12017-10-04T00:22:29  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
  22017-10-04T00:26:28  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
  32017-10-04T00:28:06  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  42017-10-04T00:33:39  *** Murch has quit IRC
  52017-10-04T00:35:05  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
  62017-10-04T00:44:19  *** Scrat has quit IRC
  72017-10-04T00:46:13  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82017-10-04T00:56:32  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
  92017-10-04T00:57:30  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 102017-10-04T00:58:02  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 112017-10-04T01:01:05  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 122017-10-04T01:06:40  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
 132017-10-04T01:06:54  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 142017-10-04T01:07:45  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 152017-10-04T01:09:05  *** harrymm has quit IRC
 162017-10-04T01:22:09  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 172017-10-04T01:23:13  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 182017-10-04T01:49:54  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 192017-10-04T01:59:30  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
 202017-10-04T02:01:06  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
 212017-10-04T02:01:11  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 222017-10-04T02:46:39  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
 232017-10-04T02:48:09  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 242017-10-04T02:48:52  *** arubi has quit IRC
 252017-10-04T03:01:21  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 262017-10-04T03:01:35  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
 272017-10-04T03:01:55  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 282017-10-04T03:02:27  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 292017-10-04T03:02:37  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 302017-10-04T03:06:49  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 312017-10-04T03:06:58  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
 322017-10-04T03:13:35  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 332017-10-04T03:15:01  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 342017-10-04T03:15:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b4a509a3f817...093074b84395
 352017-10-04T03:15:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ab5bba7 Alejandro Avilés: Fix launchctl not being able to stop bitcoind...
 362017-10-04T03:15:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 093074b Jonas Schnelli: Merge #11419: Utils: Fix launchctl not being able to stop bitcoind...
 372017-10-04T03:16:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #11419: Utils: Fix launchctl not being able to stop bitcoind (master...fix-macos-init) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11419
 382017-10-04T03:21:29  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 392017-10-04T03:26:04  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
 402017-10-04T03:26:31  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 412017-10-04T03:28:42  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 422017-10-04T03:30:38  *** lukedashjr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 432017-10-04T03:33:04  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 442017-10-04T03:34:24  *** BlueMatt has quit IRC
 452017-10-04T03:35:02  *** lukedashjr is now known as luke-jr
 462017-10-04T03:39:19  *** BlueMatt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 472017-10-04T03:40:27  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 482017-10-04T03:42:12  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 492017-10-04T03:53:37  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
 502017-10-04T03:56:09  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 512017-10-04T03:56:29  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 522017-10-04T04:07:35  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 532017-10-04T04:08:44  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 542017-10-04T04:12:38  <jonasschnelli> ping cfields
 552017-10-04T04:13:21  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 562017-10-04T04:16:59  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 572017-10-04T04:19:35  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 582017-10-04T04:19:40  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 592017-10-04T04:19:40  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 602017-10-04T04:26:04  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 612017-10-04T04:30:58  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 622017-10-04T04:44:28  *** lukedashjr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 632017-10-04T04:44:49  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 642017-10-04T04:48:53  *** lukedashjr is now known as luke-jr
 652017-10-04T04:49:09  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 662017-10-04T04:55:41  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 672017-10-04T04:55:43  *** lukedashjr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 682017-10-04T04:58:37  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 692017-10-04T05:00:05  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
 702017-10-04T05:00:23  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 712017-10-04T05:04:04  *** lukedashjr has quit IRC
 722017-10-04T05:04:13  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 732017-10-04T05:04:34  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
 742017-10-04T05:07:18  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 752017-10-04T05:07:54  *** lukedashjr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 762017-10-04T05:11:33  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 772017-10-04T05:12:18  *** lukedashjr is now known as luke-jr
 782017-10-04T05:14:37  *** chjj has quit IRC
 792017-10-04T05:20:51  *** geezas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 802017-10-04T05:31:45  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 812017-10-04T05:32:14  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 822017-10-04T05:40:08  *** promag has quit IRC
 832017-10-04T05:40:28  *** intcat has quit IRC
 842017-10-04T05:43:47  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 852017-10-04T05:45:37  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
 862017-10-04T05:47:48  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 872017-10-04T05:49:25  *** promag has quit IRC
 882017-10-04T06:03:54  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 892017-10-04T06:09:01  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 902017-10-04T06:10:52  *** afk11 has quit IRC
 912017-10-04T06:11:21  *** Guest86958 is now known as ndrst
