12017-07-13T00:00:56  *** dermoth has quit IRC
  22017-07-13T00:01:13  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  32017-07-13T00:02:50  *** marcoagner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  42017-07-13T00:05:12  *** treebear_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  52017-07-13T00:08:48  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  62017-07-13T00:35:57  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
  72017-07-13T00:38:47  *** corebob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82017-07-13T00:38:55  *** lucianor has quit IRC
  92017-07-13T00:39:45  *** wasi has quit IRC
 102017-07-13T00:42:00  <jtimon> random data point: as of height 475560, it takes 157.7 GB of storage (using -txindex)
 112017-07-13T00:42:09  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
 122017-07-13T00:42:39  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 132017-07-13T00:45:15  *** corebob has quit IRC
 142017-07-13T00:45:49  *** corebob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 152017-07-13T00:46:11  *** btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 162017-07-13T00:48:09  *** robotpoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 172017-07-13T00:49:15  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 182017-07-13T00:52:37  *** robotpoop has quit IRC
 192017-07-13T00:54:11  *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 202017-07-13T00:59:14  *** lucianor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 212017-07-13T00:59:31  *** abpa has quit IRC
 222017-07-13T01:03:28  *** treebeardd has quit IRC
 232017-07-13T01:06:09  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
 242017-07-13T01:10:01  *** kexkey_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 252017-07-13T01:13:05  *** kexkey has quit IRC
 262017-07-13T01:13:43  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 272017-07-13T01:19:45  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 282017-07-13T01:21:20  *** Murch has quit IRC
 292017-07-13T01:24:19  *** robotpoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 302017-07-13T01:26:04  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/479afa0f8486...e4fcbf797ed3
 312017-07-13T01:26:04  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1e3a320 practicalswift: Simplify "!foo || (foo && bar)" as "!foo || bar"
 322017-07-13T01:26:05  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e4fcbf7 Pieter Wuille: Merge #10780: Simplify "!foo || (foo && bar)" as "!foo || bar"...
 332017-07-13T01:26:36  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #10780: Simplify "!foo || (foo && bar)" as "!foo || bar" (master...redundant-condition) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10780
 342017-07-13T01:29:37  *** robotpoop has quit IRC
 352017-07-13T01:37:26  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 362017-07-13T01:42:26  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 372017-07-13T01:43:11  *** jeremyru1in is now known as jeremyrubin
 382017-07-13T01:43:19  *** ovovo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 392017-07-13T01:47:05  *** owowo has quit IRC
 402017-07-13T01:51:48  *** ivan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 412017-07-13T01:57:10  *** treebear_ has quit IRC
 422017-07-13T02:03:10  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 432017-07-13T02:03:45  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 442017-07-13T02:03:49  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 452017-07-13T02:03:57  *** kexkey_ is now known as kexkey
 462017-07-13T02:07:26  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
 472017-07-13T02:20:33  *** wasi has quit IRC
 482017-07-13T02:29:21  *** gielbier has quit IRC
 492017-07-13T02:30:29  *** joelsbeard has quit IRC
 502017-07-13T02:34:44  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 512017-07-13T02:35:35  *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 522017-07-13T02:36:17  *** treebeardd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 532017-07-13T02:42:28  *** kexkey has quit IRC
 542017-07-13T02:49:44  *** olymagu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 552017-07-13T02:53:12  *** kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 562017-07-13T02:56:45  *** olymagu has quit IRC
 572017-07-13T02:59:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
 582017-07-13T03:00:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 592017-07-13T03:17:33  *** treebeardd has quit IRC
 602017-07-13T03:19:56  *** lucianor has quit IRC
 612017-07-13T03:28:30  *** neha has quit IRC
 622017-07-13T03:42:12  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 632017-07-13T03:48:14  *** lucianor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 642017-07-13T04:07:19  *** lucianor has quit IRC
 652017-07-13T04:14:59  *** corebob has quit IRC
 662017-07-13T04:15:28  *** ovovo has quit IRC
 672017-07-13T04:19:25  *** treebeardd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 682017-07-13T04:20:01  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 692017-07-13T04:29:46  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
 702017-07-13T04:32:31  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 712017-07-13T04:50:24  *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 722017-07-13T04:54:28  *** Alan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 732017-07-13T04:54:51  *** Alan_ is now known as Guest14719
 742017-07-13T04:55:52  *** Guest14719 has quit IRC
 752017-07-13T04:58:18  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 762017-07-13T05:08:30  *** cheese_ has quit IRC
 772017-07-13T05:16:36  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 782017-07-13T05:17:38  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 792017-07-13T05:18:47  *** jamesob has quit IRC
 802017-07-13T05:20:11  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 812017-07-13T05:24:33  *** jamesob has quit IRC
 822017-07-13T05:30:11  *** ivan has quit IRC
 832017-07-13T05:48:19  *** Alan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 842017-07-13T05:48:43  *** Alan_ is now known as Guest86032
 852017-07-13T05:49:29  *** Guest86032 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 862017-07-13T05:55:07  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 872017-07-13T05:56:36  *** arowser has quit IRC
 882017-07-13T06:01:40  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 892017-07-13T06:02:20  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 902017-07-13T06:03:19  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 912017-07-13T06:05:03  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 922017-07-13T06:11:53  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 932017-07-13T06:21:34  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 942017-07-13T06:25:46  *** jamesob has quit IRC
 952017-07-13T06:38:03  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
 962017-07-13T06:41:43  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 972017-07-13T06:49:08  *** alan_baker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 982017-07-13T06:52:49  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 992017-07-13T07:04:52  *** kexkey has quit IRC
1002017-07-13T07:11:06  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012017-07-13T07:14:04  *** treebeardd has quit IRC
1022017-07-13T07:21:46  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e4fcbf797ed3...7666250ffb4e
1032017-07-13T07:21:46  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 69a4339 Lawrence Nahum: missing white space in function arg
1042017-07-13T07:21:47  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7666250 Jonas Schnelli: Merge #10810: missing white space in function arg...
1052017-07-13T07:22:09  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
1062017-07-13T07:22:21  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10810: missing white space in function arg (master...missing_white_space) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10810
1072017-07-13T07:24:57  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1082017-07-13T07:26:42  *** btcdrak has quit IRC
1092017-07-13T07:27:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10731: SanitizeString: Expand upon allowed characters in logging to include "!#%&*+=^{}~" (master...log_more_uacomment) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10731
1102017-07-13T07:28:14  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: how do we fix the current bug in Core then?
1112017-07-13T07:28:27  <luke-jr> #10731 is a bug fix for a present issue
1122017-07-13T07:28:28  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10731 | SanitizeString: Expand upon allowed characters in logging to include "!#%&*+=^{}~" by luke-jr · Pull Request #10731 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1132017-07-13T07:36:50  *** btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1142017-07-13T07:46:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli reopened pull request #10731: SanitizeString: Expand upon allowed characters in logging to include "!#%&*+=^{}~" (master...log_more_uacomment) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10731
1152017-07-13T07:50:14  *** coredump_ has quit IRC
1162017-07-13T07:50:27  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: Your description: "Current Core strips out the !, + and = characters used by Knots to indicate whether BIP148 enforcement is enabled."
1172017-07-13T07:50:50  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: Can you describe the bug more precise?
1182017-07-13T07:51:54  <jonasschnelli> I fail to see the bug in Core
1192017-07-13T07:53:00  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: 2017-07-13 07:37:02 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.14.2(BIP148)/Knots:20170618/: version 70015…
1202017-07-13T07:53:16  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: Core logs this regardless of whether it's !BIP148= or +BIP148 or !BIP148
1212017-07-13T07:53:27  <jonasschnelli> Well.. why is this a bug in core?
1222017-07-13T07:53:34  <luke-jr> because they are all valid UA characters
1232017-07-13T07:53:46  <jonasschnelli> Yes. But invalid log prints.
1242017-07-13T07:53:51  <gmaxwell> because you just say they are valid?
1252017-07-13T07:53:56  <gmaxwell> They were never printed before.
1262017-07-13T07:54:02  <luke-jr> they don't violate BIP 14
1272017-07-13T07:54:06  <jonasschnelli> It's a log...
1282017-07-13T07:54:08  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: why?
1292017-07-13T07:54:17  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: BIP 14 is not about a log file
1302017-07-13T07:54:20  <luke-jr> there's no reason logs shouldn't have those characters. most do. Core does other places.
1312017-07-13T07:54:37  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I'm happy if you fix it. But don't break the SanitizeString assumption
1322017-07-13T07:54:43  <luke-jr> there are far worse characters also allowed in SanitizeString
1332017-07-13T07:54:47  <gmaxwell> BIP14 seems to also allow \n  nul  and so on
1342017-07-13T07:54:56  <gmaxwell> IOW: bip-14 is brain damaged
1352017-07-13T07:54:58  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: those are sane to forbid
1362017-07-13T07:55:25  <luke-jr> what if SanitizeString turns ! into \! ?
1372017-07-13T07:55:31  <jonasschnelli> No
1382017-07-13T07:55:38  <jonasschnelli> It's not escaping
1392017-07-13T07:55:41  <jonasschnelli> Its sanitizing
1402017-07-13T07:55:49  <gmaxwell> Characters that will screw up shell processing and potentially lead to XSS in URL also are sane to forbid.
1412017-07-13T07:55:57  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: we already allow many of those
1422017-07-13T07:56:14  <jonasschnelli> Then make it better but not worse?
1432017-07-13T07:56:16  <gmaxwell> I am tempted to say we should change the printing to hex just as we do with other potentially malicious network input.
1442017-07-13T07:56:24  <gmaxwell> already people spam advertisements via UAs.
1452017-07-13T07:56:43  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: it's not a reasonable expectation. it's a log file, not a database query.
1462017-07-13T07:56:57  <luke-jr> what other log files forbid characters for such reasons?
1472017-07-13T07:57:03  <gmaxwell> why are we even logging these strings?
1482017-07-13T07:57:03  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: I'm fine about chaging the log print.. but not SanitizeString
1492017-07-13T07:57:22  <jonasschnelli> SanitizeString and the log file are conceptually two things.
1502017-07-13T07:57:29  <luke-jr> why is it when wumpus submits a PR doing this, it gets only ACKs and merged; yet when I do, people dig up obscure reasons to argue against it?
1512017-07-13T07:57:49  <gmaxwell> among other reasons, the privacy arguments we have for not logging IPs also applies, esp with so much diversity in stupid values people are setting in these strhings.
