17:49:42 *** Ylbam_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4642016-10-28T17:50:03 *** Ylbam_ is now known as Ylbam
4652016-10-28T17:50:23 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4662016-10-28T17:51:05 *** todamoon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4672016-10-28T17:51:12 *** rebroad has quit IRC
4682016-10-28T17:51:51 *** todamoon has quit IRC
4692016-10-28T17:58:55 *** pigeons has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4702016-10-28T18:07:42 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4712016-10-28T18:12:13 *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
4722016-10-28T18:21:46 *** harrymm has quit IRC
4732016-10-28T18:35:00 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4742016-10-28T19:00:18 *** harrymm has quit IRC
4752016-10-28T19:02:39 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4762016-10-28T19:04:26 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4772016-10-28T19:08:42 *** harrymm has quit IRC
4782016-10-28T19:19:53 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4792016-10-28T19:25:11 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
4802016-10-28T19:25:21 *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4812016-10-28T19:26:03 *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4822016-10-28T19:26:09 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4832016-10-28T19:31:54 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4842016-10-28T20:08:13 <BlueMatt> sipa: can a constructor call a function which then const_casts?
4852016-10-28T20:28:49 <luke-jr> 0.13.1 fails tests on sparc64? https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=bitcoin&suite=sid#problem-6
4862016-10-28T20:29:54 <BlueMatt> what the shit
4872016-10-28T20:30:23 <BlueMatt> and alpha
4882016-10-28T20:30:27 <luke-jr> yeah
4892016-10-28T20:30:40 <BlueMatt> similar errors on both
4902016-10-28T20:32:15 <sipa> BlueMatt: a bit more detail?
4912016-10-28T20:32:19 <luke-jr> looks like they have a few patches, not clear if relevant
4922016-10-28T20:32:33 <BlueMatt> sipa: nvm
4932016-10-28T20:32:36 <luke-jr> seems like just portability-related
4942016-10-28T20:37:34 *** ArtGravity has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4952016-10-28T20:38:41 <ArtGravity> Does anyone know how to fix the bitcoin-qt tray icon and integrated menus in the most recent Trusty client from the Ubuntu PPA?
4962016-10-28T20:38:53 <BlueMatt> ArtGravity: ruh roh, they not work?
4972016-10-28T20:39:08 <ArtGravity> The tray icon is in the upper left
4982016-10-28T20:39:17 <ArtGravity> the integrated menus are MIA
4992016-10-28T20:39:19 <BlueMatt> were they working in 0.13.0?
5002016-10-28T20:39:37 <ArtGravity> They worked before I upgraded today
5012016-10-28T20:39:52 <ArtGravity> I cannot guarantee that I was on 0.13.0, but is likely I was
5022016-10-28T20:40:01 <luke-jr> check your debug.log
5032016-10-28T20:40:47 <ArtGravity> What am I looking for in ~/.bitcoin/debug.log ?
5042016-10-28T20:41:01 <ArtGravity> just version number prior to today?
5052016-10-28T20:41:07 <luke-jr> yeah
5062016-10-28T20:41:34 <ArtGravity> Confirmed
5072016-10-28T20:41:37 <ArtGravity> I was on 0.13.0
5082016-10-28T20:42:04 <ArtGravity> The qt-tray icon was in the ubuntu notification area on that version
5092016-10-28T20:42:33 <ArtGravity> It's been some time since I have used the menus, so I cannot confirm or deny their presence on that version
5102016-10-28T20:42:47 <BlueMatt> ArtGravity: see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8043 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7497#issuecomment-182341185 - does removing appmenu-qt5 fix it?
5112016-10-28T20:43:03 <BlueMatt> oh, wait, thats non-unity des
5122016-10-28T20:43:17 <BlueMatt> anyway, does it look like 8043 for you?
5132016-10-28T20:43:57 <ArtGravity> I am on Unity
5142016-10-28T20:44:15 <ArtGravity> my icon appears where the B in Bitcoin Core is in the image on 8043
5152016-10-28T20:44:33 <ArtGravity> In the top left of the screen
5162016-10-28T20:44:58 <BlueMatt> I'm not farmiliar with unity...is that the equivalent of the screenshot in 8043?
5172016-10-28T20:45:04 <ArtGravity> I'm not having the missing menu problem
5182016-10-28T20:45:24 <ArtGravity> Same desktop environment as in the 8043 screenshot
5192016-10-28T20:45:32 <ArtGravity> different symptoms
5202016-10-28T20:45:48 <BlueMatt> wait, so whats the bug? that you dont get the file, settings, etc menus?
5212016-10-28T20:46:10 <ArtGravity> Tray icon appears in upper left of screen instead of in notification area
5222016-10-28T20:46:11 <BlueMatt> cfields_: welp, looks like the ppa is gonna switch back to qt4
5232016-10-28T20:46:21 <cfields_> BlueMatt: ?
5242016-10-28T20:46:38 <ArtGravity> menus that should appear in the top menu bar of unity are missing
5252016-10-28T20:46:40 <BlueMatt> ArtGravity: I really dont know what that means...screenshot? I have no idea where its /supposed/ to show up :p
5262016-10-28T20:46:53 <BlueMatt> cfields_: 0.13.1 was the first release with qt5, and if there are bugs gotta go back
5272016-10-28T20:47:22 <ArtGravity> in the 8043 screenshot, where it says Bitcoin Core - Wallet at the top left of the screen is where it should have the usual menus
5282016-10-28T20:47:31 <ArtGravity> like File, Edit, View, Help, etc
5292016-10-28T20:47:55 <BlueMatt> and what does it have there?