 922017-10-04T06:11:24  *** ndrst has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 932017-10-04T06:35:12  *** owowo has quit IRC
 942017-10-04T06:36:42  *** harrymm has quit IRC
 952017-10-04T06:38:20  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 962017-10-04T06:42:34  *** sanada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 972017-10-04T06:57:08  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 982017-10-04T06:57:25  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 992017-10-04T07:00:31  *** timothy has quit IRC
1002017-10-04T07:03:16  *** promag has quit IRC
1012017-10-04T07:09:01  *** jtimon has quit IRC
1022017-10-04T07:44:09  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1032017-10-04T07:50:10  *** JackH has quit IRC
1042017-10-04T07:50:13  *** geezas has quit IRC
1052017-10-04T07:56:29  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062017-10-04T07:57:18  *** Emcy has quit IRC
1072017-10-04T08:01:41  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1082017-10-04T08:20:50  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1092017-10-04T08:25:17  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1102017-10-04T08:43:45  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1112017-10-04T08:47:21  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122017-10-04T08:59:02  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132017-10-04T09:31:35  *** BashCo has quit IRC
1142017-10-04T09:37:36  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1152017-10-04T09:37:51  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162017-10-04T09:38:00  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172017-10-04T09:39:31  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1182017-10-04T09:40:05  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1192017-10-04T09:40:52  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202017-10-04T09:41:03  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212017-10-04T09:41:23  *** EricCartman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1222017-10-04T09:44:46  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1232017-10-04T09:56:30  *** wxxs_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242017-10-04T09:57:43  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252017-10-04T09:58:01  *** wxxs has quit IRC
1262017-10-04T09:58:09  *** wxxs_ is now known as wxxs
1272017-10-04T10:15:59  *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1282017-10-04T10:20:40  *** promag has quit IRC
1292017-10-04T10:21:49  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302017-10-04T10:35:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1312017-10-04T10:36:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322017-10-04T10:38:38  *** W4RL0RD has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332017-10-04T10:40:04  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/093074b84395...9ccafb1d7bdd
1342017-10-04T10:40:05  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fd86f99 MarcoFalke: Squashed 'src/secp256k1/' changes from 84973d393..0b7024185...
1352017-10-04T10:40:05  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 999968e MarcoFalke: Bump secp256k1 subtree
1362017-10-04T10:40:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9ccafb1 MarcoFalke: Merge #11421: Merge current secp256k1 subtree...
1372017-10-04T10:40:39  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #11421: Merge current secp256k1 subtree (master...Mf1709-subtree-secp256k1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11421
1382017-10-04T10:58:44  *** pbase has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1392017-10-04T11:06:37  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
1402017-10-04T11:09:33  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1412017-10-04T11:38:45  *** promag has quit IRC
1422017-10-04T11:39:09  *** pbase has quit IRC
1432017-10-04T11:44:54  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442017-10-04T11:48:02  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1452017-10-04T11:52:35  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
1462017-10-04T12:01:55  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1472017-10-04T12:04:28  *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1482017-10-04T12:05:12  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
1492017-10-04T12:05:19  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1502017-10-04T12:15:37  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1512017-10-04T12:23:56  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
1522017-10-04T12:26:09  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1532017-10-04T12:26:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9ccafb1d7bdd...a4c833fec104
1542017-10-04T12:26:29  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fae2673 MarcoFalke: qa: check-rpc-mapping must not run on empty lists
1552017-10-04T12:26:30  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fae60e3 MarcoFalke: qa: Fix lcov for out-of-tree builds
1562017-10-04T12:26:30  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a4c833f Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11443: [qa] Allow "make cov" out-of-tree; Fix rpc mapping check...
1572017-10-04T12:26:44  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1582017-10-04T12:27:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11443: [qa] Allow "make cov" out-of-tree; Fix rpc mapping check (master...Mf1710-qaFixups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11443
1592017-10-04T12:36:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a4c833fec104...e12522dfdaab
1602017-10-04T12:36:37  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6643b80 Matt Corallo: Add state message print to AcceptBlock failure message....
1612017-10-04T12:36:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e12522d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11406: Add state message print to AcceptBlock failure message....
1622017-10-04T12:37:19  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11406: Add state message print to AcceptBlock failure message. (master...2017-09-checkblock-fail-print) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11406
1632017-10-04T12:47:27  *** arubi has quit IRC
1642017-10-04T12:47:54  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1652017-10-04T12:48:32  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
1662017-10-04T12:54:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e12522dfdaab...a1f7f1870931
1672017-10-04T12:54:42  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6fb8f5f practicalswift: Check that -blocknotify command is non-empty before executing...
1682017-10-04T12:54:42  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cffe85f practicalswift: Skip sys::system(...) call in case of empty command
1692017-10-04T12:54:43  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a1f7f18 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10939: [init] Check non-emptiness of -blocknotify command prior to executing...