1522017-07-13T07:57:51  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: Can you refere to wumpus's PR?
1532017-07-13T07:58:14  <luke-jr> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/4983
1542017-07-13T07:58:40  <luke-jr> ‎[07:57:03] ‎<‎jonasschnelli‎>‎ luke-jr: I'm fine about chaging the log print.. but not SanitizeString <-- what do you mean by this?
1552017-07-13T07:59:05  <gmaxwell> I didn't ack wumpus; but as far as yours went, because you included a bunch of red-flag characters that I've personally been burned by.
1562017-07-13T07:59:15  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: () wumpus, yours: !#%&*+=^{}~
1572017-07-13T07:59:52  <gmaxwell> Again, why are we logging this in debug.log by default anyways?
1582017-07-13T07:59:59  <gmaxwell> We do not log IPs for privacy reasons.
1592017-07-13T08:00:26  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I don't know an answer to that. This issue affects the GUI as well, though.
1602017-07-13T08:00:32  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: If you think those chars should be visible in the log, maybe find a way as gmaxwell mentioned via hex-representation of some partially-invalid (they turn to hex)...
1612017-07-13T08:00:51  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I think it's a lot less of a concern in the GUI.  I think your new characters are probably okay there.
1622017-07-13T08:01:03  <jonasschnelli> GUI is isolated
1632017-07-13T08:01:08  <luke-jr> so URL escape in debug log?
1642017-07-13T08:01:10  <luke-jr> %xx
1652017-07-13T08:01:17  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: % lets you escape arbritary characters for html/urls among other things.
1662017-07-13T08:01:28  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: why not drop it from the debug log, and make the GUI more permissive?
1672017-07-13T08:01:51  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I de facto have a script parsing the debug log to analyse this
1682017-07-13T08:01:55  <gmaxwell> though I question perhaps if we really should be showing these things in the gui.. not the characters, but third party sourced strings
1692017-07-13T08:02:02  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell, luke-jr: Hm.. yes. Maybe use the urlencode for the UA-string before printing to the log?
1702017-07-13T08:02:11  <gmaxwell> UA:  DANGER YOUR WALLET HAS BEEN COMPROMISED GO TO HTTP://fixwallet.eu/ NOW
1712017-07-13T08:02:21  <luke-jr> :|
1722017-07-13T08:02:37  <jonasschnelli> I kinda agree with gmaxwell that BIP 14 is BD
1732017-07-13T08:02:53  <jonasschnelli> The original idea was also to place a donation bitcoin address there... :/
1742017-07-13T08:02:58  <sipa> gmaxwell: the .eu makes it totally legit
1752017-07-13T08:03:01  <luke-jr> lol
1762017-07-13T08:03:07  <jonasschnelli> hahaha
1772017-07-13T08:03:08  <gmaxwell> UA: OFFICIAL BITCOIN NOTICE. BITCOIN HAS BEEN REPLACED BY ULTRACOIN BUY REPLACEMENT COINS AT BITCOIN.COM NOW
1782017-07-13T08:03:43  <gmaxwell> I mean this is why we don't try to do any fancy decoding of data stuffed in transactions either... :)
1792017-07-13T08:04:11  <sipa> let's print the hash of the UA; we do that for almost all data already anyway
1802017-07-13T08:04:14  <gmaxwell> similar risks exist in logs.
1812017-07-13T08:04:17  <luke-jr> I thought that was to discourage fancy encoding <.<
1822017-07-13T08:04:47  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: well advertisments in UA is also bad (which some people have been doing)
1832017-07-13T08:05:04  <gmaxwell> sipa: we display hex of many things too.
1842017-07-13T08:05:17  <gmaxwell> hex can be decoded but it's not going to trick anyone.
1852017-07-13T08:05:18  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: that's not clear to me. how is it bad?
1862017-07-13T08:05:31  *** Maxime2 has quit IRC
1872017-07-13T08:05:40  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: spin up lots of sybil nodes just to get people to see DRINK MORE OVALTINE.
1882017-07-13T08:05:48  <luke-jr> hmm
1892017-07-13T08:05:55  *** Lisandro2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1902017-07-13T08:05:59  <luke-jr> but people *don't* see it that much
1912017-07-13T08:06:10  <luke-jr> if they do, it's more often than not a website that doesn't care what we do here
1922017-07-13T08:06:22  <gmaxwell> (and god forbid people use the malicious messages like I suggested above, which they'd see in optimally bad situations: when they're wondering if their node is working right)
1932017-07-13T08:06:37  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: yea, thats those websites problems (actually a lot of them filter that stuff)
1942017-07-13T08:07:26  <luke-jr> should I make SanitizeString do the %xx escaping, or have a new function for this?
1952017-07-13T08:07:33  <gmaxwell> FWIW I protested the UAs to begin with. Just for the record. :P
1962017-07-13T08:08:29  <gmaxwell> nothing good ever comes from strings in protocols.
1972017-07-13T08:09:28  <luke-jr> I know a protocol that uses strings for commands
1982017-07-13T08:09:34  <gmaxwell> as far as url escaping the logs, that solves some problems not others... e.g. I think it doesn't make them necessarily safe for shell processing.
1992017-07-13T08:09:34  <luke-jr> … sortof XD
2002017-07-13T08:09:55  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: ?
2012017-07-13T08:10:09  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2022017-07-13T08:10:30  <gmaxwell> or maybe it does. gah, part of my complaint is that these sorts of changes aren't worth the security review time.
2032017-07-13T08:10:33  *** rockhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042017-07-13T08:11:35  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: re wladimir adding ( and ) in 2014: at least those characters are specifically named in the BIP.
2052017-07-13T08:11:59  <gmaxwell> (they are also not ones that I've personally ever had bite me in data, I think)
2062017-07-13T08:12:19  <gmaxwell> where ! %  very much have.
2072017-07-13T08:13:29  <gmaxwell> Lets only allow the characters BIP14 specifically mentions. :P
2082017-07-13T08:13:51  <sipa> jonasschnelli: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10810#issuecomment-314993972 ?
2092017-07-13T08:14:00  <sipa> you're agreeing with a NACK, and then proceed to merge it?
2102017-07-13T08:14:15  <jonasschnelli> sipa: Yes
2112017-07-13T08:14:16  <sipa> (i have little opinion either way, just trying to follow what's happening)
2122017-07-13T08:14:29  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: also, FWIW, I can promise it wasn't because it was you that I protested... I was into writing my opposition before noticing it was you that was pring it.
2132017-07-13T08:14:52  <jonasschnelli> sipa: The best way to stop such PR is to merge them quickly. We can't close them.
2142017-07-13T08:15:00  <sipa> why not?
2152017-07-13T08:15:22  <jonasschnelli> Trolling and because it's an improvement (the space was missing there).
2162017-07-13T08:15:32  <jonasschnelli> Closing because it may slow us down is somehow weak?
2172017-07-13T08:15:44  <jonasschnelli> A quick merge seems to be the best path forward
2182017-07-13T08:15:53  <jonasschnelli> "get it out of the way" style
2192017-07-13T08:18:12  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2202017-07-13T08:18:13  <gmaxwell> lets hope it didn't conflict any other PRs and cause needed rebasing.
2212017-07-13T08:22:31  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: I checked that and it shouldn't
2222017-07-13T08:22:49  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2232017-07-13T08:22:53  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242017-07-13T08:23:18  <jonasschnelli> Maybe that something we can discuss in todays meeting. These typo-fix/add-spaced PRs need a clear strategy how to avoid them in the long run.
2252017-07-13T08:23:24  <jonasschnelli> Maybe the quick merge is not ideal then
2262017-07-13T08:24:01  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2272017-07-13T08:24:17  <jonasschnelli> But if we want to close them (not merge them), then we should have a quick part in the PR guidlines
2282017-07-13T08:24:49  <sipa> > Do not submit patches solely to modify the style of existing code.
2292017-07-13T08:25:08  <sipa> -- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/developer-notes.md#developer-notes
2302017-07-13T08:26:49  <jonasschnelli> Oh... I should read more.
2312017-07-13T08:27:28  *** jamesob has quit IRC
2322017-07-13T08:27:35  <jonasschnelli> What about typo fixes?
2332017-07-13T08:28:16  <jonasschnelli> So yes. My quick merge was wrong.
2342017-07-13T08:28:46  <luke-jr> does #10731 look acceptable now?
2352017-07-13T08:28:47  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10731 | Escape rather than remove any printable characters in UAs by luke-jr · Pull Request #10731 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2362017-07-13T08:32:21  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: looks good. But I guess the PR description could be a bit better (going to be in git history)
2372017-07-13T08:33:54  <luke-jr> done
2382017-07-13T08:35:23  <luke-jr> insofar as UA phishing, how hard would it be to add a red exclamation mark icon next to the UA string with a tooltip warning the user it's not to be trusted?
2392017-07-13T08:35:51  <luke-jr> (otoh, maybe that would make the problem worse?)
2402017-07-13T08:38:01  *** Lisandro2 has quit IRC
2412017-07-13T08:44:58  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2422017-07-13T08:46:08  *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
2432017-07-13T08:47:15  *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2442017-07-13T09:02:35  *** henrik_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2452017-07-13T09:07:19  *** promag has quit IRC
2462017-07-13T09:25:37  *** Raymundo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472017-07-13T09:32:48  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482017-07-13T09:39:09  *** alan_baker has quit IRC
2492017-07-13T09:40:38  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
2502017-07-13T09:40:50  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512017-07-13T09:47:51  *** Lauda has quit IRC
2522017-07-13T09:55:49  *** henrik_ has quit IRC
2532017-07-13T10:00:22  *** BashCo has quit IRC
2542017-07-13T10:01:01  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552017-07-13T10:16:35  *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562017-07-13T10:18:41  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
2572017-07-13T10:19:00  *** justan0theruser has quit IRC
2582017-07-13T10:19:40  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592017-07-13T10:24:11  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602017-07-13T10:28:49  *** jamesob has quit IRC
2612017-07-13T10:34:37  *** JackH has quit IRC
2622017-07-13T10:34:57  *** coredump_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2632017-07-13T10:53:09  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2642017-07-13T11:10:35  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
2652017-07-13T11:11:13  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2662017-07-13T11:25:31  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2672017-07-13T11:28:38  *** coredump_ has quit IRC
2682017-07-13T11:30:21  *** jamesob has quit IRC
2692017-07-13T11:33:11  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
2702017-07-13T11:39:33  *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2712017-07-13T11:46:58  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2722017-07-13T11:48:10  *** promag has quit IRC
2732017-07-13T11:57:18  *** coredump_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742017-07-13T12:12:30  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
2752017-07-13T12:26:32  <jonasschnelli> ryanofsky: I like your def __idiv__(self, relative_uri): approach
2762017-07-13T12:26:40  <jonasschnelli> Can you help me how I have to do this?
2772017-07-13T12:27:58  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2782017-07-13T12:29:39  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
2792017-07-13T12:31:00  *** clarkmoody has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802017-07-13T12:41:38  *** deep-book-gk_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2812017-07-13T12:42:08  *** coredump_ has quit IRC
2822017-07-13T12:43:41  *** deep-book-gk_ has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2832017-07-13T12:49:32  *** lucianor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2842017-07-13T12:56:20  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2852017-07-13T12:58:58  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
2862017-07-13T12:59:24  *** Guyver2__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2872017-07-13T12:59:26  *** Guyver2__ is now known as Guyver2
2882017-07-13T13:01:53  *** Guyver2_ has quit IRC
2892017-07-13T13:05:36  *** davec has quit IRC
2902017-07-13T13:06:10  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2912017-07-13T13:08:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ReneNyffenegger opened pull request #10814: Change type of op to agree with type of MAX_OPCODE. (master...MAX_OPCODE) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10814
2922017-07-13T13:13:02  *** murchandamus has quit IRC
2932017-07-13T13:13:10  *** davec has quit IRC
2942017-07-13T13:13:27  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2952017-07-13T13:13:53  <ryanofsky> jonasschnelli, does suggested code in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10650#discussion_r123484826 not work?
2962017-07-13T13:14:15  *** murchandamus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2972017-07-13T13:14:37  <ryanofsky> maybe it needs /v1/ string added
2982017-07-13T13:14:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #10814: Change type of op to agree with type of MAX_OPCODE. (master...MAX_OPCODE) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10814
2992017-07-13T13:18:34  <ryanofsky> actually should probably be __truediv__ not idiv: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/datamodel.html?highlight=truediv#object.__truediv__
3002017-07-13T13:20:58  *** davec has quit IRC
3012017-07-13T13:22:02  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3022017-07-13T13:26:47  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3032017-07-13T13:26:49  *** davec has quit IRC
3042017-07-13T13:30:25  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3052017-07-13T13:31:16  *** jamesob has quit IRC
3062017-07-13T13:32:37  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3072017-07-13T13:41:54  <jnewbery> jonasschnelli: what's the current status with 10814? Are you expecting to rebase/address feedback today?
3082017-07-13T13:42:54  <jnewbery> sorry, not 10814, 10650
3092017-07-13T13:43:05  <jnewbery> #10650
3102017-07-13T13:43:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10650 | Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10650 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3112017-07-13T13:46:15  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery, ryanofsky: working on a rebase of 10650 with add points adressed
3122017-07-13T13:46:43  <jonasschnelli> But git history is somehow fucked up... will fix soon
3132017-07-13T13:46:59  <jonasschnelli> So I pushed the just rebased version now
3142017-07-13T13:47:18  <jonasschnelli> Because the fixed has a strange history.. will fix soon
3152017-07-13T13:47:34  <jnewbery> anything I can do to help?
3162017-07-13T13:49:06  *** cheese_ has quit IRC
3172017-07-13T13:50:15  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery: no all good.
3182017-07-13T13:52:22  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3192017-07-13T13:54:58  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3202017-07-13T13:55:06  *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
3212017-07-13T13:56:06  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3222017-07-13T14:01:27  <instagibbs> morcos, displaying wallet name is still useful in case you have multiple wallets in same datadir and you've forgotten which one you loaded :)
3232017-07-13T14:01:46  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3242017-07-13T14:01:58  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3252017-07-13T14:01:58  *** BashCo has quit IRC
3262017-07-13T14:02:11  <jonasschnelli> instagibbs you mean in getwalletinfo?
3272017-07-13T14:02:32  <instagibbs> yeah
3282017-07-13T14:02:34  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3292017-07-13T14:02:55  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I think it's a must for getwalletinfo
3302017-07-13T14:03:05  <jonasschnelli> Its how users can be sure they interacting with the right wallet
3312017-07-13T14:03:07  <instagibbs> squinting at the hd key is the way I distinguish now
3322017-07-13T14:03:22  <jonasschnelli> yeah. that works too
3332017-07-13T14:05:30  <morcos> instagibbs: heh, i was joking about the listwallets feature.. but hopefully 10650 makes it!
3342017-07-13T14:06:17  <morcos> it lookes like #10706 could use one more ack, but it's close.  #10707 is then 2 simple commits on top of that.  But I'd like opinon on the second commit
3352017-07-13T14:06:19  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10706 | Improve wallet fee logic and fix GUI bugs by morcos · Pull Request #10706 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3362017-07-13T14:06:20  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10707 | Better API for estimatesmartfee RPC by morcos · Pull Request #10707 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3372017-07-13T14:06:27  <morcos> See this comment: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10707#issuecomment-314869251
3382017-07-13T14:06:48  <morcos> All this needs to go in before string freeze
3392017-07-13T14:11:10  *** promag has quit IRC
3402017-07-13T14:14:17  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery or ryanofsky
3412017-07-13T14:14:36  <jonasschnelli> i could not get that authproxy endoint thing running
3422017-07-13T14:14:59  <jonasschnelli> I guess python doesnt like me...
3432017-07-13T14:15:15  <jonasschnelli> Anyone of you willing to provide a commit for 10650?
3442017-07-13T14:16:46  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3452017-07-13T14:20:11  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3462017-07-13T14:21:31  <jnewbery> jonasschnelli: I'll give it a go now
3472017-07-13T14:21:47  <jonasschnelli> perfect. thanks
3482017-07-13T14:31:36  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
3492017-07-13T14:44:11  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3502017-07-13T14:44:32  *** juscamarena_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3512017-07-13T14:44:49  *** Guest97515 has quit IRC
3522017-07-13T14:45:10  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3532017-07-13T14:45:48  <jnewbery> I've got authproxy working and written a test, but any requests to /v1/wallet/<wallet> get 404s
3542017-07-13T14:46:00  <jnewbery> I think because RegisterJSONEndpoint() isn't called anywhere?
3552017-07-13T14:46:12  <jnewbery> jonasschnelli ^
3562017-07-13T14:46:18  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3572017-07-13T14:46:25  *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
3582017-07-13T14:49:31  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3592017-07-13T14:49:32  *** juscamarena_ has quit IRC
3602017-07-13T14:50:58  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3612017-07-13T14:51:04  *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
3622017-07-13T14:53:01  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
3632017-07-13T14:54:41  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3642017-07-13T14:55:13  <jnewbery> ok, here you go: https://github.com/jnewbery/bitcoin/tree/multiwallet_test2
3652017-07-13T14:55:58  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery: Yes. The PR is currently not working
3662017-07-13T14:56:51  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery: which commit is relevant? I'd like to cherry pick (and keep you as the author)
3672017-07-13T14:57:02  <jnewbery> that is (your PR #10650) MINUS (the authproxy commit) PLUS (my PR #10604 rebased on top) PLUS (ryanofsky's suggested authproxy change) PLUS (a functional test for multiwallet endpoints) PLUS (a hack in httprpc.cpp to get the test to pass)
3682017-07-13T14:57:04  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10650 | Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10650 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3692017-07-13T14:57:09  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10604 | [wallet] [tests] Add listwallets RPC, include wallet name in `getwalletinfo` and add multiwallet test by jnewbery · Pull Request #10604 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3702017-07-13T14:57:20  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3712017-07-13T14:57:41  <jnewbery> 4597818... is the authproxy commit
3722017-07-13T14:58:06  *** riemann has quit IRC
3732017-07-13T14:59:03  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery: Ah.. is was looking for that one: https://github.com/jnewbery/bitcoin/commit/4597818e43900dc07271773f544f47d1da6d635c
3742017-07-13T14:59:08  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3752017-07-13T14:59:27  <jonasschnelli> Thanks.. will finish 10650 soon. best to do hand off for now (until I'll comment its rebased)
3762017-07-13T14:59:34  <jonasschnelli> *hands
3772017-07-13T15:00:43  *** Guyver2__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3782017-07-13T15:00:45  *** Guyver2__ is now known as Guyver2
3792017-07-13T15:02:08  <jnewbery> ok, ping me if you need anything else. It'd be great to get this ready for final review/merge before the meeting
3802017-07-13T15:03:13  *** Guyver2_ has quit IRC
3812017-07-13T15:03:45  *** juscamarena_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3822017-07-13T15:10:07  *** jnewbery1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3832017-07-13T15:14:18  *** treebeardd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3842017-07-13T15:14:24  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3852017-07-13T15:17:13  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3862017-07-13T15:17:19  *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
3872017-07-13T15:28:03  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3882017-07-13T15:32:28  *** jamesob has quit IRC
3892017-07-13T15:32:57  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
3902017-07-13T15:33:27  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3912017-07-13T15:33:56  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
3922017-07-13T15:41:47  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery with your AuthProxy thing I get also a 404
3932017-07-13T15:42:00  <jonasschnelli> But bitcoin-cli works.. so the endpoint must be registered
3942017-07-13T15:43:16  <jnewbery> can you push your latest branch and I'll test?
3952017-07-13T15:43:51  <jnewbery> suggest you tcpdump and compare the requests from bitcoin-cli and authproxy
3962017-07-13T15:44:21  <jonasschnelli> ah.. found!
3972017-07-13T15:44:21  <jonasschnelli> path='//v1/wallet/w0/'
3982017-07-13T15:45:06  <jonasschnelli> it should be AuthServiceProxy("{}{}" (for the __truediff__ op)
3992017-07-13T15:45:25  *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4002017-07-13T15:45:36  *** ivan- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4012017-07-13T15:46:24  *** ivan- is now known as ivan
4022017-07-13T15:47:27  <ryanofsky> shouldn't you just write / "path" instead of / "/path"?
4032017-07-13T15:48:10  <jnewbery> ryanofsky: right. That's what's in the test I provided https://github.com/jnewbery/bitcoin/commit/53be2f334979f2cd979554fe81c4837ad02328cd
4042017-07-13T15:48:23  <jnewbery> doesn't matter either way, as long as you're consistent
4052017-07-13T15:48:25  *** Murch has quit IRC
4062017-07-13T15:48:27  *** lucianor_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4072017-07-13T15:50:35  <ryanofsky> / "path" is more consistent with python path api
4082017-07-13T15:51:31  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4092017-07-13T15:52:33  *** lucianor has quit IRC
4102017-07-13T15:59:00  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery, ryanofsky: I just pushed the new version.. now its ready for a review
4112017-07-13T15:59:12  *** instagibbs has quit IRC
4122017-07-13T15:59:57  <jonasschnelli> I think usually its better to wait for a 2nd rebase until the author said its overhauled... :)
4132017-07-13T16:00:09  <jonasschnelli> But I guess Github sends those code-push mails.
4142017-07-13T16:00:57  *** promag has quit IRC
4152017-07-13T16:01:39  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4162017-07-13T16:02:43  *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
4172017-07-13T16:05:34  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4182017-07-13T16:16:46  *** cheese_ has quit IRC
4192017-07-13T16:17:59  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4202017-07-13T16:20:05  *** lucianor_ has quit IRC
4212017-07-13T16:26:48  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4222017-07-13T16:29:25  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4232017-07-13T16:33:35  *** jamesob has quit IRC
4242017-07-13T16:39:13  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4252017-07-13T16:48:41  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
4262017-07-13T16:50:52  *** Raymundo has quit IRC
4272017-07-13T16:51:24  *** Ricky2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4282017-07-13T16:52:52  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
4292017-07-13T16:54:28  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4302017-07-13T17:01:01  *** Murch has quit IRC
4312017-07-13T17:01:17  *** timothy has quit IRC
4322017-07-13T17:06:36  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4332017-07-13T17:15:01  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4342017-07-13T17:19:28  *** owowo has quit IRC
4352017-07-13T17:25:45  <morcos> Can someone please remove 0.15 milestone from: #8501 and #10418  and add 0.15 milestone to: #10815
4362017-07-13T17:25:47  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8501 | Add mempool statistics collector by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #8501 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4372017-07-13T17:25:48  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10418 | Need fee estimation migration for 0.15 · Issue #10418 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4382017-07-13T17:25:49  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10815 | bitcoin-qt core dumps when bitcoin(d/-qt) is already running · Issue #10815 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4392017-07-13T17:26:21  <morcos> Actually 10418 can just be closed, although it should be addressed in the release notes
4402017-07-13T17:27:24  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
4412017-07-13T17:31:42  *** lucianor_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4422017-07-13T17:33:19  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4432017-07-13T17:40:45  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4442017-07-13T17:43:40  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4452017-07-13T17:45:21  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4462017-07-13T17:46:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4472017-07-13T17:54:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] morcos opened pull request #10816: Properly forbid -salvagewallet and -zapwallettxes for multi wallet. (master...multiwallet_parameters) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10816
4482017-07-13T17:54:52  *** chjj has quit IRC
4492017-07-13T18:02:14  *** BashCo has quit IRC
4502017-07-13T18:02:51  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4512017-07-13T18:03:40  <wumpus> 10815 is crazy, when did that start to happen? I'm sure it was ok on 0.14 :/
4522017-07-13T18:04:57  <wumpus> we really need tests for the init sequence, it's too easy to mess it up
4532017-07-13T18:06:49  <morcos> wumpus: i don't know.. i've been noticing for a while now that occasionally i don't seem to be able to get RPC credentials..  what causes that aspect of the problem?
4542017-07-13T18:06:54  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4552017-07-13T18:07:03  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4562017-07-13T18:07:11  <morcos> don't know if those other cases were related to this problem, its kind of easy to miss the core dumps when you expect it to not start properly anyway
4572017-07-13T18:08:14  *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4582017-07-13T18:09:05  *** owowo has quit IRC
4592017-07-13T18:09:45  <morcos> by the way, general request for anyone who has open PR's please check whether your 0.15 milestone status is correct or not.  would be nice to focus on the right things and make sure we don't miss anything important.
4602017-07-13T18:12:11  *** abpa has quit IRC
4612017-07-13T18:13:50  <wumpus> well if it continues after not being able to lock the data directory it could do all kinds of things, such as deleting files that are used by the running instance
4622017-07-13T18:14:30  <sipa> it seems 0.15 will use around 1.4x less CPU for validation than 0.14.2 (with infinite dbcache, before assumevalid point)
4632017-07-13T18:14:40  <wumpus> great!
4642017-07-13T18:15:40  <sipa> and at the tip, it's probably even more due to tx validation cache
4652017-07-13T18:18:08  <sipa> wumpus: the whole type punning thing is complicated
4662017-07-13T18:18:13  <morcos> negative CPU usage sounds awesome!
4672017-07-13T18:18:24  <sipa> morcos: haha
4682017-07-13T18:18:35  <wumpus> sipa: I'm sometimes thinking about giving up on C++ completely, I really can't keep up anymore
4692017-07-13T18:19:00  <sipa> wumpus: in C11, type punning through a union is officially supported, and it's ambiguous in C99
4702017-07-13T18:19:12  <sipa> but in C++, there seems to be nothing in the standard to indicate that it is legal
4712017-07-13T18:19:24  <wumpus> everyone uses it though, we were all told to use it, after punning through a pointer was no longer allowed
4722017-07-13T18:19:29  <wumpus> now this is no longer allowed either?
4732017-07-13T18:19:30  <sipa> however, it's been supported in actual compilers since forever
4742017-07-13T18:19:55  <sipa> it was never allowed by standards, but in practice everyone used it, so compilers support it
4752017-07-13T18:20:15  <wumpus> so is this a question of language lawyering or a practical problem?
4762017-07-13T18:20:34  <sipa> in this PR, it's purely theoretical... i gave 3 reasons why it's not a problem :)
4772017-07-13T18:20:45  <wumpus> if everything supports it in practice and all code out there uses something, then it's very hard to argue avoiding it
4782017-07-13T18:21:06  <morcos> #10235 should be milestoned 0.15 but is ready for merge
4792017-07-13T18:21:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10235 | Track keypool entries as internal vs external in memory by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #10235 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4802017-07-13T18:21:32  <wumpus> unless there is an official way of doing it, of course, which is better, then we should move to that, but it's tiring
4812017-07-13T18:21:44  <wumpus> there's always something that is UB lately
4822017-07-13T18:21:49  <wumpus> c++ sucks
4832017-07-13T18:21:55  <sipa> wumpus: yes, you're always allowed to access a type's byte representation through a char pointer
4842017-07-13T18:22:12  <wumpus> but we don't want to access the type's byte representation
4852017-07-13T18:22:42  <wumpus> it was to initialize a pointer in a structure
4862017-07-13T18:22:55  <sipa> yes, but the wrong one :)
4872017-07-13T18:22:57  <wumpus> or do you want to use offset_of and clear the byte range?
4882017-07-13T18:23:22  <sipa> the compiler _incorrectly_ thinks that the indirect pointer may be used uninitialized
4892017-07-13T18:23:53  <sipa> this is not possible, the size field is used as a union tag
4902017-07-13T18:24:09  <wumpus> morcos: the problem in 10815 is that it does a shutdown, even though the init didn't complete
4912017-07-13T18:24:12  <sipa> we're trying to silence it by initializing that pointer, even though the other union field is the only one that's being used
4922017-07-13T18:24:26  <wumpus> morcos: so it shuts down the HTTP server, which deletes your authentication cookie etc, even though it was never started
4932017-07-13T18:24:41  <wumpus> sipa: bleh
4942017-07-13T18:25:27  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4952017-07-13T18:25:34  <sipa> wumpus: forget i brought it up; there are plenty of reasons why it should be fine
4962017-07-13T18:25:37  <morcos> wumpus: and what causes core dump?
4972017-07-13T18:26:04  <wumpus> morcos:  g_signals.m_internals->BlockChecked.disconnect(boost::bind(&CValidationInterface::BlockChecked, pwalletIn, _1, _2));
4982017-07-13T18:26:11  <morcos> 10799 can be tagged 0.15 too
4992017-07-13T18:26:22  <wumpus> morcos: probably disconnecting something that was never connected in the first place
5002017-07-13T18:26:40  <morcos> hmm.. that sucks
5012017-07-13T18:28:11  <morcos> while i have you, can i have your opinion on another RPC agument name change issue, this time all messed up solely by me:   https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10707#issuecomment-314869251
5022017-07-13T18:28:43  <morcos> i don't want to miss string freeze, so just want to be sure we all agree on what the final API should look like so i can make sure commits are updated
5032017-07-13T18:29:18  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5042017-07-13T18:30:41  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5052017-07-13T18:30:45  <wumpus> morcos: sure, it's good to use a consistent name over multiple calls, if it is used for the same thing
5062017-07-13T18:30:57  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5072017-07-13T18:31:15  <wumpus> and if it hasn't been in any release it's ok to change it
5082017-07-13T18:31:25  <morcos> yep only issue is the only one in stable release is using the wrong convention confTarget instead of conf_target.   make all the new ones wrong, or just allow that old one to stick around unchanged.
5092017-07-13T18:31:27  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
5102017-07-13T18:31:34  <wumpus> also the string freeze doesn't apply to RPC help or api, because it's not translated
5112017-07-13T18:31:42  *** Lauda has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5122017-07-13T18:31:46  <wumpus> it's just for GUI messages _(...) and tr(...)
5132017-07-13T18:32:03  <morcos> nblocks has been in release, but already changing estimatesmartfee anyway based on the unstable warning
5142017-07-13T18:32:06  <morcos> oh...
5152017-07-13T18:32:17  <morcos> whew, ok
5162017-07-13T18:32:19  <cfields> sipa: why not use aggregate initialization: prevector() : _size(0), _union{{}}
5172017-07-13T18:32:24  <cfields> or give the union a ctor?
5182017-07-13T18:32:45  <luke-jr> yeah, string freeze is to give translators time ;)
5192017-07-13T18:32:59  <sipa> cfields: oh?
5202017-07-13T18:33:42  <sipa> cfields: which field of the union does that initialize?
5212017-07-13T18:33:50  <cfields> sipa: the first
5222017-07-13T18:34:34  <sipa> cfields: go comment on the PR
5232017-07-13T18:35:13  <luke-jr> unions can have a ctor? :o
5242017-07-13T18:35:14  *** jamesob has quit IRC
5252017-07-13T18:35:50  <sipa> luke-jr: yup, and other methods
5262017-07-13T18:35:57  <sipa> (but not virtual ones)
5272017-07-13T18:35:59  <cfields> sipa: sure. I'm not seeing the warning without the change, though.