5302016-10-28T20:48:00 <BlueMatt> the logo
5312016-10-28T20:48:13 <BlueMatt> but the menus are in the window, i assume?
5322016-10-28T20:48:15 <BlueMatt> ie not missing
5332016-10-28T20:48:28 *** dzijeka has quit IRC
5342016-10-28T20:48:38 <ArtGravity> Just the logo covering the "Bit" in Bitcoin Core
5352016-10-28T20:48:40 <ArtGravity> No menus
5362016-10-28T20:48:41 <cfields_> BlueMatt: Ah yea, 0.13 -> 0.13.1 definitely shouldn't switch qt4 -> qt5. I didn't realize 0.13 used qt4.
5372016-10-28T20:48:50 <BlueMatt> ArtGravity: anyway, can you file an issue on github?
5382016-10-28T20:48:55 <ArtGravity> Yes
5392016-10-28T20:48:58 <BlueMatt> ArtGravity: thanks
5402016-10-28T20:49:01 <BlueMatt> probably with screenshot
5412016-10-28T20:49:02 <ArtGravity> NP
5422016-10-28T20:49:19 <BlueMatt> cfields_: well the only way to switch was dropping precise, which i did in 0.13, but only after uploading for others
5432016-10-28T20:49:22 <BlueMatt> so this was the first opportunity
5442016-10-28T20:49:23 <luke-jr> cfields_: PPA, not gitian binaries
5452016-10-28T20:49:27 <ArtGravity> I do have appmenu-qt5 installed
5462016-10-28T20:49:39 <BlueMatt> ArtGravity: hmm, try without?
5472016-10-28T20:49:44 <BlueMatt> if it works without thats an easier fix
5482016-10-28T20:49:51 <ArtGravity> I can try removing that first and see what happens
5492016-10-28T20:50:00 <BlueMatt> thanks
5502016-10-28T20:50:38 <cfields_> BlueMatt: mm, even if it does work, that's definitely an unexpected change imo
5512016-10-28T20:50:58 <BlueMatt> cfields_: it /should/ just be a library change, not anything a user would see
5522016-10-28T20:51:16 <ArtGravity> I remember this happening before and doing something to fix it
5532016-10-28T20:51:27 <cfields_> BlueMatt: eh? guis and integration are vastly different between qt4 and qt5
5542016-10-28T20:51:32 <ArtGravity> My Dogecoin had the problem too
5552016-10-28T20:52:40 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
5562016-10-28T20:53:19 <cfields_> bbl
5572016-10-28T20:57:21 <ArtGravity> w/o appmenu-qt5 I get the menu in the app instead of integrated into Unity
5582016-10-28T20:57:32 <ArtGravity> The tray icon still appears in the wrong location
5592016-10-28T21:02:12 <BlueMatt> arg, ok, thanks
5602016-10-28T21:02:15 <BlueMatt> can you file an issue?
5612016-10-28T21:02:21 <ArtGravity> Sure
5622016-10-28T21:13:25 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5632016-10-28T21:15:02 <BlueMatt> sipa: ok, you owe me review :p
5642016-10-28T21:18:18 <sipa> BlueMatt: this is true.
5652016-10-28T21:19:06 *** d_t has quit IRC
5662016-10-28T21:22:31 *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
5672016-10-28T21:24:52 <sipa> BlueMatt: the whole reason for needing the stream::Construct<T>() rather than T(Steam&) is nVersion and nType
5682016-10-28T21:25:09 <sipa> BlueMatt: the stream determines the value of those
5692016-10-28T21:25:34 <sipa> i've argued before that we need to get rid of the nVersion and nType being passed around everywhere, and instead just make them accessors on the stream
5702016-10-28T21:26:54 <BlueMatt> sipa: then please do :p
5712016-10-28T21:27:30 <sipa> please review 8468 then :)
5722016-10-28T21:27:57 <BlueMatt> sipa: I meant just for CTransaction initially
5732016-10-28T21:28:12 <sipa> BlueMatt: bleh
5742016-10-28T21:28:36 <BlueMatt> sipa: its incredibly shitty to have the Construct<T> stuff there, especially given the random hacks and tons of assert(false) functions
5752016-10-28T21:28:44 <sipa> BlueMatt: i agree
5762016-10-28T21:28:54 <BlueMatt> so break the shitty api :p
5772016-10-28T21:41:06 * sipa breaks it thoroughly
5782016-10-28T21:41:26 <BlueMatt> it deserved it
5792016-10-28T21:42:28 <Victorsueca> lol
5802016-10-28T21:54:14 <GitHub166> [bitcoin] EthanHeilman opened pull request #9037: net: Add test-before-evict discipline to addrman (master...test-before-evict) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9037
5812016-10-28T22:09:27 <ArtGravity> BlueMatt: Issue #9038 submitted
5822016-10-28T22:10:07 *** cryptapus is now known as cryptapus_afk
5832016-10-28T22:13:05 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5842016-10-28T22:18:16 *** ArtGravity has quit IRC
5852016-10-28T22:28:43 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5862016-10-28T22:32:09 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
5872016-10-28T23:01:05 *** Lauda_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5882016-10-28T23:01:42 *** Lauda has quit IRC
5892016-10-28T23:04:06 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5902016-10-28T23:04:19 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
5912016-10-28T23:04:25 *** Victor_sueca is now known as Victorsueca
5922016-10-28T23:09:28 *** aalex has quit IRC
5932016-10-28T23:13:29 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5942016-10-28T23:42:16 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
5952016-10-28T23:44:24 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5962016-10-28T23:45:44 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev