12017-12-12T00:00:27 *** ibrightly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22017-12-12T00:02:29 *** TheV01d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
32017-12-12T00:02:38 *** stevenroose has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
42017-12-12T00:03:41 *** schnerchi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
52017-12-12T00:03:46 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62017-12-12T00:03:50 *** cyber55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
72017-12-12T00:06:06 *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
82017-12-12T00:10:47 *** crazyprodigy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
92017-12-12T00:11:22 *** midnightmagic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102017-12-12T00:14:12 *** shtirlic has quit IRC
112017-12-12T00:15:03 *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122017-12-12T00:17:00 *** arubi has quit IRC
132017-12-12T00:17:25 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142017-12-12T00:19:07 *** sipa has quit IRC
152017-12-12T00:24:04 *** mrfrasha has quit IRC
162017-12-12T00:24:20 *** HarlequinFields has quit IRC
172017-12-12T00:27:29 *** pierre_rochard has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
182017-12-12T00:29:02 *** HarlequinFields has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192017-12-12T00:29:03 <pierre_rochard> Does each wallet in vpwallets have a unique identifier?
202017-12-12T00:32:36 *** achow101_ is now known as achow101
212017-12-12T00:34:27 *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222017-12-12T00:44:57 *** jamesob has quit IRC
232017-12-12T00:50:50 *** leofoto123 has quit IRC
242017-12-12T00:55:00 *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
252017-12-12T00:56:22 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262017-12-12T00:56:43 *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272017-12-12T00:59:05 *** newbold_ has quit IRC
282017-12-12T01:01:56 *** vchengsong has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292017-12-12T01:02:06 *** jb55 has quit IRC
302017-12-12T01:05:07 *** DrFeelGood has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312017-12-12T01:18:23 *** zombieC has quit IRC
322017-12-12T01:19:50 *** HarlequinFields has quit IRC
332017-12-12T01:29:37 *** Kozuch_ has quit IRC
342017-12-12T01:29:57 *** bule has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352017-12-12T01:31:09 *** vchengsong has quit IRC
362017-12-12T01:33:57 *** DvdKhl has quit IRC
372017-12-12T01:44:29 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
382017-12-12T01:45:01 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
392017-12-12T01:46:07 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402017-12-12T01:48:19 *** HarlequinFields has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
412017-12-12T02:01:56 *** davec has quit IRC
422017-12-12T02:03:52 *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
432017-12-12T02:03:56 *** tomdickharry has quit IRC
442017-12-12T02:05:03 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452017-12-12T02:15:27 *** Roberto_2000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
462017-12-12T02:20:01 *** dongcarl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472017-12-12T02:27:05 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
482017-12-12T02:35:27 *** toorx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
492017-12-12T02:47:14 *** dermoth has quit IRC
502017-12-12T02:47:36 *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512017-12-12T02:48:21 <kallewoof> I had no idea nodes randomly rebroadcasted other people's transactions. Double spending is the only solution then. (Another case for RBF default on)
522017-12-12T02:48:57 <sipa> kallewoof: some sites do
532017-12-12T02:49:04 <sipa> though in general, nodes don't
542017-12-12T02:49:12 <sipa> there is nothing to prevent them to, though
552017-12-12T02:49:31 <sipa> and i think we'd be better off if there was some mempool synchronization that levelled the field
562017-12-12T02:49:33 <kallewoof> Just see no reason for them to do it.
572017-12-12T02:50:19 <kallewoof> Mempool synchronization? Like what?
582017-12-12T02:51:46 <phantomcircuit> sipa, there are nodes that rebroadcast transactions seemingly on a timer
592017-12-12T02:52:00 <gmaxwell> kallewoof: bitcoin core doesn't rebroadcast third party txn, but random bozos do, because they think they're helping in some cases, or because they want to pump up mempool stats. or god knows why
602017-12-12T02:52:25 <phantomcircuit> either way, transactions do not expire
612017-12-12T02:52:39 <gmaxwell> mempool sync is discussed some here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1377345.0
622017-12-12T02:54:04 <kallewoof> gmaxwell: Ohh, okay. Thanks! (I should be on bitcointalk more often I guess)
632017-12-12T03:03:57 *** dongcarl has quit IRC
642017-12-12T03:04:36 <phantomcircuit> kallewoof, i'd generally advise against that unless you filter for pre 2014
652017-12-12T03:10:44 *** tomdickharry has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662017-12-12T03:18:09 *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
672017-12-12T03:19:14 *** meshcollider has quit IRC
682017-12-12T03:19:54 <kallewoof> phantomcircuit: I very rarely visit it, but it seems like it has a lot of in-depth discussion.
692017-12-12T03:21:22 *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
702017-12-12T03:21:57 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712017-12-12T03:22:34 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
722017-12-12T03:43:03 *** dongcarl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
732017-12-12T03:43:36 *** dongcarl has left #bitcoin-core-dev
742017-12-12T03:46:33 *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
752017-12-12T03:47:36 <meshcollider> kallewoof: so much rubbish too though unfortunately
762017-12-12T03:52:15 *** toorx has quit IRC
772017-12-12T03:53:50 *** Issues2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
782017-12-12T03:54:30 *** Murch has quit IRC
792017-12-12T03:54:30 *** Issues2 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
802017-12-12T03:56:45 *** HarlequinFields has quit IRC
812017-12-12T04:01:23 *** roadcrap has quit IRC
822017-12-12T04:03:45 *** cheetah2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
832017-12-12T04:11:59 <kallewoof> meshcollider: That's unfortunate.
842017-12-12T04:38:36 <sipa> kallewoof: i think i stopped frequenting bitcointalk in 2012 maybe
852017-12-12T04:38:56 <sipa> or 2013
862017-12-12T04:39:06 <gmaxwell> it's no worse than the mailing list now.
872017-12-12T04:39:45 <gmaxwell> actually, I think it's better. There are a lot of dull and repetative posts on both, but BCT more promptly gets replies directing people to the last 20 times the material was discussed.
882017-12-12T04:42:39 *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
892017-12-12T04:43:51 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
902017-12-12T04:59:07 <kallewoof> Heh
912017-12-12T05:09:15 *** HarlequinFields has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
922017-12-12T05:17:28 *** mrfrasha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
932017-12-12T05:18:49 *** StopAndDecrypt_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
942017-12-12T05:19:21 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
952017-12-12T05:24:15 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962017-12-12T05:24:17 *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
972017-12-12T05:25:13 *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
982017-12-12T05:28:02 *** michagogo has quit IRC
992017-12-12T05:29:42 *** michagogo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002017-12-12T05:30:11 *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012017-12-12T05:31:34 *** Murch has quit IRC
1022017-12-12T05:40:41 *** commavir has quit IRC
1032017-12-12T05:41:01 *** commavir has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042017-12-12T05:42:17 *** roadcrap has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1052017-12-12T05:43:27 *** knight_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062017-12-12T05:44:10 *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1072017-12-12T05:47:02 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1082017-12-12T05:47:45 *** knight_ has quit IRC
1092017-12-12T05:48:01 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1102017-12-12T05:48:16 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1112017-12-12T05:48:27 *** cheese_ has quit IRC
1122017-12-12T05:48:46 *** Murch has quit IRC
1132017-12-12T05:52:23 *** imabinarydigit01 has quit IRC
1142017-12-12T05:53:11 *** imabinarydigit01 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1152017-12-12T05:53:12 *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
1162017-12-12T05:54:21 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172017-12-12T05:54:25 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1182017-12-12T05:59:01 *** quantbot has quit IRC
1192017-12-12T06:01:14 *** imabinarydigit01 has quit IRC
1202017-12-12T06:01:52 *** imabinarydigit01 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212017-12-12T06:02:43 *** Toxo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1222017-12-12T06:21:25 *** alfa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1232017-12-12T06:26:35 *** arubi has quit IRC
1242017-12-12T06:26:59 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252017-12-12T06:28:13 *** indistylo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262017-12-12T06:28:43 *** indistylo has quit IRC
1272017-12-12T06:29:14 *** meshcollider has quit IRC
1282017-12-12T06:30:47 *** Kernelstack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292017-12-12T06:32:38 *** mrfrasha has quit IRC
1302017-12-12T06:34:07 *** bule has quit IRC
1312017-12-12T06:46:40 *** Toxo has quit IRC
1322017-12-12T06:50:21 *** jtimon has quit IRC
1332017-12-12T06:50:22 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1342017-12-12T06:56:50 *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1352017-12-12T06:57:37 *** Emcy has quit IRC
1362017-12-12T07:03:30 *** Roberto_2000 has quit IRC
1372017-12-12T07:09:09 *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382017-12-12T07:15:12 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
1392017-12-12T07:15:21 *** DvdKhl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1402017-12-12T07:17:32 *** HarlequinFields has quit IRC
1412017-12-12T07:17:53 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1422017-12-12T07:17:53 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432017-12-12T07:20:12 *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
1442017-12-12T07:21:21 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1452017-12-12T07:24:45 *** Victor_sueca is now known as Victorsueca
1462017-12-12T07:26:57 <Provoostenator> sipa: so both the minimum fee required to get in the mempool and to bump transactions are both set by minrelayfee, but because there's also an MB limit to the mempool per node, that determines the effective minimum for the former?
1472017-12-12T07:28:20 <sipa> Provoostenator: run getmempoolinfo
1482017-12-12T07:29:24 <sipa> if your mempool is full, it will report a nonzero minrelayfee
1492017-12-12T07:30:05 <sipa> any time a transaction is kicked out of the mempool, the new relay fee is raised to the fee of what was kicked out
1502017-12-12T07:30:11 <sipa> and then it decays slowly back to 0
1512017-12-12T07:30:35 <Provoostenator> Ok, so it's more than an emergent property from the fact that low fees are kicked out.
1522017-12-12T07:34:29 <sipa> the goal is to have it carefully actually track the lowest acceptable feerate for your mempool
1532017-12-12T07:34:39 <sipa> which doesn't work if the mempool is always empty ;)
1542017-12-12T07:35:32 <Provoostenator> If people change their mempool size to something not standard, doesn't that create a fingerprinting opportunity?
1552017-12-12T07:36:36 <sipa> yup
1562017-12-12T07:37:09 <sipa> nodes even communicate their approximate minimum feerate to each other
1572017-12-12T07:45:39 *** Sillent has quit IRC
1582017-12-12T07:55:43 <Provoostenator> sipa: I'm doing a fresh make clean and make now to see if I can reproduce the test error. I did that yesterday as well, but I wonder how reproducable it is.
1592017-12-12T07:56:06 <sipa> Provoostenator: also wipe your test cache
1602017-12-12T07:56:19 <sipa> (test/cache directory)
1612017-12-12T07:56:34 <Provoostenator> Ah, why doesn't make clean do that?
1622017-12-12T07:56:44 <sipa> because make clean removes the results of make
1632017-12-12T07:56:53 <sipa> the test cache isn't produced by make
1642017-12-12T07:57:15 <Provoostenator> make nuke?
1652017-12-12T07:57:32 <sipa> PR's welcome :p
1662017-12-12T07:58:28 <Provoostenator> I can try. Do have an objection to make clean doing this? Or should it be another command? I can't see why anyone would possibly want to keep the test cache around after running make clean.
1672017-12-12T07:59:51 <sipa> cfields: opinions? ^
1682017-12-12T08:07:21 *** JackH has quit IRC
1692017-12-12T08:07:48 <sipa> Provoostenator: did removing the cache help?
1702017-12-12T08:07:57 <sipa> if that's the case, that's unexpected on its own
1712017-12-12T08:08:13 <Provoostenator> sipa: my machine is not that fast; I'll tell you in 15 minutes or so :-)
1722017-12-12T08:08:26 <Provoostenator> But I'd that's safe to assume.
1732017-12-12T08:08:59 <Provoostenator> Oh ok, so the cache is supposed to be wiped? I'll see ifI can break that.
1742017-12-12T08:09:09 <Provoostenator> I wish Github emails would should show the comment someone replied to, so it's easier to tell what "fixed" refers to. I'll stalk them.
1752017-12-12T08:09:12 <sipa> no, wiping the cache _should not_ matter for this
1762017-12-12T08:09:37 <sipa> i'm just saying that before jumping to conclusions, you should try to reproduce with an empty cache
1772017-12-12T08:09:51 <Provoostenator> That's what I meant. I'll try if wiping helps, but it shouldn't. Make is running as we speak.
1782017-12-12T08:10:07 <sipa> install ccache
1792017-12-12T08:10:12 <Provoostenator> (I've learned not to assume stuff :-)
1802017-12-12T08:10:23 <sipa> no need to recompile from scratch every time you switch branches
1812017-12-12T08:10:56 <Provoostenator> Generally I don't recompile everything. In this case I just wanted to make sure everything was clean and it wasn't some build problem.
1822017-12-12T08:11:12 <Provoostenator> I'll try ccache
1832017-12-12T08:11:52 <sipa> if ccache is installed, configure will automatically detect and use it
1842017-12-12T08:11:58 <Provoostenator> Any good tools that can leverage other machines (e.g. EC2 nodes) to speed op compilation?
1852017-12-12T08:12:16 *** tattoovicious has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1862017-12-12T08:12:18 <sipa> distcc i guess, but i never really looked into that
1872017-12-12T08:12:46 <sipa> it's fast enough on an octacore machine :)
1882017-12-12T08:13:16 <Provoostenator> Don't make me quote CSW :-)
1892017-12-12T08:13:21 <sipa> hahaha
1902017-12-12T08:16:48 *** Amuza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1912017-12-12T08:20:18 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1922017-12-12T08:27:09 <Provoostenator> sipa: your comment about why self.nodes[0].generate(1) was needed just solved another mystery for me: https://medium.com/provoost-on-crypto/debugging-bitcoin-core-functional-tests-cc0aa6e7fd3e
1932017-12-12T08:29:20 *** wump is now known as wumpus
1942017-12-12T08:29:59 <Provoostenator> I'll see if I can make sync_mempools() throw a warning if you call it during IDB.
1952017-12-12T08:32:47 <Provoostenator> And it would be nice to have a command to tell test nodes IDB is done without mining a block (cc jnewbery).
1962017-12-12T08:34:35 <aj> Provoostenator: you mean IBD (initial block download), or is IDB something i don't know about?
1972017-12-12T08:34:58 <Provoostenator> I need to stop making that typo. Yes, IBD, IDB is a record company :-)
1982017-12-12T08:35:37 <Provoostenator> (or whatever it is)
1992017-12-12T08:43:55 *** sugarpuff has quit IRC
2002017-12-12T08:44:16 *** sugarpuff has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2012017-12-12T08:45:32 *** arubi has quit IRC
2022017-12-12T08:46:22 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2032017-12-12T08:49:44 *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042017-12-12T08:53:27 *** owowo has quit IRC
2052017-12-12T08:57:48 <Provoostenator> sipa: address_types.py passes now. I'll make a Github ticket next time I notice when removing test cache fixes a test.
2062017-12-12T08:59:10 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2072017-12-12T08:59:23 *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
2082017-12-12T09:08:05 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2092017-12-12T09:11:27 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 4 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0e722e8879a8...c0902624b0ec
2102017-12-12T09:11:28 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2851b77 Pieter Wuille: Make all script verification flags softforks
2112017-12-12T09:11:28 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2dd6f80 Pieter Wuille: Add a test that all flags are softforks
2122017-12-12T09:11:29 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 01013f5 Pieter Wuille: Simplify tx validation tests
2132017-12-12T09:11:42 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10699: Make all script validation flags backward compatible (master...20170628_softflags) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10699
2142017-12-12T09:15:00 <sipa> o/
2152017-12-12T09:17:54 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
2162017-12-12T09:18:19 <wumpus> \o
2172017-12-12T09:19:04 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2182017-12-12T09:21:16 *** arubi has quit IRC
2192017-12-12T09:21:37 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2202017-12-12T09:26:45 *** tattoovicious has quit IRC
2212017-12-12T09:28:26 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c0902624b0ec...d48ab83f0053
2222017-12-12T09:28:27 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 07c4838 Matt Corallo: Always return true if AppInitMain got to the end...
2232017-12-12T09:28:27 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d48ab83 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11831: Always return true if AppInitMain got to the end...
2242017-12-12T09:29:04 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11831: Always return true if AppInitMain got to the end (master...2017-12-startup-exit-return-code-race) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11831
2252017-12-12T09:29:27 *** DvdKhl has quit IRC
2262017-12-12T09:43:42 *** tattoovicious has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2272017-12-12T09:51:12 <Provoostenator> p2p_full_blocktests failing on me with AssertionError: 1513072096.035577 <= 1513072096.086564
2282017-12-12T09:51:51 <Provoostenator> Slightly differtent numbers is another run: 1513070202.4765592 <= 1513070202.517996
2292017-12-12T09:52:16 <wumpus> uhoh
2302017-12-12T09:52:17 <Provoostenator> (on the segwit branch, I'll try master as well)
2312017-12-12T09:52:44 <wumpus> was it one of the recent commits?
2322017-12-12T09:53:09 <Provoostenator> Most recent version #11403
2332017-12-12T09:53:15 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11403 | SegWit wallet support by sipa · Pull Request #11403 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2342017-12-12T09:54:14 <Provoostenator> I am running make in another process, so maybe it's a timing thing?
2352017-12-12T09:54:20 <Provoostenator> I'll play around with it.
2362017-12-12T09:54:58 <Provoostenator> (make in another process, but also a different directory, so I mean perhaps heavy CPU / disk usage messes with the tests)
2372017-12-12T09:57:49 <wumpus> tests failures due to timing are unfortunately quite common
2382017-12-12T10:02:19 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
2392017-12-12T10:04:24 *** tattoovicious has quit IRC
2402017-12-12T10:05:42 <wumpus> it passes here locally
2412017-12-12T10:05:47 <wumpus> (on current master)
2422017-12-12T10:06:16 <Provoostenator> Travis is happy too, so it's obviously not deterministic.
2432017-12-12T10:11:50 <wumpus> yes I've been running it a few times on different hosts
2442017-12-12T10:18:14 <Provoostenator> Are there any good tools to generate disk / cpu background usage? (other than running an Ethereum full node :-)
2452017-12-12T10:18:43 <sipa> cpuburn
2462017-12-12T10:24:50 *** Babozor has quit IRC
2472017-12-12T10:28:31 <aj> wumpus: hey, i think i found a bug in the util unit test, that's been there since 2f7f2a in 2011; https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11862/commits/56ca063fd65e05b8b71fa5421592cb9f56cd4d09 (argc < length(argv), so non-option behaviour isn't actually tested)
2482017-12-12T10:30:20 <wumpus> aj: cool, please send a fix :)
2492017-12-12T10:33:42 *** terrence has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2502017-12-12T10:34:27 <wumpus> Provoostenator: do you get it on master too?
2512017-12-12T10:34:49 <Provoostenator> wumpus: yes, just did
2522017-12-12T10:35:16 <terrence> I want to develop a wallet, how can I get the lowest level api, or interface? instead of existing wrapped apis
2532017-12-12T10:37:37 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2542017-12-12T10:37:38 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
2552017-12-12T10:38:00 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562017-12-12T10:38:29 <wumpus> terrence: the lowest level would be to implement transaction serialization, deserialization, signing, as well as keeping the balance and unspent state up to date with the current status of the block chain yourself
2572017-12-12T10:39:21 <promag> wumpus: not sure if that is what he means
2582017-12-12T10:40:00 <promag> terrence: do you know bitcoind rpc interface?
2592017-12-12T10:40:19 <wumpus> promag: lol, let's leave that to them instead of arguing about it between us
2602017-12-12T10:41:09 <promag> heh, "existing wrapped apis" I guess he is talking about some client library or web api.. dunno... *flys away*
2612017-12-12T10:43:16 <promag> wumpus: should replace in Assert with annotation in #11515?
2622017-12-12T10:43:18 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11515 | Assert cs_main is held when retrieving node state by promag · Pull Request #11515 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2632017-12-12T10:43:19 *** dabura667 has quit IRC
2642017-12-12T10:44:02 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652017-12-12T10:44:05 <promag> or keep both?
2662017-12-12T10:44:07 <terrence> @promag sorry, I dont know, I'm new to blockchain dev
2672017-12-12T10:44:27 <wumpus> promag: well BlueMatt has a point that if it can be checked compile time,there's no point doing it at run time
2682017-12-12T10:44:55 <wumpus> promag: personally I wouldn't remove the comment though
2692017-12-12T10:45:09 <wumpus> promag: 'this datastructure is protected by lock X' is useful information
2702017-12-12T10:45:21 <promag> terrence: see https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#remote-procedure-calls-rpcs for instance
2712017-12-12T10:45:40 <wumpus> however a GUARDED_BY annotation does the same
2722017-12-12T10:45:48 <wumpus> and is checked by the compiler, unlike a comment
2732017-12-12T10:46:14 <Provoostenator> Deleting cache doesn't help either. Getting this error quite consistently now.
2742017-12-12T10:46:14 <promag> yes, the comment is redundant
2752017-12-12T10:46:21 <wumpus> IF you add the annotation
2762017-12-12T10:46:23 <terrence> promag: thank you, how did you
2772017-12-12T10:46:42 <wumpus> I don't agree that the AssertLockHeld in one function makes the comment redundant
2782017-12-12T10:47:05 <terrence> I have so many questions that I cannot find on the internet...
2792017-12-12T10:47:06 <wumpus> locks protect data, not code
2802017-12-12T10:47:42 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2812017-12-12T10:47:50 <wumpus> so the annotation or comment belongs at the data structure definition
2822017-12-12T10:48:27 *** quantbot has quit IRC
2832017-12-12T10:48:52 <promag> terrence: you have to dig, learn, experiment.. you are not in the matrix
2842017-12-12T10:49:28 <promag> wumpus: what I meant is to keep the assert and replace the comment with the annotation
2852017-12-12T10:49:55 <wumpus> I'm ok with that
2862017-12-12T10:50:06 <promag> it conflicts with https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11226/files#diff-eff7adeaec73a769788bb78858815c91R272
2872017-12-12T10:50:12 <terrence> promag: exactly, I'm new to blockchain, but I'm fascinated by blockchain
2882017-12-12T10:50:30 <wumpus> althoug in principle the assert is redundant when the annotation is there, but it doesn't hurt to have it so I don't find it worth a long discussion
2892017-12-12T10:50:31 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2902017-12-12T10:50:41 <wumpus> better to be overcomplete here
2912017-12-12T10:50:46 <promag> terrence: then join #bitcoin instead
2922017-12-12T10:51:42 <promag> wumpus: I agree, if asserts can be removed when annotations are in place
2932017-12-12T10:52:09 <wumpus> promag: it's somewhat complicated because not all compilers check the annotations
2942017-12-12T10:52:26 *** quantbot has quit IRC
2952017-12-12T10:52:32 <promag> so that's a +1 for assert
2962017-12-12T10:52:47 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2972017-12-12T10:53:45 <terrence> promag: I did, seems no one active in there
2982017-12-12T10:54:14 <promag> terrence: try #bitcoin-dev
2992017-12-12T10:54:36 <wumpus> #bitcoin is the most busy channel in the bitcoin community, if no one is active there you're just at the wrong time
3002017-12-12T10:55:48 <terrence> wumpus: okay... maybe wrong time
3012017-12-12T10:56:51 *** alfa has quit IRC
3022017-12-12T10:58:07 <promag> wumpus: if you're bored #11870
3032017-12-12T10:58:08 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11870 | wallet: Remove unnecessary mempool lock in ReacceptWalletTransactions by promag · Pull Request #11870 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3042017-12-12T10:58:54 <promag> pushed #11515
3052017-12-12T10:58:56 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11515 | Assert cs_main is held when retrieving node state by promag · Pull Request #11515 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3062017-12-12T10:59:19 <wumpus> I'm never bored
3072017-12-12T10:59:29 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11354: Coins DB: Improve handling of FRESH child with non-DIRTY parent in CCoinsViewCa⦠(master...fix/batch-write-clean-parent-fresh-child) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11354
3082017-12-12T11:00:07 <wumpus> so many things to do and so little time/energy
3092017-12-12T11:01:34 *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3102017-12-12T11:01:38 <promag> wumpus: are you talking about 234 open PR's? :p
3112017-12-12T11:01:45 <wumpus> for ex.
3122017-12-12T11:02:13 <fanquake> The amount of stuff I see wumpus star on GH he must have about 5 side projects on the go
3132017-12-12T11:02:56 <wumpus> that's... about right :)
3142017-12-12T11:03:43 <fanquake> Plenty todo with graphics cards and their drivers/related software.
3152017-12-12T11:18:37 *** Kozuch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3162017-12-12T11:21:19 <promag> ah I guess you don't have kids
3172017-12-12T11:24:04 <promag> wumpus: "I think both ways should be supported for the foreseeable future, no need to deprecate anything right now" why keep legacy? in 3 releases it should not be there IMO
3182017-12-12T11:24:39 <wumpus> because we don't want to break people's software just because
3192017-12-12T11:25:06 <wumpus> the current way apparently works for everyone well. I kind of hate RPC PRs that break the interface just because the author likes some convention better.
3202017-12-12T11:25:33 <wumpus> I personally would prefer using arrays as well there but that doesn't mean that all previously written software that uses createrawtransaction shoudl break
3212017-12-12T11:26:20 <wumpus> it's just an alternative way of specifying the same data
3222017-12-12T11:26:43 <promag> I don't think overloading is that great
3232017-12-12T11:26:59 <wumpus> fine, I'll just NACK the whole change then
3242017-12-12T11:27:18 *** zombieC has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3252017-12-12T11:27:19 <promag> heh
3262017-12-12T11:27:27 *** Cory has quit IRC
3272017-12-12T11:27:35 <wumpus> keep the users in mind please
3282017-12-12T11:28:51 <promag> in these cases I tend to prefer new calls instead of overloading
3292017-12-12T11:28:59 <wumpus> which would be bs in this case
3302017-12-12T11:34:23 *** fanquake has quit IRC
3312017-12-12T11:35:25 *** terrence has quit IRC
3322017-12-12T11:35:34 *** tattoovicious has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3332017-12-12T11:37:10 *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3342017-12-12T11:37:14 *** quantbot has quit IRC
3352017-12-12T11:37:27 <meshcollider> which PR are you discussing
3362017-12-12T11:37:48 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3372017-12-12T11:38:07 <meshcollider> oh, #11872 ?
3382017-12-12T11:38:08 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11872 | [rpc] createrawtransaction: Accept sorted outputs by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #11872 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3392017-12-12T11:43:26 <wumpus> FWIW in principle it is already possible to specify the order of outputs, but only if the client-side JSON library can emit ordered dictionaries. Python's can do this when you use Collections.OrderedDict() instead of a dictionary. The server-side (univalue) won't reorder dictionaries. But using an array is conforming to the spec instead of 'it happens to work'.
3402017-12-12T11:44:35 *** quantbot has quit IRC
3412017-12-12T11:48:12 *** Squidicuz has quit IRC
3422017-12-12T11:48:33 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
3432017-12-12T11:48:34 *** Squidicuz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3442017-12-12T11:49:33 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3452017-12-12T11:52:43 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3462017-12-12T11:59:12 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
3472017-12-12T11:59:23 *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3482017-12-12T11:59:51 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3492017-12-12T12:10:30 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d48ab83f0053...ad1820cbad15
3502017-12-12T12:10:31 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5fc6e71 John Newbery: [tests] Add network_thread_ utility functions....
3512017-12-12T12:10:32 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 74e64f2 John Newbery: [tests] Use network_thread_start() in tests.
3522017-12-12T12:10:32 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 34e08b3 John Newbery: [tests] Fix network threading in functional tests...
3532017-12-12T12:11:54 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3542017-12-12T12:15:44 *** quantbot has quit IRC
3552017-12-12T12:16:21 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3562017-12-12T12:17:41 *** Babozor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3572017-12-12T12:19:43 *** nelruk has quit IRC
3582017-12-12T12:19:50 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3592017-12-12T12:20:32 *** quantbot has quit IRC
3602017-12-12T12:23:59 *** Babozor has quit IRC
3612017-12-12T12:24:08 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3622017-12-12T12:25:54 <promag> wumpus: OrderedDict doesn't allow to test duplicate output address
3632017-12-12T12:26:28 <wumpus> promag: that's true :)
3642017-12-12T12:26:41 <promag> how would we test that atm?
3652017-12-12T12:26:52 <wumpus> promag: I think python will let you write a dictionary class that can hold duplicate keys
3662017-12-12T12:27:32 <promag> there is defaultdict
3672017-12-12T12:27:38 <wumpus> alternatively, write the query yourself, insert raw json somehow
3682017-12-12T12:27:55 <wumpus> defaultdict doesn't allow that afaik
3692017-12-12T12:28:34 <wumpus> what you'd want is a list-kind of class with a custom json serializer that serializes as object
3702017-12-12T12:28:43 <wumpus> not sure how to do that or whether it's even possible
3712017-12-12T12:29:20 <promag> raw it is
3722017-12-12T12:32:19 *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
3732017-12-12T12:38:24 <wumpus> promag: this seems to work https://gist.github.com/laanwj/822e1d8684a7ffc20cf08156654b37f7
3742017-12-12T12:38:32 <Provoostenator> I forgot that I used ./configure --enable-debug. The weird test functional errors I described above when I remove that (followed by make clean && make). They issues come back when I set --enable-debug again.
3752017-12-12T12:38:43 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3762017-12-12T12:39:01 <wumpus> Provoostenator: that's very strange
3772017-12-12T12:39:19 <Provoostenator> They also run a lot slower with debug enabled, so that might be related.
3782017-12-12T12:39:26 <wumpus> --enable-debug does make locking a lot slower, so if it's some kind of race condition, it could be triggered by that
3792017-12-12T12:39:29 <wumpus> right.
3802017-12-12T12:39:30 <Provoostenator> I'll run again with jnewbery's latest commits you just merged
3812017-12-12T12:41:17 <promag> wumpus: nice, are you going to add the test or mind I do?
3822017-12-12T12:43:03 *** quantbot has quit IRC
3832017-12-12T12:46:57 *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3842017-12-12T13:09:54 *** intcat has quit IRC
3852017-12-12T13:15:02 *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3862017-12-12T13:23:07 *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3872017-12-12T13:24:40 *** intcat has quit IRC
3882017-12-12T13:25:58 *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3892017-12-12T13:32:43 *** tattoovicious has quit IRC
3902017-12-12T13:35:28 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3912017-12-12T13:37:24 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 7 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ad1820cbad15...214046f69b19
3922017-12-12T13:37:25 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 93a34cf Matt Corallo: Make DisconnectBlock unaware of where undo data resides on disk
3932017-12-12T13:37:26 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 50701ba Matt Corallo: Move txindex/undo data disk location stuff out of ConnectBlock
3942017-12-12T13:37:26 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e104f0f Matt Corallo: Move block writing out of AcceptBlock
3952017-12-12T13:37:34 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10279: Add a CChainState class to validation.cpp to take another step towards clarifying internal interfaces (master...2016-12-cconsensus) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10279
3962017-12-12T13:43:02 *** alcipir has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3972017-12-12T13:46:42 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3982017-12-12T13:50:56 *** alcipir has quit IRC
3992017-12-12T13:51:29 *** mrfrasha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4002017-12-12T13:51:44 *** tattoovicious has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4012017-12-12T13:56:52 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/214046f69b19...5d132e8b9746
4022017-12-12T13:56:52 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a720b92 practicalswift: Remove includes in .cpp files for things the corresponding .h file already included
4032017-12-12T13:56:53 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5d132e8 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10574: Remove includes in .cpp files for things the corresponding .h file already included...
4042017-12-12T13:57:05 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10574: Remove includes in .cpp files for things the corresponding .h file already included (master...redundant) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10574
4052017-12-12T14:06:49 *** intcat has quit IRC
4062017-12-12T14:08:11 *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4072017-12-12T14:13:31 *** Amuza has quit IRC
4082017-12-12T14:15:48 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4092017-12-12T14:17:24 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
4102017-12-12T14:18:03 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4112017-12-12T14:19:23 <pierre_rochard> Does each wallet in vpwallets have a unique identifier? The class has GetName âfor logging/debugging purposesâ and there is the walletâs vector index, not sure that I can rely on either of these
4122017-12-12T14:19:26 *** zombieC has quit IRC
4132017-12-12T14:21:30 <promag> don't use the index
4142017-12-12T14:21:42 <promag> btw, what is the purpose?
4152017-12-12T14:24:05 <pierre_rochard> accounting in multi-wallet world - which addresses belong to which wallet
4162017-12-12T14:25:16 <promag> a wallet index can change
4172017-12-12T14:25:33 <promag> and a wallet name too, if you do rename the wallet
4182017-12-12T14:26:15 <promag> there is no embedded unique id in the wallet yet and don't know if there will be one
4192017-12-12T14:26:24 <pierre_rochard> ah so is the wallet name the file name? like wallet.dat?
4202017-12-12T14:26:47 <promag> yes
4212017-12-12T14:26:58 <pierre_rochard> If there wonât be an embedded unique ID then wallet name will have to suffice
4222017-12-12T14:27:03 <pierre_rochard> Thank you!
4232017-12-12T14:27:22 <promag> don't recall if it is the filename or filepath though
4242017-12-12T14:29:58 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4252017-12-12T14:30:55 *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4262017-12-12T14:43:26 *** Kozuch has quit IRC
4272017-12-12T14:46:57 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4282017-12-12T14:50:25 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
4292017-12-12T14:51:04 *** mrfrasha has quit IRC
4302017-12-12T14:51:34 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4312017-12-12T14:57:29 *** mrfrasha_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4322017-12-12T14:59:37 *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4332017-12-12T15:01:53 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #11877: Improve createrawtransaction functional tests (master...2017-12-createrawtransaction) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11877
4342017-12-12T15:02:55 *** intcat has quit IRC
4352017-12-12T15:04:09 *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4362017-12-12T15:09:23 <promag> wumpus: when you said "Something that I guess needs to be tested explicitly now" I thought you meant there should be a functional test :P
4372017-12-12T15:10:02 <wumpus> promag: adding tests is alwasys good
4382017-12-12T15:13:06 <wumpus> promag: but indeed I meant adding the check, which I didn't expect to be there yet
4392017-12-12T15:14:19 *** pkx2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4402017-12-12T15:14:23 <promag> wumpus: btw, is it really necessary to be unique? in terms of specification, is it possible to have duplicate output address?
4412017-12-12T15:14:54 <promag> IIRC there is no restriction there
4422017-12-12T15:15:09 <wumpus> I don't think transaction validation prohibits it
4432017-12-12T15:15:25 <wumpus> but our software enforces it everywhere so it's good to be consistent
4442017-12-12T15:15:43 *** Thora1Koelpin has quit IRC
4452017-12-12T15:15:44 <promag> are we disallowing just because of the key/value parameter?
4462017-12-12T15:15:59 <wumpus> no, because it's always been that way, also in the GUI
4472017-12-12T15:16:00 <promag> I should test in the UI..
4482017-12-12T15:16:08 <promag> ah ok ty
4492017-12-12T15:16:15 <wumpus> there's no reason to do it so it's generally indicative of a bug
4502017-12-12T15:17:01 <promag> wumpus: why? I could split coins to the same private, no?
4512017-12-12T15:17:10 <wumpus> just makes the transaction bigger than it should be, to pay more fees
4522017-12-12T15:17:26 <wumpus> if you want to split, definitely use different keys
4532017-12-12T15:17:53 <promag> right, best practise there
4542017-12-12T15:18:28 *** JackH has quit IRC
4552017-12-12T15:21:14 *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
4562017-12-12T15:25:50 *** tattoovicious has quit IRC
4572017-12-12T15:25:51 *** lnostdal has quit IRC
4582017-12-12T15:26:48 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
4592017-12-12T15:31:51 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4602017-12-12T15:34:33 *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4612017-12-12T15:36:57 *** mrfrasha_ has quit IRC
4622017-12-12T15:36:59 *** Emcy has quit IRC
4632017-12-12T15:38:57 *** mrfrasha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4642017-12-12T15:39:10 <BlueMatt> promag: was asking about a quick rebase-then-merge on #11041, which I think would be a good idea
4652017-12-12T15:39:12 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11041 | Add LookupBlockIndex by promag · Pull Request #11041 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4662017-12-12T15:39:14 *** meshcollider has quit IRC
4672017-12-12T15:39:28 <BlueMatt> mostly cause it would help me re-implement/rebase #10692 in a cleaner way
4682017-12-12T15:39:29 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10692 | Make mapBlockIndex and chainActive and all CBlockIndex*es const outside of validation/CChainState by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #10692 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4692017-12-12T15:39:57 <BlueMatt> I think it has enough concept ack to merit that....promag, care to rebase?
4702017-12-12T15:40:28 <BlueMatt> I'll commit to reviewing it quick, and yelling at people to get it merged in a day or three
4712017-12-12T15:42:03 * wumpus wonders how near #11403 is
4722017-12-12T15:42:09 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11403 | SegWit wallet support by sipa · Pull Request #11403 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4732017-12-12T15:42:38 * BlueMatt needs to re-review today :(
4742017-12-12T15:42:48 * wumpus needs to review and test it too
4752017-12-12T15:43:08 *** intcat has quit IRC
4762017-12-12T15:45:24 <instagibbs> re-re-review time eh
4772017-12-12T15:46:33 *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4782017-12-12T15:47:39 *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4792017-12-12T15:47:57 *** alcipir has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4802017-12-12T15:53:53 *** alcipir has quit IRC
4812017-12-12T15:56:24 *** alcipir has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4822017-12-12T15:57:48 *** R has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4832017-12-12T15:58:03 <R> Hey, is anyone active here?
4842017-12-12T15:58:11 *** R is now known as Guest89357
4852017-12-12T15:59:12 <Guest89357> ?
4862017-12-12T16:02:47 <Randolf> Guest89357: There are many active folks here, but the discussions are usually focused on the development of the various facets of the Bitcoin project.
4872017-12-12T16:02:58 <Guest89357> Ok
4882017-12-12T16:03:02 <Guest89357> well
4892017-12-12T16:03:18 <Guest89357> I have a problem related to an old bitcoin core client
4902017-12-12T16:03:32 <Guest89357> I don't suppose you guys could help me out with it?
4912017-12-12T16:03:46 <Randolf> Guest89357: For support, the #bitcoin channel is probably your best bet.
4922017-12-12T16:04:00 <wumpus> better to ask in #bitcoin, this is not a support but a development channel, read the topic please
4932017-12-12T16:04:04 <Guest89357> Ok
4942017-12-12T16:04:12 <Guest89357> sorry for bothering, will check that channel out!
4952017-12-12T16:04:18 *** Guest89357 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4962017-12-12T16:07:44 *** brugabri has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4972017-12-12T16:09:32 *** brugabri has quit IRC
4982017-12-12T16:10:21 *** alcipir has quit IRC
4992017-12-12T16:10:54 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
5002017-12-12T16:12:06 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5012017-12-12T16:15:08 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
5022017-12-12T16:15:31 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5032017-12-12T16:20:20 <promag> BlueMatt: ok then
5042017-12-12T16:21:10 *** ula has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5052017-12-12T16:21:26 <promag> BlueMatt: later tonight (utc+0 here) I can do it
5062017-12-12T16:21:43 <BlueMatt> k, thanks
5072017-12-12T16:24:57 *** alcipir has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5082017-12-12T16:26:30 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5092017-12-12T16:29:56 <ryanofsky> pierre_rochard, wallet files do have embedded identifiers, search for "get_fileid" in the code
5102017-12-12T16:30:08 <ryanofsky> but for your case, i think you probably better off using wallet filename, so users can understand & choose the id
5112017-12-12T16:30:20 <ryanofsky> also #11687 adds CWallet::m_name and should clarify things: see comment https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11687/commits/3dba60c313ae111492dafc3eb09f2c5044fb1b4d#diff-12635a58447c65585f51d32b7e04075bR724
5122017-12-12T16:30:24 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11687 | External wallet files by ryanofsky · Pull Request #11687 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5132017-12-12T16:31:34 <promag> ryanofsky: is get_fileid immutable?
5142017-12-12T16:32:24 <ryanofsky> not sure i understand but it's generated randomly, and we never change it but you can call an api to change it
5152017-12-12T16:35:42 <pierre_rochard> Thanks for the headsup ryanofsky - Iâll go with the wallet filename and will read through the PR
5162017-12-12T16:35:52 <promag> BlueMatt: I've updated the comment https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11866#pullrequestreview-82808956 which I think you misinterpreted
5172017-12-12T16:39:58 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5182017-12-12T16:40:09 *** bitcoinman55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5192017-12-12T16:40:41 <bitcoinman55> how do i encrypt a wallet on linux? ubuntu 16.04
5202017-12-12T16:40:56 <bitcoinman55> is it possible with the gui or i'll have to do it with commands
5212017-12-12T16:42:04 <BlueMatt> promag: no, I dont think I did
5222017-12-12T16:42:16 <BlueMatt> promag: I think we shouldnt be doing the duplicative check at all
5232017-12-12T16:42:31 <BlueMatt> bitcoinman55: #bitcoin will probably help you more, but, yes, there should be a button somewhere
5242017-12-12T16:43:01 <promag> but for instance, in the case there is a conflict, you say it will fire TransactionRemovedFromMempool right?
5252017-12-12T16:44:49 *** Randolf has quit IRC
5262017-12-12T16:55:05 *** bitcoinman55 has quit IRC
5272017-12-12T16:57:10 *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5282017-12-12T17:06:22 *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5292017-12-12T17:17:20 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
5302017-12-12T17:18:35 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5312017-12-12T17:22:53 *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
5322017-12-12T17:34:32 *** bitC has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5332017-12-12T17:35:06 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
5342017-12-12T17:38:52 <sipa> instagibbs: if addresstype is bech32, addmultisigaddress should give you a bech32 address
5352017-12-12T17:39:26 <sipa> and passing bech32 addresses for individual keys to addmultisigaddress should work fine
5362017-12-12T17:39:51 <instagibbs> oh hmmm, so it only complains if you default with a different kind?
5372017-12-12T17:40:29 <sipa> you can't pass a P2WSH address to addmultisigaddress
5382017-12-12T17:40:40 <sipa> because that is not an address that refers to a key
5392017-12-12T17:40:53 <instagibbs> oh did I get my wires crossed and try a p2wsh
5402017-12-12T17:41:10 *** bitC has quit IRC
5412017-12-12T17:42:52 <instagibbs> ah yeah, thought i was testing a p2pkh
5422017-12-12T17:44:05 <instagibbs> still returning me a nested p2sh
5432017-12-12T17:44:08 <instagibbs> fwiw
5442017-12-12T17:44:25 <instagibbs> oh nevermind, typo in startup
5452017-12-12T17:48:28 <instagibbs> all comments retracted :) good work
5462017-12-12T18:01:02 *** timothy has quit IRC
5472017-12-12T18:01:22 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #11879: [tests] remove redundant univalue_tests.cpp (master...remove_univalue_test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11879
5482017-12-12T18:01:55 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5492017-12-12T18:04:12 <sipa> Provoostenator: aha, snoei
5502017-12-12T18:05:09 <Provoostenator> I just got a new machine, so it's a good opportunity to see if any dependencies are missing in the docs...
5512017-12-12T18:05:26 <Provoostenator> Having some issues with make deploy not showing the icons.
5522017-12-12T18:06:57 *** shesek has quit IRC
5532017-12-12T18:11:31 <Provoostenator> Fixed by reboot, nvm.
5542017-12-12T18:35:29 <BlueMatt> hmm, re: #11873 I'm curious if anyone would maintain it or if it'd just die compared to travis where we at least theoretically work to fix failures
5552017-12-12T18:35:30 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11873 | Visual studio Build setup for CI · Issue #11873 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5562017-12-12T18:35:52 <BlueMatt> but it looks like its just a simple travis clone thinggy that runs windows vms instead of linux and is free for oss
5572017-12-12T18:37:10 <wumpus> BlueMatt: eh didn't the person more or less commit to maintaining MSVC support for forseeable future?
5582017-12-12T18:37:38 <wumpus> it was one of the first things I asked
5592017-12-12T18:38:19 <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11526#issuecomment-338163039
5602017-12-12T18:39:34 <BlueMatt> oh heh
5612017-12-12T18:39:50 <BlueMatt> so we are gonna add this other travis-y thing to bitcoin/bitcoin?
5622017-12-12T18:40:35 <BlueMatt> #11854 could prolly get merged
5632017-12-12T18:40:38 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11854 | Split up key and script metadata for better type safety by ryanofsky · Pull Request #11854 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5642017-12-12T18:40:51 * BlueMatt likes it pre-segwit-wallet, sorry sipa :p
5652017-12-12T18:41:05 <sipa> ?
5662017-12-12T18:42:24 <BlueMatt> as in I'd like to see segwit wallet built on 11854, given it was partially the result of my review comments :p
5672017-12-12T18:42:40 <sipa> oh, no opinion there
5682017-12-12T18:42:49 <sipa> i'll gladly rebase if it's merged first
5692017-12-12T18:44:10 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5702017-12-12T18:44:11 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5712017-12-12T18:44:34 <wumpus> BlueMatt: yes I think it's basically good to go, there was some discussion about where to put the MSVC build system that I didn't read in detail yet
5722017-12-12T18:45:26 <BlueMatt> ah cool
5732017-12-12T18:46:53 <BlueMatt> also #11870 could probably be merged
5742017-12-12T18:46:54 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11870 | wallet: Remove unnecessary mempool lock in ReacceptWalletTransactions by promag · Pull Request #11870 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5752017-12-12T18:47:39 <wumpus> ok
5762017-12-12T18:48:03 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5772017-12-12T18:48:37 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
5782017-12-12T18:50:08 *** tattoovicious has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5792017-12-12T18:58:17 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5d132e8b9746...22149540f9e7
5802017-12-12T18:58:17 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9c8eca7 Russell Yanofsky: Split up key and script metadata for better type safety...
5812017-12-12T18:58:18 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2214954 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11854: Split up key and script metadata for better type safety...
5822017-12-12T18:58:48 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11854: Split up key and script metadata for better type safety (master...pr/scriptmet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11854
5832017-12-12T18:59:05 *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
5842017-12-12T18:59:05 *** booyah has quit IRC
5852017-12-12T19:04:47 <BlueMatt> sipa: segwit wallet needs rebase :p
5862017-12-12T19:05:04 *** tomdickharry has quit IRC
5872017-12-12T19:05:25 <sipa> BlueMatt: already on it
5882017-12-12T19:06:06 *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5892017-12-12T19:09:47 <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: do you mind rebasing #11281 before review? Its kind confusing when some code added in intermediary commits is likely to be removed during rebase
5902017-12-12T19:09:50 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11281 | Avoid permanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during RescanFromTime by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #11281 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
5912017-12-12T19:10:01 <jonasschnelli> Oh. It needs rebase.. yes. Let me do that
5922017-12-12T19:10:40 <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: You mean cleanup the commit history?
5932017-12-12T19:10:55 <jonasschnelli> The last two commits need squashing... can do now
5942017-12-12T19:15:39 *** mrfrasha has quit IRC
5952017-12-12T19:16:31 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
5962017-12-12T19:17:39 <BlueMatt> yes, squash
5972017-12-12T19:17:41 <BlueMatt> thanks
5982017-12-12T19:17:52 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5992017-12-12T19:19:25 <sipa> BlueMatt: done
6002017-12-12T19:26:26 <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: here you go: #11281
6012017-12-12T19:26:29 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11281 | Avoid permanent cs_main/cs_wallet lock during RescanFromTime by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #11281 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6022017-12-12T19:26:45 <BlueMatt> thanks
6032017-12-12T19:27:18 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/22149540f9e7...ef8ba7d73a48
6042017-12-12T19:27:18 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5b25293 João Barbosa: wallet: Remove unnecessary mempool lock in ReacceptWalletTransactions
6052017-12-12T19:27:19 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ef8ba7d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11870: wallet: Remove unnecessary mempool lock in ReacceptWalletTransactions...
6062017-12-12T19:27:55 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11870: wallet: Remove unnecessary mempool lock in ReacceptWalletTransactions (master...2017-12-reaccept-wallet-transactions) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11870
6072017-12-12T19:29:08 *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6082017-12-12T19:29:42 *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6092017-12-12T19:34:44 *** shtirlic has quit IRC
6102017-12-12T19:35:07 <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: thanks for reviewing #10387, what do you think about https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10387#issuecomment-343357330
6112017-12-12T19:35:10 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10387 | Eventually connect to NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED peers by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10387 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6122017-12-12T19:35:37 *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6132017-12-12T19:37:51 *** shtirlic has quit IRC
6142017-12-12T19:38:34 *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6152017-12-12T19:43:08 <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: yes my comment was in response to gmaxwell's comment
6162017-12-12T19:44:17 <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: overlooked that comment. Thanks
6172017-12-12T19:46:04 <cfields> BlueMatt: woohoo @ #10279!
6182017-12-12T19:46:07 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10279 | Add a CChainState class to validation.cpp to take another step towards clarifying internal interfaces by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #10279 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6192017-12-12T19:46:16 *** HarlequinFields has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6202017-12-12T19:47:27 <BlueMatt> cfields: heh, lol, yea
6212017-12-12T19:47:48 <BlueMatt> next is #10692, but want to rebase on #11041 first
6222017-12-12T19:47:49 <cfields> BlueMatt: that was much easier to review than I anticipated. Sorry for just getting to it.
6232017-12-12T19:47:50 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10692 | Make mapBlockIndex and chainActive and all CBlockIndex*es const outside of validation/CChainState by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #10692 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6242017-12-12T19:47:52 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11041 | Add LookupBlockIndex by promag · Pull Request #11041 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6252017-12-12T19:48:19 *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6262017-12-12T19:48:23 <cfields> BlueMatt: could i convince you to do a quick PR to rename the class members? They're really confusing atm.
6272017-12-12T19:49:35 <BlueMatt> cfields: I mean you can do it, 10692 needs a *ton* of rebase, so I dont have anything important built on top of it
6282017-12-12T19:50:14 *** mrfrasha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6292017-12-12T19:50:16 <cfields> ok
6302017-12-12T19:53:24 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #11881: [WIP] [concept] Remove Python2 support (master...remove_python2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11881
6312017-12-12T20:01:56 *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
6322017-12-12T20:01:56 *** DvdKhl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6332017-12-12T20:09:18 *** shtirlic has quit IRC
6342017-12-12T20:10:01 *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6352017-12-12T20:14:36 *** adiabat has quit IRC
6362017-12-12T20:16:13 *** adiabat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6372017-12-12T20:19:26 *** shtirlic has quit IRC
6382017-12-12T20:20:13 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6392017-12-12T20:20:13 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6402017-12-12T20:20:17 *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6412017-12-12T20:29:23 *** cnone_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6422017-12-12T20:30:09 *** cnone22 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6432017-12-12T20:30:23 *** StopAndDecrypt_ has quit IRC
6442017-12-12T20:31:33 *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6452017-12-12T20:31:33 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
6462017-12-12T20:31:33 *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6472017-12-12T20:33:48 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6482017-12-12T20:34:12 *** sanada` has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6492017-12-12T20:34:40 *** paracyst has quit IRC
6502017-12-12T20:34:41 *** Ge0rges has quit IRC
6512017-12-12T20:34:47 *** paracyst_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6522017-12-12T20:35:12 *** sanada has quit IRC
6532017-12-12T20:35:12 *** murr4y has quit IRC
6542017-12-12T20:35:12 *** kallewoof has quit IRC
6552017-12-12T20:35:43 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
6562017-12-12T20:35:44 *** adiabat has quit IRC
6572017-12-12T20:35:45 *** LeMiner has quit IRC
6582017-12-12T20:35:45 *** ryan-c has quit IRC
6592017-12-12T20:36:02 *** mryandao has quit IRC
6602017-12-12T20:38:45 *** kallewoof has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6612017-12-12T20:39:21 *** LeMiner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6622017-12-12T20:39:25 *** murr4y has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6632017-12-12T20:39:27 *** ryan-c has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6642017-12-12T20:40:03 *** mryandao has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6652017-12-12T20:40:42 *** adiabat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6662017-12-12T20:41:51 *** Ge0rges has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6672017-12-12T20:43:25 <jnewbery> Provoostenator: Your p2p-fullblocktest.py failures are due to timeouts. The assert message isn't very helpful but if you look down the stack you'll see that it's a timeout
6682017-12-12T20:43:48 <jnewbery> most likely because the re-org test at the end of p2p-fullblocktest.py isn't completing within the required 60 seconds
6692017-12-12T20:44:13 <jnewbery> Take a look at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11632 and see if the suggested change helps you
6702017-12-12T20:44:38 <jnewbery> instagibbs: achow101: did that change fix it for you?
6712017-12-12T20:45:15 *** twistedline has quit IRC
6722017-12-12T20:45:15 *** Arokh has quit IRC
6732017-12-12T20:45:26 <jnewbery> I've also completely refactored that test in #11773. Any review of those PRs, starting with #11771 would be greatly appreciated
6742017-12-12T20:45:28 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11773 | [tests] Change p2p-fullblocktest to use BitcoinTestFramework by jnewbery · Pull Request #11773 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6752017-12-12T20:45:29 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11771 | [tests] Change invalidtxrequest to use BitcoinTestFramework by jnewbery · Pull Request #11771 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6762017-12-12T20:46:01 *** twistedline has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6772017-12-12T20:46:49 <instagibbs> the refactor of the test fixed it yes
6782017-12-12T20:49:39 <achow101> jnewbery: 11773 fixed it for me
6792017-12-12T20:54:24 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum2 is now known as Cogito_Ergo_Sum
6802017-12-12T20:54:45 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6812017-12-12T20:54:45 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6822017-12-12T20:55:06 *** ula has quit IRC
6832017-12-12T20:57:27 *** tattoovicious has quit IRC
6842017-12-12T20:57:39 *** vicnicius has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6852017-12-12T20:58:18 *** tattoovicious has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6862017-12-12T20:59:13 *** jb55 has quit IRC
6872017-12-12T20:59:49 *** vicnicius has quit IRC
6882017-12-12T21:00:27 <jnewbery> great. Thanks!
6892017-12-12T21:03:12 *** Szadek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6902017-12-12T21:05:03 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
6912017-12-12T21:09:00 *** tattoovicious has quit IRC
6922017-12-12T21:11:32 *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6932017-12-12T21:13:41 *** Murch has quit IRC
6942017-12-12T21:14:40 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6952017-12-12T21:21:01 *** efo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6962017-12-12T21:21:09 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
6972017-12-12T21:21:27 *** jb55 has quit IRC
6982017-12-12T21:21:38 *** efo has quit IRC
6992017-12-12T21:22:22 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7002017-12-12T21:28:55 *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7012017-12-12T21:36:25 *** nxvivek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7022017-12-12T21:43:50 *** Arokh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7032017-12-12T21:44:27 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
7042017-12-12T21:46:15 *** nxvivek has quit IRC
7052017-12-12T21:55:09 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7062017-12-12T21:56:42 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7072017-12-12T21:58:33 *** quantbot_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7082017-12-12T22:02:08 *** quantbot has quit IRC
7092017-12-12T22:03:21 *** quantbot_ has quit IRC
7102017-12-12T22:04:53 *** [\\\] has quit IRC
7112017-12-12T22:07:22 *** cnone22 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
7122017-12-12T22:12:09 *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7132017-12-12T22:14:35 *** Baraa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7142017-12-12T22:17:13 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
7152017-12-12T22:17:19 *** HarlequinFields has quit IRC
7162017-12-12T22:17:49 *** tattoovicious has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7172017-12-12T22:18:23 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7182017-12-12T22:20:13 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
7192017-12-12T22:26:45 *** tattoovicious has quit IRC
7202017-12-12T22:32:30 *** Murch has quit IRC
7212017-12-12T22:34:58 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7222017-12-12T22:36:57 *** jb55 has quit IRC
7232017-12-12T22:41:01 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #11882: Improve fallback fee situations (master...2017/12/feeest_readyness) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11882
7242017-12-12T22:41:41 *** Baraa has quit IRC
7252017-12-12T22:42:27 *** bityogi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7262017-12-12T22:42:30 *** bityogi has quit IRC
7272017-12-12T22:42:45 *** bityogi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7282017-12-12T22:43:13 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
7292017-12-12T22:44:12 *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7302017-12-12T22:44:12 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
7312017-12-12T22:44:12 *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7322017-12-12T22:51:43 *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7332017-12-12T22:52:47 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
7342017-12-12T22:52:48 *** StopAndDecrypt_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7352017-12-12T22:56:35 *** curious_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7362017-12-12T22:57:19 *** curious_ has quit IRC
7372017-12-12T23:01:03 *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7382017-12-12T23:09:47 *** bur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7392017-12-12T23:09:57 *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
7402017-12-12T23:10:14 *** bur has quit IRC
7412017-12-12T23:11:32 <meshcollider> jnewbery: is there anything wrong with modifying bitcoin.conf in run_test() or should that only be done in setup_chain() ?
7422017-12-12T23:18:18 *** jb55 has quit IRC
7432017-12-12T23:20:55 <jnewbery> meshcollider: by default, the test_framework will start your nodes in self.setup_nodes(), which is called *before* run_test() begins. That means if you don't restart your bitcoin nodes, then they won't see any changes in bitcoin.conf that you make in run_test()
7442017-12-12T23:21:44 <jnewbery> If you're stop-starting nodes and expect them to pick up changes in bitcoin.conf, then I see no problem with changing it in run_test().
7452017-12-12T23:21:53 *** alcipir has quit IRC
7462017-12-12T23:22:22 <jnewbery> You can get the datadir with the datadir variable in TestNode
7472017-12-12T23:22:45 <jonasschnelli> Travis lacks a couple of PRs behind... I wonder if we once have that situation continues, all it requires is a new PR / PR push every 2hs.
7482017-12-12T23:25:39 <meshcollider> jnewbery: ok sweet, thanks
7492017-12-12T23:27:35 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
7502017-12-12T23:29:04 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7512017-12-12T23:30:37 *** pkx2 has quit IRC
7522017-12-12T23:35:20 *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7532017-12-12T23:38:55 *** jb55 has quit IRC
7542017-12-12T23:40:08 *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
7552017-12-12T23:45:21 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
7562017-12-12T23:45:37 *** vicenteH has quit IRC
7572017-12-12T23:51:50 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
7582017-12-12T23:52:28 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7592017-12-12T23:59:30 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MeshCollider opened pull request #11883: Add configuration file/argument testing (master...201712_datadir_tests) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11883