5282017-07-13T18:36:07  <sipa> cfields: neither do it
5292017-07-13T18:36:08  <sipa> *do i
5302017-07-13T18:47:55  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
5312017-07-13T18:48:08  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
5322017-07-13T18:48:45  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] morcos opened pull request #10817: Add a discard_rate to avoid small change (master...discardmore) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10817
5332017-07-13T18:49:16  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5342017-07-13T18:49:20  <morcos> gmaxwell: ^ probably too late, but was waiting on my other PR's to move forward, its still depending on 10706
5352017-07-13T18:51:21  *** dom_king has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5362017-07-13T18:53:09  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5372017-07-13T18:53:30  *** EBM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5382017-07-13T18:57:45  *** LFiuza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5392017-07-13T18:58:19  *** V3110C3T has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5402017-07-13T18:58:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #10818: init: Keep track of whether data directory locked, don't cleanup if not (master...2017_05_locked_datadir) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10818
5412017-07-13T18:59:40  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
5422017-07-13T19:00:11  <luke-jr> It is time.
5432017-07-13T19:00:25  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5442017-07-13T19:00:59  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5452017-07-13T19:01:01  <gmaxwell> Neat: luke-jr found a way to abuse the coinbase api to create a sybil resistant poll based on coinbases' KYC process: https://luke.dashjr.org/programs/kycpoll/answers.php
5462017-07-13T19:01:13  *** lupape has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5472017-07-13T19:01:19  <petertodd> gmaxwell: nice
5482017-07-13T19:01:28  <achow101> meeting?
5492017-07-13T19:01:34  <gmaxwell> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr btcdrak sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier
5502017-07-13T19:01:37  <instagibbs> hi
5512017-07-13T19:01:40  <wumpus> #startmeeting
5522017-07-13T19:01:40  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Jul 13 19:01:40 2017 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
5532017-07-13T19:01:40  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
5542017-07-13T19:01:40  <jonasschnelli> Hi
5552017-07-13T19:01:41  <morcos> i'm here for 30 mins
5562017-07-13T19:01:43  *** V3110C3T has quit IRC
5572017-07-13T19:01:44  <petertodd> hi
5582017-07-13T19:01:51  <luke-jr> I'm here until I pass out <.<
5592017-07-13T19:01:59  <jtimon> hi
5602017-07-13T19:02:03  <wumpus> proposed topics?
5612017-07-13T19:02:03  <paveljanik> hi
5622017-07-13T19:02:19  <achow101> possible topic: 0.15 feature freeze
5632017-07-13T19:02:31  <achow101> it's soon, july 16th
5642017-07-13T19:02:39  <cfields> hi
5652017-07-13T19:02:43  <jtimon> review begging as first topic ?
5662017-07-13T19:02:48  <wumpus> PSA: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9961, feature freeze is sunday (which is an awful day, it'll probably be monday in practice)
5672017-07-13T19:03:19  <wumpus> #topic high priority for review
5682017-07-13T19:03:25  <wumpus> #link https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
5692017-07-13T19:03:32  <achow101> everything marked as 0.15?
5702017-07-13T19:03:36  <achow101> :p
5712017-07-13T19:03:50  <luke-jr> we can delay the feature freeze to July 16th, 2018 to avoid a Sunday
5722017-07-13T19:04:00  <kanzure> hi.
5732017-07-13T19:04:11  <morcos> #10711 can be removed from high-priority as its not for 0.15
5742017-07-13T19:04:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10711 | [tests] Introduce TestNode by jnewbery · Pull Request #10711 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5752017-07-13T19:04:31  <wumpus> agree with that jnewbery?
5762017-07-13T19:04:38  <morcos> Please add #10706 to high priority i guess, since the PR's it was depending on were merged
5772017-07-13T19:04:40  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10706 | Improve wallet fee logic and fix GUI bugs by morcos · Pull Request #10706 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5782017-07-13T19:04:45  <morcos> i think i asked him, but he stepped away
5792017-07-13T19:04:56  <jonasschnelli> I'm removing the 0.15 milestone from #10240 (will def. not make it)
5802017-07-13T19:04:59  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10240 | Add HD wallet auto-restore functionality by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10240 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5812017-07-13T19:05:04  <sipa> jonasschnelli: no
5822017-07-13T19:05:07  <jtimon> since it seems #8498 cannot be priority for some reason that scapes me, what about #10757 from me ?
5832017-07-13T19:05:09  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8498 | Near-Bugfix: Optimization: Minimize the number of times it is checked that no money... by jtimon · Pull Request #8498 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5842017-07-13T19:05:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10757 | RPC: Introduce getblockstats to plot things by jtimon · Pull Request #10757 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5852017-07-13T19:05:15  <jonasschnelli> sipa: you want that in?
5862017-07-13T19:05:19  *** treebeardd has quit IRC
5872017-07-13T19:05:21  <sipa> jonasschnelli: if we remove that from 0.15, we must revert the hd split
5882017-07-13T19:05:28  <wumpus> I tend to agree with achow101 - it's better to use the 0.15 tag now for high priority for review
5892017-07-13T19:05:36  <instagibbs> sipa, ?
5902017-07-13T19:05:41  <jonasschnelli> proposed topic then: Hd split / hd restore
5912017-07-13T19:05:46  <cfields> #9566 can be removed from 0.15
5922017-07-13T19:05:48  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9566 | threading: use std::chrono for timestamps by theuni · Pull Request #9566 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5932017-07-13T19:05:51  <morcos> wumpus: i think its still helpful to distinguish between hope for 0.15 and really need
5942017-07-13T19:06:00  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/25
5952017-07-13T19:06:20  <gmaxwell> I think if we do not fix the restore we need to disable HD by default. The current situation can pretty easily lead to funds loss.
5962017-07-13T19:06:24  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
5972017-07-13T19:06:31  <morcos> but yes i also agree we need to clean up the 0.15 milestone list
5982017-07-13T19:06:41  *** ivan has quit IRC
5992017-07-13T19:06:41  <wumpus> cfields: bumped to 0.16
6002017-07-13T19:06:50  <cfields> thanks
6012017-07-13T19:06:51  *** V3110C3T has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6022017-07-13T19:06:58  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: that would be very confusing to users, since older versions have HD
6032017-07-13T19:07:00  <jnewbery> wumpus: yess please remove 10711
6042017-07-13T19:07:03  *** GM_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6052017-07-13T19:07:11  <jonasschnelli> I can work on the HD restrore. But It's pretty complex with pruning / encrypted wallets... the PR is already large and will get bigger...
6062017-07-13T19:07:21  <jonasschnelli> If there is enough review power, we can try for 0.15
6072017-07-13T19:07:28  <gmaxwell> E.g. just pick up a walled you'd previously saved, rescan won't move the keypool forward, and you'll end up missing transactions (then discarding wallets with money), and handing out addresses to people you already gave to other people and misattributing payments.
6082017-07-13T19:07:28  <jonasschnelli> I can have it overhauled by tuesday
6092017-07-13T19:07:39  <wumpus> jnewbery: done
6102017-07-13T19:07:51  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: Yeah.. is also true for all other wallets with gap limits of 5 (most do)
6112017-07-13T19:07:59  <jonasschnelli> We should def. do better
6122017-07-13T19:08:00  <luke-jr> can just the wallet-format-touching parts of HD restore be prioritised? eg, move out the actual restoring logic?
6132017-07-13T19:08:22  <sipa> jonasschnelli: this is not true for anything that automatically tops up the keypool
6142017-07-13T19:08:28  <jonasschnelli> What about just provide HD restore for non-pruning (to reduce the size)?
6152017-07-13T19:08:43  <jtimon> mhm, only #10652 in project 8...
6162017-07-13T19:08:45  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10652 | Small step towards demangling cs_main from CNodeState by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #10652 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6172017-07-13T19:09:06  <jonasschnelli> sipa: most HD wallets in the wilde stop topping the window futher up if a gap of >5< keys where found
6182017-07-13T19:09:15  <sipa> jonasschnelli: yes
6192017-07-13T19:09:19  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: to that extent that thats true at least in other cases those wallets behaviors are well documented and the interfaces is built around them, they're also used almost exclusively for personal use, rather than industrial use... (and it's not completely true because if there isn't a long gap they do handling it right and we do not)
6202017-07-13T19:09:20  <sipa> jonasschnelli: but we don't top up at all
6212017-07-13T19:09:27  *** V3110C3T has quit IRC
6222017-07-13T19:09:39  <jonasschnelli> sipa: Yes. Not saying that is better. :)
6232017-07-13T19:09:47  <sipa> jonasschnelli: and hd split makes it worse, because it risks reusing a key that was previously used as change as a payment address
6242017-07-13T19:09:50  <jonasschnelli> I just wanted to re-state the HD restore in general is a broken thing
6252017-07-13T19:09:53  <sipa> making you miss it as incoming payment
6262017-07-13T19:09:59  <jonasschnelli> So what should we do?
6272017-07-13T19:10:02  <sipa> fix it
6282017-07-13T19:10:09  <sipa> #10240 is a bug fix
6292017-07-13T19:10:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10240 | Add HD wallet auto-restore functionality by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10240 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6302017-07-13T19:10:14  <jonasschnelli> Agree
6312017-07-13T19:10:19  <jonasschnelli> Okay. Then we have more time.. :)
6322017-07-13T19:10:54  <gmaxwell> Right now this is responsible for several serious bugs in our behavior, which regressed vs the past, and will predictable result in funds loss through several different vectors.  I don't see an easy workaround to prevent exposure-- I thought perhaps refusing to load a wallet if the tip doesn't match the chain tip, but thats too cumbersome and disruptive.
6332017-07-13T19:10:57  <jonasschnelli> Since we have great reviewers, .. I'm convinced we get it in
6342017-07-13T19:11:09  <morcos> 10240 (when ready) is an example of something that should also be on high-priority...  it's going to take some review time and its important to get in  (in addition to 0.15 milestone)
6352017-07-13T19:11:42  <jonasschnelli> Okay. I though it not going to make it for 0.15 thats why I moved focus away.. but I see the issue now better
6362017-07-13T19:11:50  <jonasschnelli> *thought
6372017-07-13T19:11:55  <jnewbery> jonas: anything I can do to help for 10240? Would you like me to rebase it?
