12017-02-17T00:07:57 *** wumpus has quit IRC
22017-02-17T00:24:21 *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
32017-02-17T00:32:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
42017-02-17T00:33:07 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
52017-02-17T00:33:35 *** lclc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62017-02-17T00:37:14 *** molz_ has quit IRC
72017-02-17T00:38:10 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
82017-02-17T00:38:39 *** lclc has quit IRC
92017-02-17T00:42:14 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102017-02-17T00:49:43 *** aalex has quit IRC
112017-02-17T00:52:46 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122017-02-17T00:56:29 *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132017-02-17T00:57:59 *** abpa has quit IRC
142017-02-17T01:09:39 *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
152017-02-17T01:10:17 *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162017-02-17T01:16:56 *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172017-02-17T01:17:08 *** fanquake has left #bitcoin-core-dev
182017-02-17T01:21:09 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192017-02-17T01:22:52 *** JackH has quit IRC
202017-02-17T01:40:55 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212017-02-17T01:44:00 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
222017-02-17T01:59:57 *** Kexkey has quit IRC
232017-02-17T02:21:26 *** Giszmo1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242017-02-17T02:24:10 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
252017-02-17T02:25:01 <achow101> is the zmq_test failing for anyone else?
262017-02-17T02:25:12 <achow101> (in rpc tests)
272017-02-17T02:29:03 *** moli_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282017-02-17T02:33:24 *** wumpus has quit IRC
292017-02-17T02:36:53 *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302017-02-17T02:45:53 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
312017-02-17T02:49:23 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
322017-02-17T03:00:03 *** dermoth has quit IRC
332017-02-17T03:00:54 *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
342017-02-17T03:06:04 *** wumpus has quit IRC
352017-02-17T03:24:35 *** goksinen has quit IRC
362017-02-17T03:33:38 *** PRab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372017-02-17T03:33:45 *** Giszmo1 has quit IRC
382017-02-17T03:35:52 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
392017-02-17T03:36:46 *** deepbook5broo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402017-02-17T03:36:46 *** deepbook5broo has left #bitcoin-core-dev
412017-02-17T03:40:07 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
422017-02-17T03:44:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
432017-02-17T04:12:31 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
442017-02-17T04:16:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
452017-02-17T04:33:14 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
462017-02-17T04:34:08 *** kadoban has quit IRC
472017-02-17T04:37:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
482017-02-17T05:05:29 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
492017-02-17T05:09:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
502017-02-17T05:12:14 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
512017-02-17T05:16:08 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522017-02-17T05:37:11 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
532017-02-17T05:41:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
542017-02-17T06:04:18 *** jtimon has quit IRC
552017-02-17T06:07:57 *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562017-02-17T06:08:10 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
572017-02-17T06:12:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
582017-02-17T06:20:13 *** mrkent has quit IRC
592017-02-17T06:20:36 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602017-02-17T06:21:20 *** mrkent has quit IRC
612017-02-17T06:21:39 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622017-02-17T06:21:47 *** city22 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
632017-02-17T06:28:39 *** chjj has quit IRC
642017-02-17T06:30:57 *** mrkent has quit IRC
652017-02-17T06:31:55 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662017-02-17T06:32:44 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672017-02-17T06:33:32 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
682017-02-17T06:34:18 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692017-02-17T06:34:53 *** mrkent has quit IRC
702017-02-17T06:35:08 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712017-02-17T06:38:11 *** lclc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
722017-02-17T06:40:13 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
732017-02-17T06:43:26 *** lclc has quit IRC
742017-02-17T06:44:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
752017-02-17T07:11:34 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
762017-02-17T07:15:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
772017-02-17T07:16:54 <jonasschnelli> jnewbery: jeremyrubin: I can hold back the PR. There is no hurry. Lets firs aim on the one you have listed above
782017-02-17T07:20:29 *** lclc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
792017-02-17T07:21:52 <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: I happened to see the list recently, and I think you shouldn't waste your time arguing with people who are philosophically opposed to supporting encryption. These people are acting in a way which is harmful to human rights and wellfare. I do not know if they are confused or if they are working for state actors which are opposed to personal freedom, or what. But it's a waste of ti
802017-02-17T07:21:58 <gmaxwell> me. Support for encryption and authication is completely optional and if other people want to use it it simply isn't any of their busienss.
812017-02-17T07:22:54 <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: Yes. That had cost me a lot of time and nerves... :)
822017-02-17T07:23:08 <jonasschnelli> Thanks!
832017-02-17T07:24:01 <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: What I really dislikes is that those guys tried to enflame others and it partially worked... that's why I was commenting on some of the concerns
842017-02-17T07:28:54 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: or possibly scared of what State actors opposing encryption might do to them/Bitcoin
852017-02-17T07:29:52 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: if so, then they're arguing dishonestly... and I can't see a reason to do that.
862017-02-17T07:30:49 <luke-jr> hm
872017-02-17T07:32:02 <gmaxwell> If someone argued that adding encryption to Bitcoin would make some state actors hate bitcoin, I think that could be pretty easily refuted.
882017-02-17T07:37:35 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
892017-02-17T07:38:29 *** BashCo has quit IRC
902017-02-17T07:42:30 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
912017-02-17T07:46:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
922017-02-17T07:59:26 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
932017-02-17T08:07:44 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/afae75fd3dad...8dee82217708
942017-02-17T08:07:44 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 55c403b John Newbery: Ensure `-maxsigcachesize` is in valid range...
952017-02-17T08:07:45 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8dee822 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9777: Handle unusual maxsigcachesize gracefully...
962017-02-17T08:07:55 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9777: Handle unusual maxsigcachesize gracefully (master...sigcache2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9777
972017-02-17T08:14:08 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
982017-02-17T08:18:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
992017-02-17T08:35:19 *** yuki-t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002017-02-17T08:46:10 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012017-02-17T08:50:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1022017-02-17T09:32:05 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1032017-02-17T09:35:33 *** city22 has quit IRC
1042017-02-17T09:36:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1052017-02-17T09:39:45 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062017-02-17T09:40:04 *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1072017-02-17T09:41:43 *** BashCo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1082017-02-17T09:43:21 * wumpus running gitian builds to check pre-rc1
1092017-02-17T09:44:37 *** BashCo has quit IRC
1102017-02-17T09:45:31 <Victorsueca> wumpus: you're going to tag 0.14 rc1 today?
1112017-02-17T09:54:23 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122017-02-17T09:56:57 *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
1132017-02-17T10:00:06 *** BashCo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1142017-02-17T10:02:37 *** BashCo has quit IRC
1152017-02-17T10:03:17 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162017-02-17T10:07:08 <wumpus> Victorsueca: unless there is a critical issue, that's the plan
1172017-02-17T10:07:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1182017-02-17T10:09:07 *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1192017-02-17T10:09:55 *** zyla has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202017-02-17T10:11:40 *** lclc has quit IRC
1212017-02-17T10:12:31 <Victorsueca> wumpus: anything that needs some extra testing on windows?
1222017-02-17T10:17:13 <wumpus> argh my dev/build machine died, that's not a good start of the day...
1232017-02-17T10:19:57 <Victorsueca> RIP
1242017-02-17T10:24:56 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252017-02-17T10:27:48 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262017-02-17T10:28:46 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1272017-02-17T10:30:05 *** chris2000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1282017-02-17T10:35:22 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292017-02-17T10:39:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1302017-02-17T10:48:32 <wumpus> building bitcoin core apparently breaks power supplies now :-) things should be back to normal, restarting testing gitian builds in a bit
1312017-02-17T10:49:54 <gmaxwell> libsecp256k1 easily overheats cpus.
1322017-02-17T10:51:09 <luke-jr> building itâ
1332017-02-17T10:51:59 <gmaxwell> for libsecp256k1? running the tests... which you hopefully do at build time!
1342017-02-17T10:54:21 <Victorsueca> I'm making the depends and it's downloading samba ccache, is that new or it just got updated?
1352017-02-17T10:55:24 <Victorsueca> ffs, it's downloading everything again, not sure why
1362017-02-17T10:57:14 <Victorsueca> I hate building boost
1372017-02-17T10:57:24 *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382017-02-17T11:01:53 <wumpus> building boost should be very quick, at least from depends, we have restricted that to only build the modules and variants that we actually use
1392017-02-17T11:02:01 <wumpus> building qt on the other hand...
1402017-02-17T11:02:40 <wumpus> we have done the same there - select only what we need, but GUI toolkits are beasts
1412017-02-17T11:05:50 <Victorsueca> problem with boost is not nly the time it takes, it's quiet, there's nothing more stressing than that, you don't know if it's still building or it got stuck
1422017-02-17T11:06:56 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432017-02-17T11:08:25 <wumpus> I'm pretty sure there's a flag to make it verbose, if you want that
1442017-02-17T11:10:02 *** lclc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1452017-02-17T11:11:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1462017-02-17T11:37:51 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1472017-02-17T11:42:20 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8dee82217708...3c02b957402e
1482017-02-17T11:42:20 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3f78e46 Gregory Maxwell: Update nMinimumChainWork and defaultAssumeValid.
1492017-02-17T11:42:21 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3c02b95 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9779: Update nMinimumChainWork and defaultAssumeValid....
1502017-02-17T11:42:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1512017-02-17T11:42:45 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9779: Update nMinimumChainWork and defaultAssumeValid. (master...update_chainparams) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9779
1522017-02-17T11:51:27 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3c02b957402e...ad168ef4e308
1532017-02-17T11:51:28 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 91fb506 Alex Morcos: Add two hour buffer to manual pruning
1542017-02-17T11:51:28 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ad168ef Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9778: Add two hour buffer to manual pruning...
1552017-02-17T11:51:49 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9778: Add two hour buffer to manual pruning (master...2hrprune) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9778
1562017-02-17T11:54:04 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ad168ef4e308...9828f9a9962c
1572017-02-17T11:54:05 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8be0866 Russell Yanofsky: [qa] Simplify import-rescan.py...
1582017-02-17T11:54:05 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c28583d Russell Yanofsky: [qa] Extend import-rescan.py to test specific key timestamps
1592017-02-17T11:54:06 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 38d3e9e Russell Yanofsky: [qa] Extend import-rescan.py to test imports on pruned nodes.
1602017-02-17T11:54:24 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9761: Use 2 hour grace period for key timestamps in importmulti rescans (master...pr/multigrace) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9761
1612017-02-17T12:05:49 *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
1622017-02-17T12:09:52 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632017-02-17T12:14:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1642017-02-17T12:14:44 *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1652017-02-17T12:40:27 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1662017-02-17T12:42:07 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1672017-02-17T12:43:17 *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
1682017-02-17T12:47:04 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1692017-02-17T13:13:29 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702017-02-17T13:17:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1712017-02-17T13:34:23 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722017-02-17T13:45:09 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732017-02-17T13:49:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1742017-02-17T13:53:15 <achow101> don't forget to increment the version number this time :p
1752017-02-17T14:07:13 *** olsa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1762017-02-17T14:11:39 *** olsa has quit IRC
1772017-02-17T14:15:59 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1782017-02-17T14:20:27 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1792017-02-17T14:21:31 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1802017-02-17T14:24:12 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812017-02-17T14:25:53 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1822017-02-17T14:34:21 *** ibrightly has quit IRC
1832017-02-17T14:34:58 *** ibrightly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1842017-02-17T14:36:45 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1852017-02-17T14:40:57 *** goksinen has quit IRC
1862017-02-17T14:55:49 *** Giszmo1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1872017-02-17T14:57:21 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
1882017-02-17T14:59:56 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1892017-02-17T15:09:12 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1902017-02-17T15:16:34 *** kadoban has quit IRC
1912017-02-17T15:49:58 *** Guest84185 has quit IRC
1922017-02-17T15:49:58 *** Guest84185 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1932017-02-17T15:50:10 *** Guest84185 is now known as amiller
1942017-02-17T15:52:16 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1952017-02-17T15:55:52 *** BashCo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1962017-02-17T15:58:51 *** BashCo has quit IRC
1972017-02-17T16:19:16 <wumpus> I don't think I ever forgot that for a major release, just minor releases
1982017-02-17T16:24:52 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.14: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/bc69f34b3537a7d34fb7f89b4acd619749bc6cc2
1992017-02-17T16:24:53 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 bc69f34 Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: bump version to 0.14.0
2002017-02-17T16:26:29 *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2012017-02-17T16:27:52 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/f87e8f53920adfa80a3f4af9435370dc272c3783
2022017-02-17T16:27:52 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f87e8f5 Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: bump version to 0.14.99...
2032017-02-17T16:28:45 <achow101> ooh branching
2042017-02-17T16:29:28 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2052017-02-17T16:33:24 *** chjj has quit IRC
2062017-02-17T16:38:55 *** MarcoFalke_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2072017-02-17T16:39:33 <MarcoFalke_> branch off ''\o/''
2082017-02-17T16:40:10 <wumpus> yep, it's that time of the year
2092017-02-17T16:43:37 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.14: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/f68e4414d77aeb60d8dee1b2e53a195ff15b2c48
2102017-02-17T16:43:38 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 f68e441 Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: pre-rc1 translations update
2112017-02-17T16:46:42 *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
2122017-02-17T16:46:52 *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132017-02-17T16:47:17 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2142017-02-17T16:47:23 <MarcoFalke_> I think `gen-manpages.sh` needs to be run on 0.14
2152017-02-17T16:47:39 *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2162017-02-17T16:48:48 <wumpus> ok
2172017-02-17T16:49:03 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.14: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/1a02ecc73af4b4ac36da1bd04f9e7eddf640e48f
2182017-02-17T16:49:04 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 1a02ecc Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Update release notes from wiki
2192017-02-17T16:57:36 <wumpus> will do that in a bit
2202017-02-17T17:04:02 <cfields> did a full gitian build of linux/win/osx as of a few commits ago (afae75fd3da). So far, linux/osx test_bitcoin pass, osx gets reliable rpc test failure: http://pastebin.com/raw/7mgt7jsQ
2212017-02-17T17:04:44 <wumpus> argh
2222017-02-17T17:05:49 <cfields> will re-test from 0.14 after the latest importmulti changes
2232017-02-17T17:05:57 *** Arvidt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242017-02-17T17:06:05 <wumpus> and it doesn't happen with normal build of the same, just gitian?
2252017-02-17T17:06:16 <wumpus> I don't remember that issue on travis so probably
2262017-02-17T17:06:37 *** wasi has quit IRC
2272017-02-17T17:06:37 *** arubi has quit IRC
2282017-02-17T17:06:39 *** Giszmo1 has quit IRC
2292017-02-17T17:07:10 <cfields> wumpus: i haven't tried an osx build from the same spot, i'll do that at the same time as the 0.14 rebuild
2302017-02-17T17:08:09 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2312017-02-17T17:09:18 <Arvidt> Is it better for Bitcoin to run a full node, or is it also ok ok to run a pruned node with 100 GiB (-prune=100000) ?
2322017-02-17T17:09:49 <wumpus> when running a pruned node it doesn't matter what the size is, no pruned node will serve blocks
2332017-02-17T17:10:43 <wumpus> so if you want to provide blocks to other nodes that are bootstrapping, you need to run a non-pruned node, at least currently
2342017-02-17T17:12:11 <Arvidt> ok, thanks for the info. There is very few information about pruned mode in the internet, only bitcoiin core release notes and some bitcointalk thread that are two years old.
2352017-02-17T17:13:56 <wumpus> the full node guide mentions pruning as well https://bitcoin.org/en/full-node#configuration-tuning , though it doesn't mention that currently pruned nodes will not serve blocks
2362017-02-17T17:14:15 <wumpus> feel free to add it, most if not all the documents are open source
2372017-02-17T17:14:20 *** MarcoFalke_ has quit IRC
2382017-02-17T17:20:10 *** lclc has quit IRC
2392017-02-17T17:22:19 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.14: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/268c390d02d99a4a93a0a01221e273d2b9695ff7
2402017-02-17T17:22:19 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 268c390 Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Update manpages for 0.14.0
2412017-02-17T17:24:23 <cfields> wumpus: local build passes :\. Waiting for gitian built to finish so i can compare.
2422017-02-17T17:29:05 *** aalex has quit IRC
2432017-02-17T17:32:53 <wumpus> ok, hopefully it was a false positive
2442017-02-17T17:33:54 <cfields> wumpus: yes, that tests passes on 0.14. Still waiting for the whole suite to finish, but looks like a false alarm
2452017-02-17T17:34:21 <achow101> I had an rpc test failing yesterday, I'm checking again now on master to see if it still fails
2462017-02-17T17:37:12 <achow101> yeah, zmq_test.py still fails for me
2472017-02-17T17:42:03 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482017-02-17T17:42:42 <cfields> ok, all osx pass
2492017-02-17T17:44:31 <cfields> wumpus: need to bump the gitian descriptors if we want separate package caches for 0.13/0.14. Will PR now.
2502017-02-17T17:52:00 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #9783: release: bump gitian descriptors for a new 0.14 package cache (0.14...gitian-descriptor-bump) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9783
2512017-02-17T17:56:09 <Chris_Stewart_5> Will this 'normalize' function in secp256k1 strip uneccessary padding on signatures? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/pubkey.cpp#L183
2522017-02-17T17:56:48 <Chris_Stewart_5> We have a specific test in script_tests.json that pads R values and doesn't require DERSIG flag
2532017-02-17T18:10:56 *** jtimon has quit IRC
2542017-02-17T18:13:53 <wumpus> cfields: I had no idea that we were still using the 0.13 dependencies for master
2552017-02-17T18:14:55 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9783: release: bump gitian descriptors for a new 0.14 package cache (0.14...gitian-descriptor-bump) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9783
2562017-02-17T18:15:12 <cfields> wumpus: it doesn't matter a ton. The chain is hashed and it always grabs the right deps based on the recipe. Splitting just lets you keep them separate, so you can stash 0.13 away if you want, to save time for 0.13.3 build
2572017-02-17T18:25:49 <wumpus> cfields: right
2582017-02-17T18:27:50 *** BashCo has quit IRC
2592017-02-17T18:28:14 <gmaxwell> release notes still say nothing about the massive performance improvements. Shall I write something?
2602017-02-17T18:28:24 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2612017-02-17T18:29:15 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.14: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/871e19ac84ae71b3d22928d5cb3bbf4f0f013b07
2622017-02-17T18:29:16 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 871e19a Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Add list of authors to release notes...
2632017-02-17T18:29:26 <wumpus> sure, that'd be very welcome, release notes can be updated until the final release
2642017-02-17T18:30:16 <wumpus> still need to add the big list of changes too
2652017-02-17T18:32:27 *** BashCo has quit IRC
2662017-02-17T18:32:54 <cfields> gmaxwell: i started to a few days ago but got distracted. I'm unsure if we want to just add a "performance increases" section and add a bunch of stuff, or add individual features and mention what they speed up
2672017-02-17T18:33:28 <gmaxwell> Perfmrnace increases with a line per improvement might be nice.
2682017-02-17T18:34:38 <cfields> gmaxwell: works for me. Have you already started, or shall I?
2692017-02-17T18:35:17 <gmaxwell> Go ahead. Hm. I thought I wrote release notes for assume valid.
2702017-02-17T18:35:56 <gmaxwell> that certantly should be release noted, esp as someone might feel its a security model change (at least without the explination)
2712017-02-17T18:36:38 <gmaxwell> oh Idid and it was just all removed. :(
2722017-02-17T18:36:50 <cfields> gmaxwell: sure, and imo it goes under performance improvements. Not sure if that's what you were implying. But to an end-user, that's surely the benefit
2732017-02-17T18:37:44 <gmaxwell> It is a performance improvement but unless explained it could be understood as a significant security model change.
2742017-02-17T18:37:55 <gmaxwell> Can someone please explain to me why the release note for that was removed?
2752017-02-17T18:38:04 <wumpus> what was removed? you should edit the release notes in 0.14, not on master
2762017-02-17T18:38:13 <wumpus> master was completely cleaned out
2772017-02-17T18:38:37 <gmaxwell> wumpus: doing that means that changes that write their release notes get their notes nuked.
2782017-02-17T18:38:51 <sipa> gmaxwell: ?
2792017-02-17T18:39:06 <wumpus> gmaxwell: this has been the case for every major release
2802017-02-17T18:39:09 <sipa> things that are merged in 0.14 have their notes in 0.14
2812017-02-17T18:39:16 <wumpus> 0.14 is branched off, master is 0.15 now
2822017-02-17T18:39:34 <gmaxwell> The releas enote was removed for 0.14
2832017-02-17T18:39:36 <gmaxwell> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/1a02ecc73af4b4ac36da1bd04f9e7eddf640e48f#diff-ef76fd6674f07db88c3422fdbf0bcf9fL79
2842017-02-17T18:39:54 <sipa> ah, update from the wiki
2852017-02-17T18:40:02 <gmaxwell> so was -0.14.0 Fundrawtransaction change address reuse
2862017-02-17T18:40:13 <wumpus> gmaxwell: wasn't that just moved somewhere else?
2872017-02-17T18:40:34 <achow101> the problem was that some things got into the release notes in the repo, and others were in the wiki
2882017-02-17T18:40:34 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2892017-02-17T18:40:35 <wumpus> it's in the wrong place after all, in the section reserved for PRs
2902017-02-17T18:41:00 <wumpus> so my assumption was that it was moved upwards, but if it got removed it should be added back (in the right place)
2912017-02-17T18:41:16 <gmaxwell> wumpus: it was in the notable changes section, and no it's nowhere mentioned in the release notes now.
2922017-02-17T18:41:26 <wumpus> ok, re-add it then
2932017-02-17T18:42:05 <gmaxwell> At least I know what happened now!
2942017-02-17T18:42:24 <gmaxwell> I think we do want changes writing their own release notes, no? we'll just need to figure out how to merge that with the wiki.
2952017-02-17T18:42:27 <gmaxwell> (in the future)
2962017-02-17T18:42:59 <wumpus> gmaxwell: I apparently missed that when merging changes from the wiki; I saw some stuff was removed, but Ithought it were just the items in the wrong place that were merged back
2972017-02-17T18:43:14 <wumpus> in the future we should pay attention to changes, just like you did now, good job
2982017-02-17T18:43:16 <wumpus> :)
2992017-02-17T18:45:17 *** jtimon has quit IRC
3002017-02-17T18:47:51 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3012017-02-17T18:48:37 <cfields> sipa / gmaxwell: any notable perf improvements from libsecp256k1 for 0.14? I'm hazy on the timeline
3022017-02-17T18:51:36 <sipa> cfields: no, i don't think so
3032017-02-17T18:51:52 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3042017-02-17T18:52:00 <cfields> ok, thanks
3052017-02-17T18:52:34 <cfields> ah, docs need ctaes reference
3062017-02-17T18:52:53 <sipa> oh, was ctaes new for 0.14?
3072017-02-17T18:53:31 <gmaxwell> No.
3082017-02-17T18:53:38 *** adiabat has quit IRC
3092017-02-17T18:54:58 *** adiabat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3102017-02-17T18:55:14 <cfields> huh, seemed recent
3112017-02-17T18:55:56 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] gmaxwell opened pull request #9784: Restore removed release notes. (0.14...release_notes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9784
3122017-02-17T18:56:08 <cfields> yep, present in 0.13.0. nm.
3132017-02-17T18:56:23 <gmaxwell> I don't know if we ever release noted. :)
3142017-02-17T18:57:18 <cfields> jus this: - #7689 `b89ef13` Replace OpenSSL AES with ctaes-based version (sipa)
3152017-02-17T18:57:20 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7689 | Replace OpenSSL AES with ctaes-based version by sipa · Pull Request #7689 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3162017-02-17T18:58:05 <wumpus> is it something that affects end users much?
3172017-02-17T18:58:17 <gmaxwell> yea, kinda sad because that was a relly impressive work.
3182017-02-17T18:58:46 <gmaxwell> a secondary purpose of release notes, its also a communication channel about what we're doing.
3192017-02-17T18:58:52 <gmaxwell> (and interesting to)
3202017-02-17T18:59:14 <gmaxwell> the only effect on users was that it avoided some build problems with openssl api changes that some people expirenced later.
3212017-02-17T18:59:26 <wumpus> the release notes for 0.13 were already huge, if there are too many notable changes no one is going to read everything
3222017-02-17T18:59:44 <wumpus> I think it's fine to not add a specific paragraph for everything
3232017-02-17T19:00:40 <wumpus> i'm certainly in favor of publishing awesome developer changes in bitcoin core, but I'm not sure the release notes is the right place for that
3242017-02-17T19:00:51 <wumpus> a tech blog on bitcoincore.org would be nice
3252017-02-17T19:00:53 <gmaxwell> That is fair too.
3262017-02-17T19:01:07 <gmaxwell> But who has the time?
3272017-02-17T19:01:31 <wumpus> well if you'd have the time to add it to the release notes, you'd also have time to write a blog post, those are equivalent time-wise
3282017-02-17T19:02:20 <gmaxwell> release note would have been one/two paragraphs, would make for a kind of lame blogpost. :P
3292017-02-17T19:02:40 <wumpus> brg444 did a nice writeup on bitcoin core performance improvements
3302017-02-17T19:02:46 <gmaxwell> but there could be summary posts, I suppose with things that weren't important enough to usage to go into the release notes.
3312017-02-17T19:02:48 <wumpus> why? not everything needs to be a long story
3322017-02-17T19:03:02 <wumpus> short, frequent updates are good too
3332017-02-17T19:03:39 <Chris_Stewart_5> The Chronicles of Bitcoin Core (TM)
3342017-02-17T19:03:49 <gmaxwell> I hope he hasn't published that yet, it didn't have measurement last I saw and was weaker without it... unfortunately it takes so long to sync with older versions it takes a while to get numbers! :)
3352017-02-17T19:05:37 <wumpus> I don't think he has, but I like that it puts everything into context
3362017-02-17T19:05:42 <gmaxwell> wumpus: Thanks, good points.
3372017-02-17T19:06:09 <gmaxwell> Yea, I saw a draft too... I should check again, it was missing a bunch of stuff but I bet he's added it now.
3382017-02-17T19:24:07 <gmaxwell> We have two stack protector not protecting compiler warnings on 0.14 branch, might want to consider fixing in the next RC if they're trivial fixes.
3392017-02-17T19:25:08 <cfields> gmaxwell: ah, nice. I've been trying to figure out how to state the net performance improvements in a meaningful way. Full IBD from before/after seems pretty reasonable.
3402017-02-17T19:25:15 <wumpus> what causes those?
3412017-02-17T19:25:47 <wumpus> and I don't think I've ever seen those warnings, what gcc/clang gives them?
3422017-02-17T19:25:55 <gmaxwell> "running newer compilers" :P
3432017-02-17T19:25:56 <gmaxwell> httprpc.cpp: In function âbool HTTPReq_JSONRPC(HTTPRequest*, const string&)â:
3442017-02-17T19:25:59 <gmaxwell> httprpc.cpp:150:13: warning: stack protector not protecting local variables: variable length buffer [-Wstack-protector] static bool HTTPReq_JSONRPC(HTTPRequest* req, const std::string &)
3452017-02-17T19:26:14 <gmaxwell> qt/test/paymentservertests.cpp: In member function âvoid PaymentServerTests::paymentServerTests()â:
3462017-02-17T19:26:17 <gmaxwell> qt/test/paymentservertests.cpp:65:6: warning: stack protector not protecting local variables: variable length buffer [-Wstack-protector]
3472017-02-17T19:26:20 <gmaxwell> void PaymentServerTests::paymentServerTests()
3482017-02-17T19:26:22 <gmaxwell> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3492017-02-17T19:26:25 <wumpus> oh in the tests in not important
3502017-02-17T19:26:42 <gmaxwell> first one isn't in tests. httprpc.
3512017-02-17T19:27:10 <gmaxwell> anyways anyone running more recent gcc will get them. (I don't know how recent is required, but 6.3.0 has them)
3522017-02-17T19:27:11 <wumpus> variable-length buffer on the stack in httprpc/!
3532017-02-17T19:27:22 <gmaxwell> thats what it appears to be reporting!
3542017-02-17T19:27:29 <wumpus> where?
3552017-02-17T19:27:40 <sipa> i don't see it!
3562017-02-17T19:27:42 <wumpus> didn't even know that was possible in c++
3572017-02-17T19:27:49 <sipa> it is
3582017-02-17T19:28:04 <gmaxwell> well C++11 IIRC added optional VLA.
3592017-02-17T19:28:09 <gmaxwell> this is what it reports:
3602017-02-17T19:28:10 <gmaxwell> static bool HTTPReq_JSONRPC(HTTPRequest* req, const std::string &)
3612017-02-17T19:28:10 <gmaxwell> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3622017-02-17T19:28:32 <gmaxwell> which made no sense to me but I figured there was some kind of over-my-head c++ magic happening.
3632017-02-17T19:28:36 <luke-jr> I get them with 4.9.4
3642017-02-17T19:29:05 <wumpus> I'm fairly sure I didn't *intend* that when writing that code at least
3652017-02-17T19:29:16 <wumpus> so I'm curious
3662017-02-17T19:29:36 <gmaxwell> I agree the test isn't so important, but the users compiling seeing warnings isn't ideal. Certantly lower priority.
3672017-02-17T19:29:43 <wumpus> I also think it's strange it comes up now
3682017-02-17T19:29:53 <sipa> i've seen that warning for months, at least
3692017-02-17T19:29:57 <wumpus> shouldn't that warning have been there for ages?
3702017-02-17T19:30:20 <gmaxwell> it's been there for a while but I ignore warnings in master because they're usually eliminated before release, didn't realize that most other people weren't seeing it.
3712017-02-17T19:30:20 <wumpus> oh and you just mention it now just before a release, ok :/
3722017-02-17T19:30:34 <gmaxwell> Actually I have mentioned it once before.
3732017-02-17T19:30:46 <gmaxwell> but I thought everyone else was seeing it too.
3742017-02-17T19:31:02 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3752017-02-17T19:31:05 <gmaxwell> Sorry.
3762017-02-17T19:31:15 <sipa> building from scratch with 6.2.0 now, i'll report the warnings i get
3772017-02-17T19:31:27 <sipa> /usr/bin/ar: `u' modifier ignored since `D' is the default (see `U')
3782017-02-17T19:31:30 <wumpus> I don't think it's a big deal but I want to know what is causing a variable sized buffer there
3792017-02-17T19:31:35 <sipa> httprpc.cpp: In function âbool HTTPReq_JSONRPC(HTTPRequest*, const string&)â:
3802017-02-17T19:31:38 <sipa> httprpc.cpp:150:13: warning: stack protector not protecting local variables: variable length buffer [-Wstack-protector]
3812017-02-17T19:31:41 <sipa> static bool HTTPReq_JSONRPC(HTTPRequest* req, const std::string &)
3822017-02-17T19:31:43 <sipa> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3832017-02-17T19:31:49 <wumpus> variable-sized buffers on the stack are usually a code stink
3842017-02-17T19:32:04 <wumpus> honestly I thought the practice died in the 90's
3852017-02-17T19:32:29 <sipa> (several more 'u' modifier warnings)
3862017-02-17T19:32:34 <jonasschnelli> I think we should mention the AES change there...
3872017-02-17T19:32:45 <jonasschnelli> (in the release notes)
3882017-02-17T19:32:45 <wumpus> yes the modfifier warnings are well-known, there's an issue open for those IIRC
3892017-02-17T19:32:47 <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: what aes change?
3902017-02-17T19:33:12 <jonasschnelli> Sorry,.. I hadn't scrolled down...
3912017-02-17T19:33:17 <gmaxwell> :P
3922017-02-17T19:33:22 <sipa> jonasschnelli, wumpus, gmaxwell: how about we first move all the AES mode of operation code into ctaes (it's currently in crypto/aes.cpp), and then write a blog post about ctaes in general
3932017-02-17T19:33:25 <jonasschnelli> I just saw a discussion about ctaes
3942017-02-17T19:33:37 <sipa> /usr/include/boost/type_traits/detail/bool_trait_def.hpp:18:78: note: #pragma message: NOTE: Use of this header (bool_trait_def.hpp) is deprecated
3952017-02-17T19:33:40 <sipa> # pragma message("NOTE: Use of this header (bool_trait_def.hpp) is deprecated")
3962017-02-17T19:33:53 <sipa> leveldb/db/memtable.cc: In member function âvoid leveldb::MemTable::Add(leveldb::SequenceNumber, leveldb::ValueType, const leveldb::Slice&, const leveldb::Slice&)â:
3972017-02-17T19:33:57 <sipa> leveldb/db/memtable.cc:104:23: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Wsign-compare]
3982017-02-17T19:34:00 <sipa> assert((p + val_size) - buf == encoded_len);
3992017-02-17T19:34:05 <wumpus> yes, there are a few warnings in boost, those depend on the boost version
4002017-02-17T19:34:13 <wumpus> there's also warnings in leveldb those need to be fixed upstream
4012017-02-17T19:34:14 <cfields> heh, i have a fix for the deprecated boost thing. Will PR in a few min.
4022017-02-17T19:34:31 <cfields> sipa: i did a cbc ctaes over the weekend, just need to get it cleaned up
4032017-02-17T19:34:36 <wumpus> sipa: sounds good to me
4042017-02-17T19:35:15 <cfields> sipa: out of curiosity, does the rpc warning go away if you make the function non-static ?
4052017-02-17T19:36:18 <gmaxwell> cfields: no.
4062017-02-17T19:36:34 <sipa> cfields: no
4072017-02-17T19:36:41 <cfields> ok, thanks
4082017-02-17T19:36:51 <gmaxwell> I am bisecting its code.
4092017-02-17T19:37:42 <jonasschnelli> Hmm.. I once extended ctaes to do cbc (if that is of interest)
4102017-02-17T19:37:43 <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/shiftdevices/libshiftdevices/blob/master/src/aes256_cbc.c
4112017-02-17T19:38:00 <sipa> hah
4122017-02-17T19:38:09 <sipa> there are at least 3 people who have already done that it seems
4132017-02-17T19:38:14 <sipa> and nobody upstreamed it!
4142017-02-17T19:38:33 <cfields> heh
4152017-02-17T19:39:25 <cfields> sipa: i didn't like the api i came up with, planned to revisit before upstreaming
4162017-02-17T19:39:40 <jonasschnelli> I wanted to upstream.
4172017-02-17T19:39:59 <wumpus> haha!
4182017-02-17T19:40:13 <sipa> i found the httprpc thing
4192017-02-17T19:40:33 <sipa> it's the out[KEY_SIZE] in multiuserauthorized
4202017-02-17T19:40:41 <gmaxwell> damn I type too slow.
4212017-02-17T19:40:47 <wumpus> KEY_SIZE is not a constant?
4222017-02-17T19:41:03 <sipa> marking it const fixes it
4232017-02-17T19:41:10 <wumpus> damn, good catch
4242017-02-17T19:41:27 <gmaxwell> unsigned int KEY_SIZE = 32;
4252017-02-17T19:41:27 <gmaxwell> unsigned char out[KEY_SIZE];
4262017-02-17T19:41:46 <wumpus> next time you see that warning please raise an alarm immediately
4272017-02-17T19:41:49 <gmaxwell> I wish the compiler had flags to disable language features.
4282017-02-17T19:42:21 <gmaxwell> I'll open an issue, I did mention it on IRC.
4292017-02-17T19:42:28 <gmaxwell> (if it happens again!)
4302017-02-17T19:42:35 <cfields> gmaxwell: -Wvla
4312017-02-17T19:42:42 <gmaxwell> oh, lol.
4322017-02-17T19:42:43 <cfields> i think that should catch it?
4332017-02-17T19:42:50 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4342017-02-17T19:43:33 <cfields> specifically, -Werror=vla
4352017-02-17T19:43:33 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #9785: Make KEY_SIZE a compile-time constant (master...constkeysize) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9785
4362017-02-17T19:43:40 <wumpus> cfields: let's do that
4372017-02-17T19:44:04 <wumpus> I'm not usually for disabling language features, but I can see no good coming out of this one
4382017-02-17T19:44:19 <cfields> wumpus: sounds good. There was another case like that a while back wrt hashing, I guess that was fixed at one point
4392017-02-17T19:44:34 <gmaxwell> that one seems safe but we should be very cautious about werror... compilers change warning detection all the time and then crap won't compile for users.
4402017-02-17T19:44:38 <cfields> sipa / gmaxwell: can you comment on whether -Werror=vla blows up on the old code?
4412017-02-17T19:44:49 <sipa> cfields: let's check
4422017-02-17T19:44:55 <wumpus> especially if it silently makes functions vulnerable by disabling the stack cookie
4432017-02-17T19:45:06 <wumpus> gmaxwell: agreed, Werror certainly shouldn't be enabled generally
4442017-02-17T19:45:07 <cfields> gmaxwell: Werror= allows you to only error on specific warnings
4452017-02-17T19:45:17 <gmaxwell> VLAs aren't so bad... they have good uses, but I agree we shouldn't have them in our codebase.
4462017-02-17T19:45:32 <gmaxwell> cfields: yes but many warnings change their behavior. As I said, vla sounds safe.
4472017-02-17T19:45:57 <gmaxwell> but many other warnings change their specific triggers from version to version.
4482017-02-17T19:46:00 <wumpus> this one is specific enough
4492017-02-17T19:46:00 <sipa> $ ./configure --with-incompatible-bdb --without-gui CXXFLAGS="-Wall -Wpedantic -Werror=vla -g3 -O2"
4502017-02-17T19:46:19 <sipa> ok, i do not want -Wpedantic
4512017-02-17T19:47:21 <gmaxwell> httprpc.cpp: In function âbool multiUserAuthorized(std::__cxx11::string)â:
4522017-02-17T19:47:24 <gmaxwell> httprpc.cpp:116:39: error: variable length array âoutâ is used [-Werror=vla]
4532017-02-17T19:47:27 <gmaxwell> unsigned char out[KEY_SIZE];
4542017-02-17T19:47:29 <gmaxwell> ^
4552017-02-17T19:47:41 <cfields> I remember this one getting snagged as a vla at one point: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/hash.h#L30
4562017-02-17T19:47:56 <cfields> i think that may be up to the compiler.
4572017-02-17T19:48:11 <gmaxwell> qt/test/paymentservertests.cpp: In member function âvoid PaymentServerTests::paymentServerTests()â:
4582017-02-17T19:48:14 <gmaxwell> qt/test/paymentservertests.cpp:181:61: error: variable length array ârandDataâ is used [-Werror=vla]
4592017-02-17T19:48:16 <cfields> er sorry, 2 lines up
4602017-02-17T19:48:17 <gmaxwell> unsigned char randData[BIP70_MAX_PAYMENTREQUEST_SIZE + 1];
4612017-02-17T19:48:19 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4622017-02-17T19:48:20 <gmaxwell> ^
4632017-02-17T19:49:09 *** lclc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4642017-02-17T19:49:26 <gmaxwell> with those two things fixed it compiles cleanly with that Werror=vla.
4652017-02-17T19:51:08 <wumpus> would be good to include the paymentrequest change in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9785 too
4662017-02-17T19:51:43 <cfields> yes, clang still dislikes the one in hash.h
4672017-02-17T19:53:28 <wumpus> hm, a static field that is addressed as a non-static field
4682017-02-17T19:54:07 <wumpus> if you make that CSHA256::OUTPUT_SIZE I'm fairly sure the warning goes away?
4692017-02-17T19:54:24 <cfields> wumpus: yep
4702017-02-17T19:55:18 *** mrkent has quit IRC
4712017-02-17T19:55:38 <sipa> what if you make it just OUTPUT_SIZE ?
4722017-02-17T19:56:11 <cfields> sipa: works for one, breaks for ripemd
4732017-02-17T19:56:23 <cfields> pr coming up
4742017-02-17T19:56:36 <sipa> already on it
4752017-02-17T19:56:41 <cfields> race!
4762017-02-17T19:56:49 <wumpus> if you make it just OUTPUT_SIZE the meaning changes
4772017-02-17T19:57:01 <sipa> indeed
4782017-02-17T19:57:03 <wumpus> though if the numbers are the same anyway it doesn't matter
4792017-02-17T19:57:08 <sipa> it needs to be CSHA256::OUTPUT_SIZE
4802017-02-17T19:58:06 <cfields> http://pastebin.com/raw/u5uG8PbE
4812017-02-17T19:58:07 <cfields> no?
4822017-02-17T20:00:16 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4832017-02-17T20:00:49 <sipa> my battery just died
4842017-02-17T20:01:00 <btcdrak> RIP
4852017-02-17T20:01:12 <sipa> the PR also has the paymentprotocol change, but I didn't tedt
4862017-02-17T20:01:14 <sipa> *test
4872017-02-17T20:01:14 <cfields> 0.14: destroyer of PSUs and batteries
4882017-02-17T20:01:28 <sipa> s/died/ran out/
4892017-02-17T20:04:17 <achow101> When did 0.14 destroy a PSU?
4902017-02-17T20:05:26 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #9786: boost: remove iostreams includes (master...no-iostreams) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9786
4912017-02-17T20:05:59 <wumpus> achow101: mine, earlier today
4922017-02-17T20:06:11 <wumpus> while building w/ gitian, not while running it, mind you
4932017-02-17T20:07:18 <cfields> ^^ should get rid of the "NOTE: Use of this header (bool_trait_def.hpp) is deprecated")"
4942017-02-17T20:08:04 <achow101> wumpus: lol
4952017-02-17T20:14:22 *** Kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4962017-02-17T20:26:18 *** asoltys has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4972017-02-17T20:26:37 *** lclc has quit IRC
4982017-02-17T20:34:05 <achow101> is the tag still happening today?
4992017-02-17T20:37:51 <cfields> wumpus: would you like release notes additions PR'd directly to 0.14, i assume?
5002017-02-17T20:41:21 <wumpus> achow101: yes, in a minute
5012017-02-17T20:41:37 <luke-jr> "Out-of-sync Modal Info Layer" looks like something that can be removed from release notes to trim it down
5022017-02-17T20:41:42 <wumpus> cfields: yes, editing the wiki has little sense now, we should probaly add a warning there
5032017-02-17T20:41:51 <cfields> ok
5042017-02-17T20:44:38 <luke-jr> " - After resetting the options by clicking the `Reset Options` button in the options dialog or with the `-resetguioptions` startup option, the user will be prompted to choose the data directory again. This is to ensure that custom data directories will be kept after the option reset which clears the custom data directory set via the choose datadir dialog."
5052017-02-17T20:44:51 <luke-jr> ^ where did this change happen? I don't see any code for this behaviour
5062017-02-17T20:45:23 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.14: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/618709141147f74771da0795cf0dccb47c606d24
5072017-02-17T20:45:24 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 6187091 Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Add changelog for 0.14.0 to release notes
5082017-02-17T20:45:42 <wumpus> going to pull in the warning changes and then tag
5092017-02-17T20:46:10 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #9787: [WIP] release: add a few performance-related notes (0.14...update-release-notes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9787
5102017-02-17T20:46:19 <cfields> ^^ just intended to be a starting point
5112017-02-17T20:47:03 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 0.14: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/618709141147...04396bcc058e
5122017-02-17T20:47:03 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 1577f07 Gregory Maxwell: Restore removed release notes.
5132017-02-17T20:47:04 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 04396bc Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9784: Restore removed release notes....
5142017-02-17T20:47:20 <cfields> sipa: are you PRing the hash changes? Or did those die with your battery?
5152017-02-17T20:48:26 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f87e8f53920a...df42bcdbfebe
5162017-02-17T20:48:27 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 914fad1 Pieter Wuille: Make KEY_SIZE a compile-time constant
5172017-02-17T20:48:27 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c801c82 Pieter Wuille: Move BIP70_MAX_PAYMENTREQUEST_SIZE to header
5182017-02-17T20:48:28 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master df42bcd Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9785: Avoid variable length arrays...
5192017-02-17T20:48:49 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9785: Avoid variable length arrays (master...constkeysize) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9785
5202017-02-17T20:48:58 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/df42bcdbfebe...12f46fa7d87d
5212017-02-17T20:48:58 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3301587 Cory Fields: boost: remove iostreams includes...
5222017-02-17T20:48:59 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 12f46fa Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9786: boost: remove iostreams includes...
5232017-02-17T20:49:21 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9786: boost: remove iostreams includes (master...no-iostreams) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9786
5242017-02-17T20:51:13 <sipa> cfields: oops, right, will do
5252017-02-17T20:51:14 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to 0.14: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/04396bcc058e...2afefeade6e6
5262017-02-17T20:51:15 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 f873564 Pieter Wuille: Make KEY_SIZE a compile-time constant...
5272017-02-17T20:51:16 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 973e345 Pieter Wuille: Move BIP70_MAX_PAYMENTREQUEST_SIZE to header...
5282017-02-17T20:51:16 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 2afefea Cory Fields: boost: remove iostreams includes...
5292017-02-17T20:54:39 <wumpus> luke-jr: was that message added at the same time as the change, or later?
5302017-02-17T20:55:28 <wumpus> luke-jr: seems to be #8487
5312017-02-17T20:55:30 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8487 | Persist the datadir after option reset by achow101 · Pull Request #8487 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5322017-02-17T20:55:41 <luke-jr> but that's the opposite?
5332017-02-17T20:56:02 <wumpus> I'm not aware of any other changes there (and log -p confirms this)
5342017-02-17T20:56:42 <luke-jr> oh, does it preserve *and* reprompt? :o
5352017-02-17T20:58:07 <wumpus> anyhow, time to tag
5362017-02-17T20:59:18 <sipa> ack tag
5372017-02-17T20:59:38 <jonasschnelli> \O/
5382017-02-17T20:59:54 <wumpus> * [new tag] v0.14.0rc1 -> v0.14.0rc1
5392017-02-17T21:00:27 <sipa> \o/ \\o o//
5402017-02-17T21:01:01 <wumpus> \\o//
5412017-02-17T21:01:24 <cfields> woohoo!
5422017-02-17T21:01:27 <sipa> you have 4 arms? that explains!
5432017-02-17T21:01:48 <wumpus> if only :)
5442017-02-17T21:02:55 <gmaxwell> that symbol is a tutrle on its back.
5452017-02-17T21:02:56 <wumpus> gitian will probably have to rebuild all dependencies as the gitian-depends version was bumped
5462017-02-17T21:02:57 <gmaxwell> flip him over!
5472017-02-17T21:03:02 <jonasschnelli> heh
5482017-02-17T21:03:52 <achow101> \o/
5492017-02-17T21:03:53 <wumpus> cfields: we should not forget to bump the depends version to 0.15 on master as soon as possible so that we don't have this problem next time
5502017-02-17T21:04:06 <cfields> wumpus: indeed. I'm cheating and symlinking for now.
5512017-02-17T21:04:47 <cfields> will PR that in just a min.
5522017-02-17T21:04:49 <wumpus> yeah I thought about that too, but I'm not doing that, want to be sure to get the right output
5532017-02-17T21:05:49 <wumpus> I'd be the person to symlink the wrong directory then get a wrong executable, spend hours debugging that, and lose a lot of time compared to... simply rebuilding everything :p
5542017-02-17T21:05:56 <achow101> luke-jr: it preserves and reprompts the datadir
5552017-02-17T21:05:56 <jonasschnelli> Can you just gpg sign the gitian assets file on a different machine? No need for the descriptor, right?
5562017-02-17T21:06:35 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: yes, see "signing externally" in gitian-building.md
5572017-02-17T21:07:40 <jonasschnelli> wumpus: Thanks... great.. wasn't aware of that doc part
5582017-02-17T21:08:09 <instagibbs> nice work :)
5592017-02-17T21:08:30 <wumpus> you can also pass -p true to gsign to make it skip the call to gpg complately
5602017-02-17T21:09:16 <wumpus> but it doesn't matter whether you do that or let the gpg call fail, it's the last statement in gsign, in both cases you can copy the unsigned assert file and detach-sign it yourself
5612017-02-17T21:10:28 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #9788: gitian: bump descriptors for master (master...gitian-bump-0.15) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9788
5622017-02-17T21:13:55 * gmaxwell sets the timer for the premature reddit release announcement. :P
5632017-02-17T21:14:26 <wumpus> reddit, what's that :)
5642017-02-17T21:14:53 *** Sosumi has quit IRC
5652017-02-17T21:20:46 <instagibbs> having issues with configure on rc1:
5662017-02-17T21:20:47 <instagibbs> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
5672017-02-17T21:20:54 <instagibbs> checking build system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
5682017-02-17T21:20:54 <instagibbs> checking host system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
5692017-02-17T21:20:54 <instagibbs> ./configure: line 2455: syntax error near unexpected token `no-define'
5702017-02-17T21:20:54 <instagibbs> ./configure: line 2455: `AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE(no-define subdir-objects foreign)'
5712017-02-17T21:21:22 <wumpus> instagibbs: see #bitcoin
5722017-02-17T21:21:24 <achow101> works fine for me
5732017-02-17T21:21:41 <instagibbs> wumpus, not unless it recently was removed, it's on a dev machine :P
5742017-02-17T21:21:47 <wumpus> no need to cross-post
5752017-02-17T21:22:01 <instagibbs> eh, I tried asking, got nothing, then came here
5762017-02-17T21:22:02 <instagibbs> sorry
5772017-02-17T21:28:47 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #9789: build: disallow variable length arrays (master...no-vla) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9789
5782017-02-17T21:38:00 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5792017-02-17T21:38:40 <cfields> gmaxwell: i wonder if that vla was throwing off your sanitizer. didn't you have something reported from rpc code?
5802017-02-17T21:42:08 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
5812017-02-17T21:47:13 <sipa> i'm running master as of a few hours ago, plus my sanitize fixes, on bitcoin.sipa.be, with tsan and ubsan enabled
5822017-02-17T21:53:46 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
5832017-02-17T22:05:38 <cfields> sipa: ah, nice
5842017-02-17T22:09:48 <gmaxwell> cfields: I don't know why it would.
5852017-02-17T22:12:29 *** e4xit has quit IRC
5862017-02-17T22:15:58 *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
5872017-02-17T22:34:43 *** aalex has quit IRC
5882017-02-17T22:40:34 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #9790: doc/release-notes: Various cleanups (0.14...0.14-relnotes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9790
5892017-02-17T22:43:43 *** face has quit IRC
5902017-02-17T22:48:47 *** face has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5912017-02-17T22:51:07 *** wasi has quit IRC
5922017-02-17T22:52:32 <achow101> first!
5932017-02-17T22:56:13 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5942017-02-17T23:05:31 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5952017-02-17T23:27:59 *** jl2012 has quit IRC
5962017-02-17T23:29:28 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #9791: Avoid VLA in hash.h (master...novla) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9791
5972017-02-17T23:34:56 *** goksinen has quit IRC
5982017-02-17T23:36:35 *** goksinen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5992017-02-17T23:37:05 <gmaxwell> the CLANG vs GCC VLA warning on hash.h is an example of why we should -Wvla but not error on it.
6002017-02-17T23:37:58 <sipa> gmaxwell: from investigating briefly, it seems that VLAs are standard in C99 but optional in C11. They're not specified in C++ or C++11.
6012017-02-17T23:40:50 *** goksinen has quit IRC
6022017-02-17T23:42:28 <gmaxwell> Apparently their analog is in C++14, std::dynarray and "runtime sized arrays" (exactly the same syntax as VLA but: sizeof works, and they can't be multidimensional)
6032017-02-17T23:43:01 <luke-jr> eh? sizeof works with C99 VLAs..
6042017-02-17T23:43:27 <luke-jr> or is that a GNU extension?
6052017-02-17T23:45:01 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: sorry, I wasn't clear, I was saying that it does not work in the C++14 spec.
6062017-02-17T23:45:12 <luke-jr> oh
6072017-02-17T23:46:57 * luke-jr wonders if we should remove "About Qt" from the menu. It seems (without knowing the languages) translators are interpreting "Qt" as "Bitcoin-Qt"
6082017-02-17T23:47:34 *** JackH has quit IRC
6092017-02-17T23:47:35 <sipa> luke-jr: i've noticed that too
6102017-02-17T23:48:04 <sipa> in past times, it seems "Qt" was even understood to refer to the bitcoin core program name
6112017-02-17T23:48:25 <gmaxwell> it's kind of confusing in any case. like... "information no one ever wants"
6122017-02-17T23:48:49 <luke-jr> other Qt apps used to have it, but I don't think many (if any) do anymore
6132017-02-17T23:49:04 <luke-jr> in KDE apps, it's just "About <app>" and "About KDE"
6142017-02-17T23:52:09 <achow101> I thought it was required as part of the license that Qt uses
6152017-02-17T23:52:21 <achow101> (that might be wrong info)
6162017-02-17T23:53:11 <gmaxwell> nope.