1702017-10-04T12:55:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10939: [init] Check non-emptiness of -blocknotify command prior to executing (master...blocknotify-consistentcy) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10939
1712017-10-04T12:59:09  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10233: Wallet: Support not reusing addresses (master...freezea) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10233
1722017-10-04T13:01:51  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a1f7f1870931...7f11ef260855
1732017-10-04T13:01:52  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0cd9273 Wladimir J. van der Laan: rpc: Prevent `dumpwallet` from overwriting files...
1742017-10-04T13:01:53  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7f11ef2 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9937: rpc: Prevent `dumpwallet` from overwriting files...
1752017-10-04T13:02:01  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9937: rpc: Prevent `dumpwallet` from overwriting files (master...2017_03_walletdump_nooverwrite) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9937
1762017-10-04T13:03:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7f11ef260855...74123eabdd91
1772017-10-04T13:03:07  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 96c2ce9 Matt Corallo: Fix validationinterface build on super old boost/clang...
1782017-10-04T13:03:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 74123ea Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11440: Fix validationinterface build on super old boost/clang...
1792017-10-04T13:03:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11440: Fix validationinterface build on super old boost/clang (master...2017-10-cblock-validationinterface) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11440
1802017-10-04T13:12:31  *** drnet has quit IRC
1812017-10-04T13:13:23  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
1822017-10-04T13:36:09  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/74123eabdd91...167cef8082e2
1832017-10-04T13:36:09  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f35d033 practicalswift: build: Make "make clean" remove all files created when running "make check"...
1842017-10-04T13:36:10  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 167cef8 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11435: build: Make "make clean" remove all files created when running "make check"...
1852017-10-04T13:36:49  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11435: build: Make "make clean" remove all files created when running "make check" (master...make-cleaner) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11435
1862017-10-04T13:38:14  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11046: Replace boost sleep_for with C++11 equivalent (master...2017/08/boost_sleep_for) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11046
1872017-10-04T13:39:34  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10990: 0 locktime issue (master...fix0locktimebug) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10990
1882017-10-04T13:49:47  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1892017-10-04T13:57:57  <promag> should we have only one BitcoinTestFramework subclass in each test file?
1902017-10-04T14:02:24  <MarcoFalke> I'd prefer so. Otherwise you'd have to run them sequentially and a failure of the first causes the others not to run.
1912017-10-04T14:03:02  <MarcoFalke> Also would be confusing to have (potentially) different topologies set in a single file
1922017-10-04T14:03:51  <promag> Regarding #10941, I think we can merge -(alert|block|wallet)notify tests later
1932017-10-04T14:03:53  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10941 | Add blocknotify functional test by promag · Pull Request #10941 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1942017-10-04T14:04:07  <promag> but at the moment each one has different network setups and params
1952017-10-04T14:05:50  <promag> I think merging those tests deserve a separate PR
1962017-10-04T14:10:32  *** Tank4910 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1972017-10-04T14:10:46  *** Tank4910 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1982017-10-04T14:18:08  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1992017-10-04T14:25:46  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2002017-10-04T14:31:22  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2012017-10-04T14:33:18  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
2022017-10-04T14:35:45  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2032017-10-04T14:39:25  *** Murch has quit IRC
2042017-10-04T14:47:50  *** bitsko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2052017-10-04T14:49:55  *** sanada has quit IRC
2062017-10-04T14:50:53  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag closed pull request #11439: [test] Refactor ZMQ test to use one address per notification type (master...2017-10-clean-zmq-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11439
2072017-10-04T14:52:02  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2082017-10-04T14:54:22  <promag> jnewbery: ScanForWalletTransactions interface is a bit weird
2092017-10-04T14:54:43  *** sanada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2102017-10-04T14:54:59  <promag> I think it should return the last block scanned
2112017-10-04T14:55:15  <promag> and also *all* failed blocks
2122017-10-04T14:55:28  <promag> not sure why only the most recent is useful
2132017-10-04T15:07:55  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
2142017-10-04T15:08:31  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2152017-10-04T15:10:04  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2162017-10-04T15:10:24  *** jb55 has quit IRC
2172017-10-04T15:11:30  *** wraithm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2182017-10-04T15:12:52  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
2192017-10-04T15:39:22  *** JackH has quit IRC
2202017-10-04T15:40:37  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2212017-10-04T15:43:37  *** sanada has quit IRC
2222017-10-04T15:43:40  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
2232017-10-04T15:44:38  *** mess110 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242017-10-04T15:49:32  *** sanada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2252017-10-04T15:51:53  *** promag has quit IRC
2262017-10-04T16:08:13  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2272017-10-04T16:13:07  *** bitsko has quit IRC
2282017-10-04T16:16:20  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2292017-10-04T16:22:02  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2302017-10-04T16:22:32  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2312017-10-04T16:28:05  *** mess110 has quit IRC
2322017-10-04T16:28:25  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332017-10-04T16:32:05  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2342017-10-04T16:56:55  *** timothy has quit IRC
2352017-10-04T16:58:10  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2362017-10-04T17:00:32  *** timothy has quit IRC
2372017-10-04T17:02:55  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2382017-10-04T17:15:22  *** BashCo has quit IRC
2392017-10-04T17:15:40  *** pergaminho has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2402017-10-04T17:20:44  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2412017-10-04T17:28:31  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2422017-10-04T17:33:43  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2432017-10-04T17:34:00  *** promag has quit IRC
2442017-10-04T17:35:43  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
2452017-10-04T17:35:43  *** dermoth has quit IRC
2462017-10-04T17:35:43  *** afk11 has quit IRC
2472017-10-04T17:35:43  *** arubi has quit IRC
2482017-10-04T17:35:43  *** intcat has quit IRC
2492017-10-04T17:36:39  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2502017-10-04T17:36:47  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512017-10-04T17:36:59  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522017-10-04T17:39:04  *** lifeofguenter has quit IRC
2532017-10-04T17:39:39  *** W4RL0RD has quit IRC
2542017-10-04T17:40:08  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552017-10-04T17:40:29  *** lifeofguenter has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562017-10-04T17:45:07  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
2572017-10-04T17:52:38  *** intcat has quit IRC
2582017-10-04T17:53:33  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592017-10-04T17:56:24  <jonasschnelli> Hopefully we can merge #7061 soon. (178 comments, open since almost two years)... :)
2602017-10-04T17:56:28  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7061 | [Wallet] Add RPC call "rescanblockchain " by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #7061 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2612017-10-04T17:56:29  <jonasschnelli> Needs some reacks
2622017-10-04T17:59:30  *** Emcy has quit IRC
2632017-10-04T18:21:08  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2642017-10-04T18:21:49  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652017-10-04T19:09:32  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2662017-10-04T19:11:23  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2672017-10-04T19:22:59  *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2682017-10-04T19:23:42  <meshcollider> How long does it normally take before changes to bitcoincore.org repo go live
2692017-10-04T19:30:57  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702017-10-04T19:37:21  <cfields> jonasschnelli: very late pong
2712017-10-04T19:37:41  <jonasschnelli> Heh...
2722017-10-04T19:37:56  <jonasschnelli> It's now in a comment... let me link you
2732017-10-04T19:38:10  <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10387#pullrequestreview-66842269
2742017-10-04T19:38:41  <jonasschnelli> meshcollider: ask BlueMatt. But the recent merged 0.15.0.1 changes are online
2752017-10-04T19:39:12  <BlueMatt> meshcollider: like....60 seconds?
2762017-10-04T19:39:36  <BlueMatt> unless someone fucked up the commit signatures, which folks are want to do
2772017-10-04T19:39:53  <BlueMatt> err, wont to do
2782017-10-04T19:40:34  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
2792017-10-04T19:43:44  <cfields> jonasschnelli: sounds good to me
2802017-10-04T19:44:07  <jonasschnelli> okay... there is still an issue... will fix soon, so wait with looking at the code
2812017-10-04T19:44:25  <cfields> I'd really rather see fLimitedNode in CNodeState though :(
2822017-10-04T19:44:38  <cfields> BlueMatt: thoughts on starting to migrate that way?
2832017-10-04T19:44:58  <cfields> (see above link for reference)
2842017-10-04T19:45:04  <BlueMatt> whats context?
2852017-10-04T19:45:16  *** afk11 has quit IRC
2862017-10-04T19:46:12  <cfields> BlueMatt: a bool to indicate whether or not a node is limited. Stored during version. Pretty much same use case as fPreferred
2872017-10-04T19:47:46  *** jb55 has quit IRC
2882017-10-04T19:48:38  <meshcollider> BlueMatt: jonasschnelli Oh I didn't see it because the 0.15.0.1 release announcement isn't in the recent posts list
2892017-10-04T19:48:43  <cfields> I think just used to avoid fetching old blocks. presumably jonasschnelli stuck it in CNode because that's where fClient lives (but shouldn't)
2902017-10-04T19:49:09  <BlueMatt> meshcollider: we only fixed it like an hour or three ago
2912017-10-04T19:49:32  <jonasschnelli> cfields: would always checking nServices be terrible? (instead of caching a boolen)?
2922017-10-04T19:49:50  <BlueMatt> cfields: so, wait, you want to add an fLimitedNode in addition to the fPreferred stuff? why not just adapt UpdatePreferredDownload to consider limited-ness and call it on our peers in the first UpdatedBlockTip with not-fInitialDownload?
2932017-10-04T19:51:13  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2942017-10-04T19:52:47  <BlueMatt> you may be stuck in ibd for a while, there isnt much point in filling your outbound peers with limited nodes for that duration
2952017-10-04T19:52:50  <BlueMatt> or am I missing something?
2962017-10-04T19:54:51  <BlueMatt> grr, I'll go review the pr and give real feedback instead of bullshitting, give me 20 minutes
2972017-10-04T19:55:00  <cfields> My initial thought was to tie it to preferred as well, but iirc that broke down somewhere
2982017-10-04T19:56:27  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
2992017-10-04T19:56:54  <cfields> I was also thinking that we'd want to avoid pruned nodes for initial headers sync, but I guess that's not really necessary
3002017-10-04T19:58:35  <cfields> BlueMatt: generally though, I really dislike expanding the scope of variables like that. eventualy fPreferred turns into something entirely meaningless like "whitelisted"
3012017-10-04T20:05:14  <jonasschnelli> Okay. Updated the PR
3022017-10-04T20:05:15  <jonasschnelli> Relevant parts are here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10387/files#diff-eff7adeaec73a769788bb78858815c91R1322
3032017-10-04T20:13:45  <jonasschnelli> ping JeremyRu1in
3042017-10-04T20:14:20  <jonasschnelli> My re-check / re-test told me,  rescanblockchain { start_height: 10, stop_height: 20 } does also rescan block 20
3052017-10-04T20:17:10  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3062017-10-04T20:18:17  *** JeremyRu1in is now known as JeremyRubin
3072017-10-04T20:19:04  <JeremyRubin> jonasschnelli: it doesn't work; see PR comment
3082017-10-04T20:19:26  <JeremyRubin> it's the failure mode that's broken, I should have been more clear
3092017-10-04T20:19:46  <JeremyRubin> but I was confused about the general range semantics too; so more clear language is good there nonetheless
3102017-10-04T20:27:18  <JeremyRubin> jonasschnelli: try scanning from 10 - 20 on a healthy node
3112017-10-04T20:27:28  <JeremyRubin> then, corrupt block 20 so it won't scan.
3122017-10-04T20:27:42  <JeremyRubin> now, rescan again
3132017-10-04T20:27:45  <JeremyRubin> same result
3142017-10-04T20:27:52  <JeremyRubin> now, corrupt blocks 10-20
3152017-10-04T20:27:56  <JeremyRubin> will return the same thing
3162017-10-04T20:28:32  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: I added a LogPrintf below the ReadBlockFromDisk and AddToWalletIfInvolvingMe scan... and block 20 was scanned.
3172017-10-04T20:28:43  <jonasschnelli> But maybe I should try your setup
3182017-10-04T20:28:50  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: will you kill me if I suggest a cleanup to nRequiredServices/nRelevantServices as a first commit in your pr?
3192017-10-04T20:29:00  * BlueMatt feels like he's pulling a cfields here :p
3202017-10-04T20:29:14  <JeremyRubin> jonasschnelli: Yes, if your scanning does not fail, it is fine.
3212017-10-04T20:29:14  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: ideally we keep cleanups in a seperate PR
3222017-10-04T20:29:19  <BlueMatt> not like cfields ever requires it for others, but endless first-commit cleanups
3232017-10-04T20:29:22  <JeremyRubin> But if you have a corruption, it is not.
3242017-10-04T20:29:22  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: but I can cherry pick.. :)
3252017-10-04T20:29:26  <cfields> heh
3262017-10-04T20:29:29  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: let me play around a bit
3272017-10-04T20:29:51  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: what do you mean with corruption?
3282017-10-04T20:29:57  <cfields> BlueMatt: only allowed if you first ack my socket changes you required :p
3292017-10-04T20:29:58  <jonasschnelli> invalidateblock?
3302017-10-04T20:30:27  <ryanofsky> jonasschnelli, if readblockfrom disk fails
3312017-10-04T20:30:30  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: yeah. Happy to pull-in a cleanup into bip159 PR
3322017-10-04T20:30:36  <BlueMatt> cfields: damn you
3332017-10-04T20:30:57  *** jtimon has quit IRC
3342017-10-04T20:31:36  <cfields> jonasschnelli: oh that reminds me, what do you think about adding "NODE_NETWORK should be combined with NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED" to the bip (if not already) ?
3352017-10-04T20:31:44  <cfields> I don't think that's just an implementation detail
3362017-10-04T20:31:46  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin, ryanofsky: aha... a filed ReadBlockFromDisk falsely reports a successful scan.
3372017-10-04T20:32:04  <jonasschnelli> cfields: Yeah. Need to add this... is unclear in the BIP
3382017-10-04T20:32:06  <JeremyRubin> No
3392017-10-04T20:32:17  <jonasschnelli> *a failed
3402017-10-04T20:32:20  <JeremyRubin> It correctly reports an unsuccessful scan
3412017-10-04T20:32:28  <jonasschnelli> yeah.. what I meant. sry
3422017-10-04T20:32:32  <JeremyRubin> you incorrectly interpret that result :)
3432017-10-04T20:33:27  <JeremyRubin> basically ANY non-nullptr return should cause you to return "scan failed"
3442017-10-04T20:33:30  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: this would also be undetected in classic startup -rescans? Right?
3452017-10-04T20:33:57  <JeremyRubin> Unsure of prior semantics of rescan
3462017-10-04T20:34:21  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3472017-10-04T20:34:50  <JeremyRubin> it would be reported that you have only succeeded in scanning blocks after LAST_FAILED, so then you would need to rescan up to LAST_FAILED
3482017-10-04T20:34:56  <jonasschnelli> the current rescan function skips corrupted blocks IMO
3492017-10-04T20:35:39  <JeremyRubin> Yes, but it also tells you 'no guarantees before block N'
3502017-10-04T20:35:53  <JeremyRubin> where N = LAST_FAILED
3512017-10-04T20:36:17  <JeremyRubin> this impl, however, is happy to tell you Blocks A-B succeded
3522017-10-04T20:36:20  <JeremyRubin> which is incorrect
3532017-10-04T20:37:23  <jonasschnelli> I see.. let me see how we can fix this.
3542017-10-04T20:37:37  <JeremyRubin> you have 2 choices I think
3552017-10-04T20:37:41  <jonasschnelli> I don't want to change the way how current startup -rescans work..
3562017-10-04T20:37:45  <JeremyRubin> either keep a vector of all failures
3572017-10-04T20:37:57  <jonasschnelli> aborting on a corrupted block seems not to be the ideal choice
3582017-10-04T20:38:00  <JeremyRubin> if passed in as a ptr arg with default nullptr
3592017-10-04T20:38:16  <JeremyRubin> And return a vector of failures
3602017-10-04T20:38:30  <jonasschnelli> or report "could not read all block" (bool)?
3612017-10-04T20:38:52  <JeremyRubin> That could work too...
3622017-10-04T20:39:24  <JeremyRubin> I would (personally) not return *anything* if there are any failures.
3632017-10-04T20:39:44  <jonasschnelli> AFAIK, ScanForWalletTransactions returns non-nullptr when detecting a corrupt block.. could use that
3642017-10-04T20:41:12  <JeremyRubin> yes, that's fine. I would return a `Maybe (Int,Int)`, and only return `Some (start, stop)` if there are no failures.
3652017-10-04T20:42:50  <JeremyRubin> I would also push you to rework the errors to differentiate when the numbers are actually invalid v.s. out of range for the current chain we're on.
3662017-10-04T20:43:38  <JeremyRubin> Because asking for (1000, 2000) could fail depending on how caught up you are.
3672017-10-04T20:44:06  <JeremyRubin> But is not an invalid request like (2000,1000), (-10, 20), etc.
3682017-10-04T20:45:49  <JeremyRubin> (in particular, because I think that it would be useful to issue a rescan from, let's say, (tip-10, tip+1000) and for it to return (tip-10, tip)
3692017-10-04T20:48:54  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: I think that should do it: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7061/files#diff-df7d84ff2f53fcb2a0dc15a3a51e55ceR3237
3702017-10-04T20:50:15  <JeremyRubin> jonasschnelli: I think that seems correct to me. If you have no failures reported, then all the blocks were scanned in that range
3712017-10-04T20:50:49  <jonasschnelli> Yes. If you get this (new) error, you may have scanned some of the blocks (but we won't tell which one)
3722017-10-04T20:51:03  <JeremyRubin> Correct.
3732017-10-04T20:51:17  <jonasschnelli> If you have a corrupted block you are alreafy in serious troubles... :)
3742017-10-04T20:51:54  <JeremyRubin> Yes. Maybe worth saying 'Rescan Failed. Potentially corruputed data files.'
3752017-10-04T20:52:52  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: Thanks... let me add this
3762017-10-04T20:53:17  <JeremyRubin> jonasschnelli: my comment about handling of invalid ranges though still stands. differentiating between the cases of overlap is good, an you can return useful results in some of them.
3772017-10-04T20:54:06  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: can you rephrase? I don't get your range concern
3782017-10-04T20:54:22  <JeremyRubin> bad ranges: ()[] ([)] good ranges: [()] ok ranges: [(]) []()
3792017-10-04T20:54:36  <jonasschnelli> ?
3802017-10-04T20:55:01  <JeremyRubin> (let '(' and ')' denote the start and stop range, and '[' and ']' denote genesis to tip on a number line)
3812017-10-04T20:55:14  <jonasschnelli> aha...
3822017-10-04T20:55:42  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3832017-10-04T20:55:43  <JeremyRubin> so if i ask for (tip -10, tip+100) you should return scanned (tip-10, tip)
3842017-10-04T20:55:45  <jonasschnelli> stop_height is optional but start_heigt is required when stop_height is passed
3852017-10-04T20:56:22  <jonasschnelli> I think tip+100 should result in an error
3862017-10-04T20:56:35  <JeremyRubin> I don't
3872017-10-04T20:56:47  <JeremyRubin> because it could result from our node just being behind and syncing
3882017-10-04T20:57:03  *** promag has quit IRC
3892017-10-04T20:57:14  <jonasschnelli> Yeah.. but would you silently ignore it? IMO it deserves that we inform the user (with an error)
3902017-10-04T20:57:18  <JeremyRubin> If you want it to be an error, it shouldn't be invalid it should be 'not synced to X yet'
3912017-10-04T20:57:24  <jonasschnelli> Then he can self-correct rather then auto-correct
3922017-10-04T20:57:24  *** pergaminho has quit IRC
3932017-10-04T20:57:39  <JeremyRubin> if you want it to be more clear, then you should always return the current tip
3942017-10-04T20:58:44  <JeremyRubin> but in the 'ok ranges' cases, the type of failure is very different from the bad ranges
3952017-10-04T20:59:00  <JeremyRubin> bad ranges will NEVER succeed, ok ranges will succeed if you wait long enough
3962017-10-04T20:59:45  <JeremyRubin> So bad ranges are invalid. ok ranges are too 'soon' for our node.
3972017-10-04T21:00:17  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3982017-10-04T21:01:03  <JeremyRubin> And if you don't want to support ok ranges, then there is no point of returning the range scanned at all, you may as well return `Maybe ()` because success means the range was scanned.
3992017-10-04T21:02:15  <JeremyRubin> ((unless I'm not seeing some edge case? Maybe if you somehow trigger an abortrescan you would return (start, point_aborted)?))
4002017-10-04T21:02:26  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: but with the current fix (throw when getting a non-nullptr) there is a guarantee we have scanned the given range, right?
4012017-10-04T21:02:35  <JeremyRubin> Correct!
4022017-10-04T21:02:45  <jonasschnelli> Do you see anything else t
4032017-10-04T21:02:49  <jonasschnelli> to fix?
4042017-10-04T21:02:57  <JeremyRubin> ((Except see above abortrescan concern))
4052017-10-04T21:03:13  <jonasschnelli> abortrescan leads to an explicit error thrown
4062017-10-04T21:03:24  <JeremyRubin> ok -- so then no point in returning the range
4072017-10-04T21:03:28  <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7061/files#diff-df7d84ff2f53fcb2a0dc15a3a51e55ceR3231
4082017-10-04T21:03:31  <JeremyRubin> so remove the return values
4092017-10-04T21:03:36  <jonasschnelli> the throw will lead to not return the range
4102017-10-04T21:04:10  <JeremyRubin> Actually... making abortrescan return the range seems like good UX
4112017-10-04T21:04:51  <jonasschnelli> We could add that later,.. seems out of scope and related to #11450
4122017-10-04T21:04:52  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11450 | ScanForWalletTransactions return value is incorrectly documented · Issue #11450 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4132017-10-04T21:05:06  <JeremyRubin> k -- so otherwise, you should get rid of the return values.
4142017-10-04T21:05:16  <jtimon> I really don't get it, if someone else can try to explain, that would be welcomed re https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11427#issuecomment-334033122
4152017-10-04T21:05:20  <JeremyRubin> Unless you want to handle the ranges I've labelled 'ok'
4162017-10-04T21:05:50  <jonasschnelli> You are aware that a *throw" will lead to return nothing blow that acctuall throw code line?
4172017-10-04T21:06:00  <JeremyRubin> (which, even if not handled, I think merit a separate designation from 'invalid')
4182017-10-04T21:06:38  <JeremyRubin> jonasschnelli: I'm merely pointing out that the absence of an error indicates that the request completed as requested, so the caller already knows start and stop.
4192017-10-04T21:07:15  <JeremyRubin> But maybe it's better interface design to not rely on that in case we improve the behavior in the future ;)
4202017-10-04T21:07:52  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: hm... sorry for not following completely... which absence of an error you referring to?
4212017-10-04T21:08:10  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4222017-10-04T21:08:11  <jonasschnelli> Abort rescan leads to an error: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7061/files#diff-df7d84ff2f53fcb2a0dc15a3a51e55ceR3232
4232017-10-04T21:08:37  <JeremyRubin> Ok. So you're a client. You ask for rescan (tip-10,tip-5).
4242017-10-04T21:08:48  <JeremyRubin> I'm the server.
4252017-10-04T21:08:59  <JeremyRubin> I see the request, and I rescan happily.
4262017-10-04T21:09:44  <JeremyRubin> I now will return a range (start, stop) based on your request.
4272017-10-04T21:10:12  <JeremyRubin> Under what circumstance do you, the caller, not already know what that range is?
4282017-10-04T21:10:33  <JeremyRubin> I suppose you don't know the tip if you only pass a start?
4292017-10-04T21:11:21  <JeremyRubin> So maybe it merits returning just the finish height, but you never don't know what start you requested already.
4302017-10-04T21:12:28  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4312017-10-04T21:12:53  <JeremyRubin> Anyways... this is secondary, it's not really an issue. But I think that handling ok ranges addresses my concern anyways.
4322017-10-04T21:13:40  *** promag has quit IRC
4332017-10-04T21:13:58  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: Okay. I see you point.
4342017-10-04T21:14:16  <jonasschnelli> I guess we could leave it away completely then.... or keep it for future extenions...
4352017-10-04T21:14:37  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4362017-10-04T21:14:42  <jonasschnelli> Although, if you keep away the stop height,... you should at leat get the height of the scanned tip
4372017-10-04T21:14:46  <jonasschnelli> Which may be important
4382017-10-04T21:18:08  <JeremyRubin> I think that handling ok ranges in the manner suggested gets this to have the correct semantics for the returned data
4392017-10-04T21:18:11  <jonasschnelli> JeremyRubin: thanks for reviewing and helping me to understand your point. :)
4402017-10-04T21:18:23  <JeremyRubin> yeah, sorry if my explanations were unclear
4412017-10-04T21:19:13  <JeremyRubin> It was a pretty subtle bug I guess, because a lot of people missed it!
4422017-10-04T21:19:14  <jonasschnelli> Re-reading your comments looks like I had my eyes covered with tomatos
4432017-10-04T21:20:29  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Glad you did a review.. and tell me, if you think other stuff needs to be changed/fixed.
4442017-10-04T21:24:35  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4452017-10-04T21:27:57  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4462017-10-04T21:28:40  <JeremyRubin> jonasschnelli: I would like to see ok_ranges handled in the code and then I'd ack it. If you feel strongly that they should not attempt to scan, and just fail, that's fine. But it should at least return different error strings (e.g., 'start is greater than tip', 'end is greater than tip', 'start must be positive', 'end must be positive')
4472017-10-04T21:29:35  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4482017-10-04T21:30:11  <JeremyRubin> but I think that it is simple to say that at least the end being greater than the tip has an obvious execution (execute as if no argument were provided).
4492017-10-04T21:32:20  <JeremyRubin> Start being greater than the tip requires some notion of an empty scan, which I don't think you can express easily with an inclusive range (unless you do another optional bool not_synced_fully).
4502017-10-04T21:35:21  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4512017-10-04T21:38:09  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4522017-10-04T21:41:01  *** tiktaktoe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4532017-10-04T21:44:09  *** tiktaktoe has quit IRC
4542017-10-04T21:46:41  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4552017-10-04T21:48:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
4562017-10-04T21:48:37  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4572017-10-04T21:49:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4582017-10-04T21:54:33  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4592017-10-04T21:55:53  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
4602017-10-04T21:56:08  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4612017-10-04T21:59:13  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4622017-10-04T21:59:14  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
4632017-10-04T21:59:44  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4642017-10-04T21:59:56  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
4652017-10-04T22:02:39  <JeremyRubin> jonasschnelli: ^^^ afk soon, shoot an email if questions
4662017-10-04T22:08:46  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4672017-10-04T22:09:21  *** owowo has quit IRC
4682017-10-04T22:11:21  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4692017-10-04T22:13:37  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4702017-10-04T22:14:42  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4712017-10-04T22:22:12  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4722017-10-04T22:23:35  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4732017-10-04T22:27:41  *** wraithm has quit IRC
4742017-10-04T22:37:17  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #11452: Improve ZMQ functional test (master...2017-10-improve-zmq-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11452
4752017-10-04T23:01:49  *** goatpig has quit IRC
4762017-10-04T23:09:44  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
4772017-10-04T23:11:00  *** promag has quit IRC
4782017-10-04T23:12:05  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4792017-10-04T23:14:12  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4802017-10-04T23:20:33  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4812017-10-04T23:23:43  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4822017-10-04T23:25:38  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4832017-10-04T23:43:52  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
4842017-10-04T23:46:17  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4852017-10-04T23:46:28  *** promag has quit IRC
4862017-10-04T23:52:32  *** jb55 has quit IRC
4872017-10-04T23:58:41  *** abpa has quit IRC
4882017-10-04T23:59:08  *** Alina-malina has quit IRC