6382017-07-13T19:12:02  <wumpus> ok, will add 10240
6392017-07-13T19:12:12  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery: Please take over if you can
6402017-07-13T19:12:15  <sipa> jonasschnelli: rescanning beyond your pruning depth should already be an issue? what do we do in that case?
6412017-07-13T19:12:21  <morcos> achow101: what about the signrawtransaction splitting stuff, is that still aimed for 0.15?
6422017-07-13T19:12:22  <jnewbery> sure. I'll take it
6432017-07-13T19:12:29  <jonasschnelli> sipa: the PR halts validation
6442017-07-13T19:12:35  <gmaxwell> jnewbery: You are now my personal hero for the day.
6452017-07-13T19:12:45  <sipa> jonasschnelli: no, i mean right now
6462017-07-13T19:12:53  <sipa> what do we do if we try to rescan beyond the prune depth
6472017-07-13T19:12:55  <achow101> morcos: I'd like it to be. and the validateaddress stuff as that is related to #7965
6482017-07-13T19:12:56  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7965 | Remaining instances of ENABLE_WALLET in `libbitcoin_server.a` · Issue #7965 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6492017-07-13T19:13:06  <jonasschnelli> sipa: I don't know: :/
6502017-07-13T19:13:17  <jonasschnelli> I guess you get an expection
6512017-07-13T19:13:45  <sipa> so, i think pruning is not relevant for 10240
6522017-07-13T19:13:56  *** rhavar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6532017-07-13T19:13:56  <gmaxwell> the rescan calls just say no if you try that.
6542017-07-13T19:14:01  <sipa> it's a problem right now if you rescan beyong the pruning depth, and it remains so
6552017-07-13T19:14:27  <jonasschnelli> A large part of 10240 is about haling the full node in pruning... dropping that would reduce the review workload
6562017-07-13T19:15:13  *** EBM has quit IRC
6572017-07-13T19:15:21  <sipa> jonasschnelli: i think it should stop regardless of pruning
6582017-07-13T19:15:21  <jonasschnelli> So. Drop the pruning option from 10240?
6592017-07-13T19:15:31  <sipa> it's crazy that your wallet would go out of sync with your node
6602017-07-13T19:15:39  <sipa> that's a totally unsupported state right now
6612017-07-13T19:15:45  <jonasschnelli> From the PR on encrypted wallets:
6622017-07-13T19:15:46  <jonasschnelli> Same as above, but, If we hit the gap limit with an encrypted wallet, we can't topup the keypool. In that case, we just pause the sync (not the node, only the wallet).
6632017-07-13T19:15:54  <sipa> maybe that can be enabled later, once the wallet is more independent from the node
6642017-07-13T19:16:08  *** V3110C3T has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6652017-07-13T19:16:19  <sipa> but i think 10240 should just stop sync entirely if your wallet is encrypted and the keypool runs out
6662017-07-13T19:16:21  <rhavar> Anyone familiar enough with constraint solving to help me out with this model? https://gist.github.com/RHavar/0710144c713033d42f8f443a99fefbb7
6672017-07-13T19:16:25  <jonasschnelli> sipa: well, if you use a backup wallet you have the same state
6682017-07-13T19:16:28  <sipa> rhavar: not now, meeting
6692017-07-13T19:16:36  <instagibbs> rhavar, ask again in 45 min :P
6702017-07-13T19:16:40  <sipa> jonasschnelli: at startup; not anymore after rescan
6712017-07-13T19:16:51  <sipa> during normal operation the wallet is always in sync with the node
6722017-07-13T19:16:53  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Thats true
6732017-07-13T19:16:59  * luke-jr wonders if a halted node will rewind based on headers
6742017-07-13T19:17:11  <jonasschnelli> All that because of hardened derivation!
6752017-07-13T19:17:27  <sipa> it's also easy to avoid; using 10000 keys in the keypool
6762017-07-13T19:17:36  <gmaxwell> (indeed, which I also keep recommending)
6772017-07-13T19:17:58  <jonasschnelli> You don't avoid it, you just make the timespan for the possible impact smaller
6782017-07-13T19:18:07  <sipa> okay
6792017-07-13T19:18:12  <jonasschnelli> And 10000 is just inefficient
6802017-07-13T19:18:41  <sipa> well, i think all of that isn't the priority now
6812017-07-13T19:18:58  <jonasschnelli> What about only allowing non-hardened derivation for encrypted wallets and disable all pkey export calls?
6822017-07-13T19:18:59  <sipa> for 0.15, we need to have automatic marking of seen keys
6832017-07-13T19:19:10  <sipa> jonasschnelli: yes, i like that, but not 0.15
6842017-07-13T19:19:11  *** ivan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6852017-07-13T19:19:34  <jonasschnelli> Okay. jnewbery will focus on 10240 (he will rebase and overhaul I guess)
6862017-07-13T19:19:48  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: we have a program that requires >1GB ram, runs best with >8GB ram, that does hours of processing just to start up-- I don't think worrying about 320k of key material is a major concern.
6872017-07-13T19:19:57  <sipa> awesome; let's discuss further on the 10240 PR
6882017-07-13T19:20:06  <gmaxwell> (also 1000 works too, it 10k is really too much.)
6892017-07-13T19:20:13  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: should not be a concern. But it's still an inefficient fix for the problem we have
6902017-07-13T19:20:26  <jonasschnelli> sipa: ack. Thanks jnewbery
6912017-07-13T19:20:53  <gmaxwell> Inefficient compared to what?  Inefficient to taking away private key export? In efficient compared to even one moment of one users time?
6922017-07-13T19:21:04  <jnewbery> no problem. Topic suggestion: #10650
6932017-07-13T19:21:07  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10650 | Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10650 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6942017-07-13T19:21:25  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: Inefficient compared to support pub key derivation for encrypted keys or to topup the keypool on the fly
6952017-07-13T19:21:53  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: are you actively trying to sabotage the project?
6962017-07-13T19:22:07  <sipa> gmaxwell: please
6972017-07-13T19:22:13  <jonasschnelli> ?
6982017-07-13T19:22:22  <sipa> jonasschnelli: there are good reasons to support hardened and unhardered derivation both; adding a feature is not a substitute for fixing a problem we have
6992017-07-13T19:22:24  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: was that a joke or a serious question?
7002017-07-13T19:22:46  <sipa> jonasschnelli: using non-hardened derivation implies you'll need to have a big keypool; it comes with that design choice
7012017-07-13T19:23:20  <gmaxwell> Sorry to be rude, but I am just gobsmacked about aruging that setting the keypool to be big "on the order of tens or hundreds of kilobytes" is opposed compared to this long saw about public derrivation; which we aren't doing for the wallet at least now.
7022017-07-13T19:23:46  <gmaxwell> So it seems to me like that you're intentionally in broken directions because you disagree with another decision.
7032017-07-13T19:24:29  <gmaxwell> er intentionally pushing in
7042017-07-13T19:24:47  <jonasschnelli> I though avoiding keypool with non-hardened derivation may be seen as a benefit for some of the users.. but it seems that i'm wrong. But at least it's not intentional sabotage
7052017-07-13T19:24:50  <morcos> let's move on from this at least duing the meeting, i think we all agree that the keypool can be bigger than 200 regardless of otehr chnages we make
7062017-07-13T19:25:11  <gmaxwell> Do we? it keeps getting argued against.
7072017-07-13T19:25:22  <morcos> thats why i ended it by saying we all agree. :)
7082017-07-13T19:25:25  <sipa> well, having non-hardened derivation with disabled key export is a perfectly fine _feature_ - but it's not usable for everyone (some people need key export), and for those users, we'll need to be able to deal with hardened derivation
7092017-07-13T19:25:35  <sipa> so let's do that
7102017-07-13T19:25:36  <sipa> next topic
7112017-07-13T19:25:39  <instagibbs> ack
7122017-07-13T19:25:40  <jtimon> NicolasDorier: how does #9728 interact with rescan ?
7132017-07-13T19:25:40  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Agree
7142017-07-13T19:25:42  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9728 | Can create Watch Only HD wallet with -hdwatchonly by NicolasDorier · Pull Request #9728 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
7152017-07-13T19:25:52  *** V3110C3T has quit IRC
7162017-07-13T19:25:57  <instagibbs> jtimon, it doesn't do anything special for now
7172017-07-13T19:26:12  <instagibbs> same as hardened
7182017-07-13T19:26:39  <wumpus> other topics?
7192017-07-13T19:26:52  <morcos> jnewbery suggested 10650
7202017-07-13T19:27:24  <jnewbery> I think we're almost there with 10650. Only major sticking point is not having a default wallet when there are multiple wallets loaded
7212017-07-13T19:27:25  <jtimon> instagibbs: I see, so it kind of depends on #10240 ?
7222017-07-13T19:27:28  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10240 | Add HD wallet auto-restore functionality by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10240 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
7232017-07-13T19:27:46  <instagibbs> jtimon, we can chat offline about that after meeting
7242017-07-13T19:27:53  <wumpus> #topic Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support
7252017-07-13T19:27:59  <jtimon> sure
7262017-07-13T19:28:12  <jonasschnelli> I just pushed the overhaule of 10650 that fixes the points reported by ryanofsky jnewbery and morcos
7272017-07-13T19:28:16  <jonasschnelli> *overhaul
7282017-07-13T19:28:20  <sipa> jonasschnelli: cool
7292017-07-13T19:28:28  <luke-jr> #10650
7302017-07-13T19:28:31  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10650 | Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10650 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
7312017-07-13T19:28:45  <jnewbery> great! Will review
7322017-07-13T19:28:49  <jnewbery> thanks jonas
7332017-07-13T19:29:06  <wumpus> nice
7342017-07-13T19:29:08  <morcos> yes, excellent.  woo!
7352017-07-13T19:29:10  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7362017-07-13T19:29:21  <luke-jr> I very much dislike passing wallet by name. That just makes the GUI side ugly
7372017-07-13T19:29:31  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
7382017-07-13T19:29:42  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: you mean the selecting walltes by name?
7392017-07-13T19:29:43  <sipa> luke-jr: as opposed to what? (sorry, i'm not up to date)
7402017-07-13T19:29:54  <luke-jr> sipa: as opposed to passing a CWallet* on the JSONRPCRequest
7412017-07-13T19:30:07  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7422017-07-13T19:30:09  <sipa> that seems like something that's easy to change later
7432017-07-13T19:30:09  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: the GUI would have to go CWallet* -> string -> CWallet*
7442017-07-13T19:30:13  <luke-jr> and hope it matches the right one up
7452017-07-13T19:30:22  <luke-jr> sipa: I suppose, yes
7462017-07-13T19:30:35  <wumpus> yes, indeed, can we avoid long discussions about small details that don't matter for correctness?
7472017-07-13T19:30:42  <wumpus> we really want this in before the feature freeze
7482017-07-13T19:30:47  <wumpus> so let's be pracical about it
7492017-07-13T19:30:48  <gmaxwell> <3
7502017-07-13T19:30:57  <jonasschnelli> Yes. WalletID or similar can be done later.
7512017-07-13T19:31:32  <wumpus> yep
7522017-07-13T19:32:04  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7532017-07-13T19:32:12  <jonasschnelli> One thing that is a bit cumbersome is that you have to remove the -wallet argument from bitcoin-cli when calling a non wallet command
7542017-07-13T19:32:35  <jonasschnelli> The endpoint node/wallet split is not very practical from the -cli use perspective
7552017-07-13T19:32:41  <wumpus> well it makes some sense
7562017-07-13T19:32:45  <luke-jr> hmm, bitcoin-cli reads bitcoin.conf, doesn't it? how does that interact? :/
7572017-07-13T19:32:59  <gmaxwell> then make the cli command handle that internally?
7582017-07-13T19:33:16  *** V3110C3T has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7592017-07-13T19:33:17  <gmaxwell> also, we can take some clunkyness with this expiremental feature in 0.15.
7602017-07-13T19:33:21  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: Yes. I though of that.
7612017-07-13T19:33:23  <gmaxwell> e.g. fix cli later.
7622017-07-13T19:33:32  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Sure.
7632017-07-13T19:33:46  <jonasschnelli> If you want to use multiwallet now, you need to add/remove -wallet when fiddling with -cli
7642017-07-13T19:33:50  <wumpus> IMO a clean separation between wallet and non wallet commands is good
7652017-07-13T19:33:51  <luke-jr> fixing cli could mean changing the -wallet= to something else
7662017-07-13T19:33:54  <wumpus> even if it seems cumbersome in the beginning
7672017-07-13T19:33:57  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
7682017-07-13T19:34:04  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: how do yuo remove it, if it's in bitcoin.conf?
7692017-07-13T19:34:08  <instagibbs> luke-jr, yeah, something that means "use wallet" not "load wallet"
7702017-07-13T19:34:13  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Its good.
7712017-07-13T19:34:14  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: ? I can't follow
7722017-07-13T19:34:16  <jtimon> bitcoin-cli calls with -wallet that don't need it could just ignore the extra argument and spit a warning somehwere or something?
7732017-07-13T19:34:23  <wumpus> I mean it'd be easy to put every non-wallet command on wallet endpoints as well, but that's something that is awfullly hard to change later
7742017-07-13T19:34:30  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: typical multiwallet use case has wallet=abc.db \n wallet=def.db in bitcoin.conf
7752017-07-13T19:34:36  <sipa> jonasschnelli: there are a bunch of things that the wallet - even after separation - will need access to (like fee estimates, mempool, ...)... i think it's fine if those remain inside the v1/wallet API (and also accessible as node commands)
7762017-07-13T19:34:37  <jonasschnelli> wait.. that's actually a good point!
7772017-07-13T19:34:42  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: bitcoin-cli will get these options too.
7782017-07-13T19:34:55  <jonasschnelli> Yes.. haven't tested that. :/
7792017-07-13T19:35:08  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7802017-07-13T19:35:13  <luke-jr> instagibbs's -usewallet or similar seems like a good solution
7812017-07-13T19:35:16  <instagibbs> it likely takes the first wallet arg and uses that
7822017-07-13T19:35:28  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I think -usewallet is better
7832017-07-13T19:35:40  <sipa> so i think i may agree with having pretty much everything available through the wallet endpoint
7842017-07-13T19:35:43  <instagibbs> luke-jr, something like that, if it's not complicating something else
7852017-07-13T19:35:48  <sipa> (but not getinfo) *ducks*
7862017-07-13T19:36:01  *** unholymachine has quit IRC
7872017-07-13T19:36:22  <gmaxwell> It's an expiremental feature, API isn't table. The endpoint can be leaky for now.
7882017-07-13T19:36:26  <luke-jr> it's also easier to collapse args later than to split them, if we end up regretting it
7892017-07-13T19:36:31  <jonasschnelli> I guess we can leave it for now we just need to mark the /v1 *EXPERIMENTAL* in the release notes
7902017-07-13T19:36:36  <instagibbs> yes please
7912017-07-13T19:36:40  *** jamesob has quit IRC
7922017-07-13T19:36:42  <sipa> ack
7932017-07-13T19:36:43  *** V3110C3T has quit IRC
7942017-07-13T19:36:45  <gmaxwell> s/table/stable/
7952017-07-13T19:37:03  <gmaxwell> And I think the alternative is to not have it at all, which isn't preferable.
7962017-07-13T19:37:05  <wumpus> should do that anyway
7972017-07-13T19:37:13  *** unholymachine has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7982017-07-13T19:37:14  <wumpus> absolutely
7992017-07-13T19:37:41  <wumpus> as long as it doesn't cause regressions for single-wallet mode
8002017-07-13T19:38:13  <wumpus> that would be unacceptable - but everything new is experimental
8012017-07-13T19:38:55  <sipa> agree
8022017-07-13T19:39:26  <jonasschnelli> I guess user feedback will also help us how to extend this further
8032017-07-13T19:39:48  <wumpus> indeed
8042017-07-13T19:40:25  <jonasschnelli> But once 10650 is in, we have finally usable multiwallet in Core! That's a big step.
8052017-07-13T19:40:30  <sipa> jonasschnelli: it is!
8062017-07-13T19:40:44  <jonasschnelli> And it wasn't the first try.
8072017-07-13T19:41:19  <wumpus> hehe multiwallet slipped so many releases it's a shame
8082017-07-13T19:41:23  <jtimon> yeah, is a nice feature to anounce in 0.15, even if as experimental
8092017-07-13T19:42:17  <sipa> just to repeat some other happy results briefly: my reindex-chainstate to 450k with infinity dbcache runs about 40% faster on master than on 0.14.2
8102017-07-13T19:42:40  <petertodd> sipa: what do you mean by "infinity dbcache"?
8112017-07-13T19:42:41  <jtimon> wow
8122017-07-13T19:42:42  <wumpus> which reminds me, someone should really write a release notes section about all the wonderful perf improvements in 0.15
8132017-07-13T19:42:59  <sipa> petertodd: dbcache sufficient for the entire utxo sets
8142017-07-13T19:43:00  *** lupape has quit IRC
8152017-07-13T19:43:02  <gmaxwell> wumpus: I've already been talking to drak about some blog posts and whatnot on it.
8162017-07-13T19:43:06  <wumpus> everything from crc instruction support in leveldb to the new and better database formats, to faster validation, etc
8172017-07-13T19:43:21  <petertodd> sipa: ah, cool!
8182017-07-13T19:43:27  <sipa> wumpus: don't forget tx validation caching; that's massive for performance at the tip
8192017-07-13T19:43:31  <instagibbs> ^
8202017-07-13T19:43:41  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
8212017-07-13T19:43:44  <wumpus> sipa: +1
8222017-07-13T19:43:46  <sipa> (just somewhat harder to benchmark and give cool numbers for)
8232017-07-13T19:43:50  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8242017-07-13T19:44:29  *** V3110C3T has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8252017-07-13T19:44:30  <sipa> petertodd: around 6-8GB in 0.15, in practice (and more in 0.14.2, due to the blowup at flushing time)
8262017-07-13T19:44:47  <petertodd> sipa: that's still pretty small fortunately :)
8272017-07-13T19:44:49  *** wasi has quit IRC
8282017-07-13T19:45:07  <gmaxwell> Was 2GB not that long ago.
8292017-07-13T19:45:37  <petertodd> gmaxwell: be interesting to know why UTXO growth has stopped temporarily...
8302017-07-13T19:46:27  <sipa> if you know, post it here: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/56513/why-has-utxo-set-stopped-growing-since-2017-06-03
8312017-07-13T19:46:29  <instagibbs> (total size has been shrinking for a month now)
8322017-07-13T19:46:42  *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8332017-07-13T19:47:13  <petertodd> could easily be someone ran out of money for an attack, and is spending the coins again
8342017-07-13T19:47:57  <wumpus> #link https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/56513/why-has-utxo-set-stopped-growing-since-2017-06-03
8352017-07-13T19:49:06  <wumpus> any other topics?
8362017-07-13T19:49:08  <jtimon> many more possible explanations...
8372017-07-13T19:49:25  <luke-jr> maybe a reminder that Tokyo Core is in a few weeks
8382017-07-13T19:50:01  *** treebeardd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8392017-07-13T19:50:21  <instagibbs> 2 weeks specifically
8402017-07-13T19:50:54  <luke-jr> https://coredev.tech/tokyo.html lots of unconfirmed invites still
8412017-07-13T19:51:26  <instagibbs> kind of a hike for those not already in area for other reasons
8422017-07-13T19:51:29  <jtimon> oh, missed that one, I guess I can confirm now I'm not attending
8432017-07-13T19:51:30  <wumpus> I'm not coming to tokyo core, but will be in the SF one in september
8442017-07-13T19:51:41  <sipa> wumpus: great!
8452017-07-13T19:51:52  <jonasschnelli> SF is pretty full booked..
8462017-07-13T19:52:13  <jonasschnelli> Not saying we running out of space, but >20 confirmed
8472017-07-13T19:52:33  <wumpus> sipa: you're coming too? great
8482017-07-13T19:52:54  <sipa> wumpus: yes, of course
8492017-07-13T19:53:08  <sipa> (i live nearby)
8502017-07-13T19:53:10  <achow101> do we have a location for the sf meetup?
8512017-07-13T19:54:06  <luke-jr> achow101: https://coredev.tech/nextmeeting.html
8522017-07-13T19:54:08  <wumpus> yes, but it's still possible it will change
8532017-07-13T19:55:09  <wumpus> depending on just how large the room needs to be I guess :-)
8542017-07-13T19:55:28  <instagibbs> will we finally activate segwit there? *ducks*
8552017-07-13T19:55:40  <rhavar> petertodd: the day it stopped growing is the day alphabay shut down
8562017-07-13T19:55:52  <luke-jr> instagibbs: it'll already be active by then
8572017-07-13T19:56:01  <achow101> luke-jr: hopefully
8582017-07-13T19:56:03  *** V3110C3T has quit IRC
8592017-07-13T19:56:03  <petertodd> rhavar: interesting!
8602017-07-13T19:56:11  *** V3110C3T has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8612017-07-13T19:56:13  <instagibbs> rhavar, ? what date did it go down
8622017-07-13T19:56:22  <rhavar> the 3rd i think
8632017-07-13T19:56:46  <instagibbs> been holding/dropping since 3rd of June though
8642017-07-13T19:56:58  <instagibbs> might be contributing factor still..
8652017-07-13T19:57:03  *** V3110C3T has quit IRC
8662017-07-13T19:57:10  <instagibbs> sorry, is meeting done
8672017-07-13T19:57:11  <rhavar> oh, sorry -- I'm a month off
8682017-07-13T19:57:12  <instagibbs> 3 minutes
8692017-07-13T19:57:23  *** V3110C3T has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8702017-07-13T19:57:24  <rhavar> alphabay shut down the 3rd of july
8712017-07-13T19:57:33  <rhavar> and that question was 3rd of june
8722017-07-13T19:57:51  <instagibbs> my SWAG: I think internalizing customer transaction costs did the equiv of fees for exchange trading in China
8732017-07-13T19:58:07  <wumpus> seems time to end the meeting, speculation about the reason for the stop of utxo growth is interesting but not a bitcoin core meeting topic
8742017-07-13T19:58:08  <wumpus> #endmeeting
8752017-07-13T19:58:08  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Jul 13 19:58:08 2017 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
8762017-07-13T19:58:08  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2017/bitcoin-core-dev.2017-07-13-19.01.html
8772017-07-13T19:58:08  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2017/bitcoin-core-dev.2017-07-13-19.01.txt
8782017-07-13T19:58:08  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2017/bitcoin-core-dev.2017-07-13-19.01.log.html
8792017-07-13T19:58:49  <rhavar> So anyway, anyone familiar with constraint solving (and minizinc in particular)? https://gist.github.com/RHavar/0710144c713033d42f8f443a99fefbb7
8802017-07-13T19:59:01  <rhavar> That model works, just give shit results
8812017-07-13T19:59:12  <sipa> in a previous life, i've used minizinc
8822017-07-13T19:59:48  <rhavar> Since the ideal solution is blindly obvious, can you can convince minizinc to pick it `constraint count_selected_optional_outputs = 1;`
8832017-07-13T19:59:56  <rhavar> But it doesn't find it on it's own
8842017-07-13T20:00:13  <rhavar> But it shows that the ideal solution doesn't violate any constraints (and has a lower cost than the one it picks)
8852017-07-13T20:00:28  <rhavar> I'm kind of wondering if the problem is just formatted in a stupid way or not
8862017-07-13T20:01:13  *** V3110C3T has quit IRC
8872017-07-13T20:01:54  <rhavar> (in general, I can pretty much always out-perform that model by hand. Makes me think something is seriously fundamentally screwed up)
8882017-07-13T20:01:56  <jtimon> one could also argue that simply usage has been reduced in fear of a possible fork
8892017-07-13T20:02:21  <rhavar> I got like 10-15 emails yesterday from people freaking out after the bitcoin.org notice lolz ><
8902017-07-13T20:04:15  <rhavar> (which imo was reckless and alarmist. If they did enough mental gymnastics to convince themselves that bip148 would split the chain, they should have at least waited to be sure that segwit2x isn't going to activate in time)
8912017-07-13T20:04:17  <jtimon> I guess that further disproves the argument that "people that will support uasf already know about bip148 already know about it and already 'upgraded', waiting for bip149 won't result in more people or businesses on board"
8922017-07-13T20:04:24  <jtimon> sorry, getting offtopic...
8932017-07-13T20:04:52  *** V3110C3T has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
8942017-07-13T20:05:01  <rhavar> For every 1 person who understands the technical details of forks and chain splits etc. there are 1000 who don't
8952017-07-13T20:05:07  *** chjj has quit IRC
8962017-07-13T20:05:48  <clarkmoody> rhavar I've done some constrained optimization stuff, but never with minizinc
8972017-07-13T20:06:28  <clarkmoody> I've found that you can make a constraint solver do anything you like depending on the objective function
8982017-07-13T20:06:52  <rhavar> If you can see why that model doesn't pick the obvious solution (the one you can force it to), I'd be happy to give you a $100 in bitcoin or something :P
8992017-07-13T20:07:58  <rhavar> (It's obviously really easy to hack it, so it picks the obvious solution. But i'm more interested to why it sucks in general, like if the problem is phrased badly or something)
9002017-07-13T20:10:15  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9012017-07-13T20:12:30  *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9022017-07-13T20:13:15  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
9032017-07-13T20:14:06  <clarkmoody> Could you enumerate the combinations and print cost for each, then see where on the scale the solver is choosing? Like is it the worst, or near the best, etc?
9042017-07-13T20:15:24  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
9052017-07-13T20:16:02  *** V3110C3T has quit IRC
9062017-07-13T20:20:15  <rhavar> Well in this simple example, it's the 2nd best solution or something
9072017-07-13T20:20:33  <rhavar> but considering it's a trivial example that you can do by hand in under a minute -- i think it's pretty embarrassing :P
9082017-07-13T20:20:45  *** treebeardd has quit IRC
9092017-07-13T20:21:21  <clarkmoody> I know the feeling :-)
9102017-07-13T20:21:54  <rhavar> There's also cases it say are not solvable, that are trivial  (pick all the inputs, for instance)
9112017-07-13T20:22:16  <rhavar> I actually have had some moderate success by splitting the model into two different problems (1 pick coins without change) and 1 pick coins always using change
9122017-07-13T20:22:19  <rhavar> and then compare which is better
9132017-07-13T20:22:44  <rhavar> But I feel like there must be something wrong at a more fundamental level if you need to do that
9142017-07-13T20:27:13  *** tripleslash is now known as [\\\]
9152017-07-13T20:31:18  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9162017-07-13T20:31:38  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
9172017-07-13T20:32:01  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
9182017-07-13T20:32:17  <jtimon> can someone close https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10768 ? the author said it but for some reason didn't closed it himself
9192017-07-13T20:32:38  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9202017-07-13T20:32:56  <jtimon> wait, #10714 didn't solved the warning...
9212017-07-13T20:32:57  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10714 | Avoid printing incorrect block indexing time due to uninitialized variable by practicalswift · Pull Request #10714 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
9222017-07-13T20:38:58  <jtimon> oh, yes, it does, sorry
9232017-07-13T20:41:31  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
9242017-07-13T20:41:50  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9252017-07-13T20:42:09  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9262017-07-13T20:42:47  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9272017-07-13T20:43:14  *** LFiuza has quit IRC
9282017-07-13T20:47:03  *** ulrich has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9292017-07-13T20:47:08  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
9302017-07-13T20:53:39  *** ulrich has quit IRC
9312017-07-13T20:55:51  <instagibbs> what could cause "no response from server"? It connects but gets no response?
9322017-07-13T20:58:00  *** GM_ has quit IRC
9332017-07-13T21:00:01  *** dermoth has quit IRC
9342017-07-13T21:00:47  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9352017-07-13T21:06:39  *** ivan has quit IRC
9362017-07-13T21:13:02  <instagibbs> oh, likely my -cli not matching bitcoind (testing multiwallet endpoints)
9372017-07-13T21:16:39  <instagibbs> jonasschnelli, it seems I get "trapped" if I specify a wallet in my conf file, unable to use -cli to stop the node, complains that the call is trying to use a /node/ endpoint call
9382017-07-13T21:17:04  <instagibbs> so yeah we really need something other than "wallet" for -cli usage
9392017-07-13T21:17:08  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
9402017-07-13T21:17:53  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9412017-07-13T21:19:48  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9422017-07-13T21:21:15  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9432017-07-13T21:23:27  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
9442017-07-13T21:24:16  <jtimon> do we have a list of new rpc calls so far for 0.15 ?
9452017-07-13T21:25:18  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
9462017-07-13T21:28:04  *** twistedline has quit IRC
9472017-07-13T21:29:20  *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
9482017-07-13T21:30:30  *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9492017-07-13T21:33:24  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9502017-07-13T21:37:06  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
9512017-07-13T21:37:11  *** lucianor_ has quit IRC
9522017-07-13T21:37:36  *** jamesob has quit IRC
9532017-07-13T21:39:50  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9542017-07-13T21:49:52  *** twistedline has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9552017-07-13T21:50:32  *** echonaut has quit IRC
9562017-07-13T21:50:47  *** echonaut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9572017-07-13T22:01:21  *** BashCo has quit IRC
9582017-07-13T22:02:00  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9592017-07-13T22:04:15  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
9602017-07-13T22:05:29  *** corebob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9612017-07-13T22:06:16  *** dom_king has quit IRC
9622017-07-13T22:06:42  *** corebob has quit IRC
9632017-07-13T22:07:27  *** owowo has quit IRC
9642017-07-13T22:09:09  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9652017-07-13T22:10:09  *** cheese_ has quit IRC
9662017-07-13T22:15:55  *** ProfMac has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9672017-07-13T22:16:25  *** goatpig has quit IRC
9682017-07-13T22:23:01  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
9692017-07-13T22:28:00  *** corebob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9702017-07-13T22:32:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #10819: Fix uninitialized atomic variables (master...2017-07-fix-unitialized-atomic) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10819
9712017-07-13T22:37:19  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9722017-07-13T22:41:55  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
9732017-07-13T22:42:35  *** owowo has quit IRC
9742017-07-13T22:46:19  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9752017-07-13T22:46:19  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9762017-07-13T22:52:45  <promag> I got this output: Fee Calculation: Fee:4520 Bytes:226 Tgt:6 (requested 6) Reason:"Fallback fee" Decay 0.00000: Estimation: (-1 - -1) -nan% 0.0/(0.0 0 mem 0.0 out) Fail: (-1 - -1) -nan% 0.0/(0.0 0 mem 0.0 out)
9772017-07-13T22:53:34  <promag> buggy output right?
9782017-07-13T23:02:06  *** promag has quit IRC
9792017-07-13T23:20:33  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
9802017-07-13T23:22:58  *** coredump_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9812017-07-13T23:43:32  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
9822017-07-13T23:44:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #10820: Use cpuid intrinsics instead of asm code (master...20170717_cpuid) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10820
9832017-07-13T23:44:27  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9842017-07-13T23:54:29  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev