12019-06-27T00:00:02 *** yano1 has quit IRC
22019-06-27T00:00:33 *** scoop has quit IRC
32019-06-27T00:00:33 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
42019-06-27T00:02:18 *** promag has quit IRC
52019-06-27T00:03:12 *** cprofitt1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62019-06-27T00:06:27 *** TheV01d- has quit IRC
72019-06-27T00:06:28 *** Apocalyptic has quit IRC
82019-06-27T00:06:28 *** valwal___ has quit IRC
92019-06-27T00:06:28 *** jl2012 has quit IRC
102019-06-27T00:06:28 *** vfP56jSe has quit IRC
112019-06-27T00:06:28 *** schmidty has quit IRC
122019-06-27T00:06:28 *** Liliaceae has quit IRC
132019-06-27T00:06:28 *** adiabat has quit IRC
142019-06-27T00:06:28 *** nejon has quit IRC
152019-06-27T00:06:29 *** gleb has quit IRC
162019-06-27T00:06:29 *** gwillen has quit IRC
172019-06-27T00:06:29 *** nehan has quit IRC
182019-06-27T00:06:38 *** gwillen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192019-06-27T00:06:39 *** valwal___ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202019-06-27T00:06:42 *** TheV01d_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212019-06-27T00:06:43 *** gleb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222019-06-27T00:06:43 *** nehan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232019-06-27T00:06:59 *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242019-06-27T00:06:59 *** vfP56jSe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
252019-06-27T00:07:01 *** schmidty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262019-06-27T00:07:01 *** nejon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272019-06-27T00:07:02 *** Liliaceae has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282019-06-27T00:07:06 *** jl2012 has quit IRC
292019-06-27T00:07:07 *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302019-06-27T00:07:07 *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312019-06-27T00:07:07 *** schmidty has quit IRC
322019-06-27T00:07:07 *** schmidty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332019-06-27T00:07:07 *** schmidty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
342019-06-27T00:07:18 *** Apocalyptic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352019-06-27T00:07:45 *** adiabat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362019-06-27T00:09:05 *** phantomcircuit has quit IRC
372019-06-27T00:09:30 *** infernix has quit IRC
382019-06-27T00:11:51 *** phantomcircuit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392019-06-27T00:13:58 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402019-06-27T00:14:52 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
412019-06-27T00:16:25 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
422019-06-27T00:21:57 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
432019-06-27T00:26:36 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
442019-06-27T00:33:15 *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452019-06-27T00:37:04 *** infernix has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
462019-06-27T00:37:32 *** scoop has quit IRC
472019-06-27T00:41:16 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
482019-06-27T00:46:54 *** elichai2 has quit IRC
492019-06-27T00:49:40 *** NicolasDorier has quit IRC
502019-06-27T00:53:19 *** wbnns has quit IRC
512019-06-27T00:53:20 *** NicolasDorier has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522019-06-27T00:53:42 *** mariorz has quit IRC
532019-06-27T00:55:14 *** wbnns has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542019-06-27T00:55:35 *** mariorz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552019-06-27T01:08:54 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562019-06-27T01:15:30 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
572019-06-27T01:17:42 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
582019-06-27T01:22:58 <achow101> sipa: meshcollider: Instead of having the ScriptPubKeyManagers be the SigningProviders for CWallet, what do you think about keeping CWallet as a SigningProvider and just having it poll all of its ScriptPubKeyManagers for keys and scripts? I think this makes the implementation much simpler as it doesn't require knowing exactly which address type the output is in order to sign for it (as well as a bunch of other things that take
592019-06-27T01:22:58 <achow101> SigingProviders)
602019-06-27T01:26:47 *** aseem has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
612019-06-27T01:27:58 *** hugohn has quit IRC
622019-06-27T01:31:13 *** aseem has quit IRC
632019-06-27T01:31:54 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642019-06-27T01:35:56 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
652019-06-27T02:07:24 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
662019-06-27T02:07:42 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672019-06-27T02:09:23 *** dviola has quit IRC
682019-06-27T02:10:20 *** omonk has quit IRC
692019-06-27T02:12:37 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
702019-06-27T02:13:29 *** omonk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712019-06-27T02:17:16 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
722019-06-27T02:23:30 *** rafalcpp_ has quit IRC
732019-06-27T02:23:36 *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
742019-06-27T02:23:39 *** queip has quit IRC
752019-06-27T02:29:37 <sipa> achow101: did you see my comment on your issue?
762019-06-27T02:30:23 <sipa> i think a more efficient interface is having a method that you give an sPK, and it gives you a SigningProvider for it
772019-06-27T02:30:42 <sipa> which for the legacy one would just give its built-in bulky one
782019-06-27T02:31:09 <sipa> and for descriptor based ones would expand the relevant descriptor at the right index and just return that
792019-06-27T02:31:11 *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
802019-06-27T02:31:42 *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
812019-06-27T02:34:04 *** scoop has quit IRC
822019-06-27T02:34:23 *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
832019-06-27T02:38:54 *** scoop has quit IRC
842019-06-27T02:48:08 *** astro has quit IRC
852019-06-27T02:49:07 *** astro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
862019-06-27T02:51:53 <achow101> sipa: there are a few things I think that approach won't work for. I'll take a closer look at that tomorrow
872019-06-27T02:53:46 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
882019-06-27T02:57:49 <sipa> achow101: yeah, i believe that; it's just a suggestion
892019-06-27T02:57:52 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
902019-06-27T02:58:48 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
912019-06-27T03:00:01 *** cprofitt1 has quit IRC
922019-06-27T03:00:27 *** surja795 has quit IRC
932019-06-27T03:01:38 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
942019-06-27T03:03:24 *** ElectroBNC has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
952019-06-27T03:09:20 *** bralyclow01 has quit IRC
962019-06-27T03:10:03 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
972019-06-27T03:12:08 *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
982019-06-27T03:12:40 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
992019-06-27T03:22:10 *** jtimon has quit IRC
1002019-06-27T03:29:31 *** spinza has quit IRC
1012019-06-27T03:34:58 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022019-06-27T03:39:24 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
1032019-06-27T03:47:58 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042019-06-27T03:51:08 *** surja795 has quit IRC
1052019-06-27T03:51:17 *** lafretini has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062019-06-27T03:53:28 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
1072019-06-27T03:54:13 *** lafretini has quit IRC
1082019-06-27T04:02:23 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1092019-06-27T04:04:27 *** gwillen has quit IRC
1102019-06-27T04:04:29 *** hugohn has quit IRC
1112019-06-27T04:05:48 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122019-06-27T04:07:50 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132019-06-27T04:16:10 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1142019-06-27T04:20:49 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
1152019-06-27T04:27:22 *** hugohn has quit IRC
1162019-06-27T04:28:54 *** profmac has quit IRC
1172019-06-27T04:35:00 <meshcollider> achow101: I thought that was handled by just checking IsMine on all of them anyway
1182019-06-27T04:40:13 <achow101> ngl, I think I did it way too rushed. If you look at the commits in my box-the-wallet branch, you'll see that they quality of each commit starts dropping off rapidly towards the end. I'll probably end up redoing a large chunk of it anyways
1192019-06-27T04:40:23 <achow101> at least now I know what all needs to actually be changed
1202019-06-27T04:42:21 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212019-06-27T04:43:53 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1222019-06-27T04:51:21 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
1232019-06-27T04:52:00 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242019-06-27T04:57:30 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
1252019-06-27T05:06:08 *** hebasto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262019-06-27T05:10:30 *** hugohn has quit IRC
1272019-06-27T05:11:44 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1282019-06-27T05:22:34 <fanquake> Has anyone else seen a crash similar too #16027 ? I don't think it's related solely to sleep/hibernation, as I've had two occurrences, both happening right after unloading a wallet. Unfortunately not running under lldb in either case..
1292019-06-27T05:22:35 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16027 | client 0.18.0 crashes when computer wakes up from hibernation · Issue #16027 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1302019-06-27T05:26:42 *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1312019-06-27T05:26:50 *** hugohn has quit IRC
1322019-06-27T05:27:27 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332019-06-27T05:30:50 *** hugohn has quit IRC
1342019-06-27T05:32:10 *** surja795 has quit IRC
1352019-06-27T05:45:11 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1362019-06-27T05:47:59 *** gwillen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1372019-06-27T05:51:54 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
1382019-06-27T05:52:12 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
1392019-06-27T06:00:01 *** ElectroBNC has quit IRC
1402019-06-27T06:00:45 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1412019-06-27T06:04:00 *** lgedeon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1422019-06-27T06:08:38 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432019-06-27T06:09:30 *** baldur has quit IRC
1442019-06-27T06:13:02 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
1452019-06-27T06:17:39 *** jchnak has quit IRC
1462019-06-27T06:22:01 *** baldur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1472019-06-27T06:37:57 *** JamesAU has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1482019-06-27T06:49:34 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1492019-06-27T06:53:58 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
1502019-06-27T07:30:44 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1512019-06-27T07:35:29 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
1522019-06-27T07:57:24 *** rafalcpp_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1532019-06-27T07:58:48 *** queip has quit IRC
1542019-06-27T07:58:48 *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
1552019-06-27T08:00:45 *** booyah_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1562019-06-27T08:00:54 *** booyah has quit IRC
1572019-06-27T08:06:05 *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1582019-06-27T08:08:38 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1592019-06-27T08:10:14 *** awalvie_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602019-06-27T08:10:32 *** csknk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1612019-06-27T08:13:18 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
1622019-06-27T08:14:04 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632019-06-27T08:15:34 *** awalvie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642019-06-27T08:15:35 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
1652019-06-27T08:17:00 <awalvie_> hey there
1662019-06-27T08:17:16 *** awalvie has quit IRC
1672019-06-27T08:17:30 *** awalvie_ has quit IRC
1682019-06-27T08:19:10 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
1692019-06-27T08:23:05 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702019-06-27T08:25:27 *** kljasdfvv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1712019-06-27T08:26:03 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722019-06-27T08:27:15 *** awalvie_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732019-06-27T08:28:09 <awalvie_> hello there
1742019-06-27T08:28:59 *** Zenton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1752019-06-27T08:30:17 *** awalvie_ has quit IRC
1762019-06-27T08:30:40 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1772019-06-27T08:31:05 *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1782019-06-27T08:31:52 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1792019-06-27T08:32:52 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
1802019-06-27T08:34:09 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812019-06-27T08:34:21 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1822019-06-27T08:49:55 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1832019-06-27T08:53:22 *** Skirmant has quit IRC
1842019-06-27T08:55:10 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
1852019-06-27T09:00:02 *** lgedeon has quit IRC
1862019-06-27T09:01:15 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1872019-06-27T09:03:54 *** mrd1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1882019-06-27T09:08:31 *** promag has quit IRC
1892019-06-27T09:08:48 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1902019-06-27T09:18:23 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1912019-06-27T09:18:46 *** promag has quit IRC
1922019-06-27T09:31:12 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1932019-06-27T09:32:53 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1942019-06-27T09:35:44 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
1952019-06-27T09:40:54 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1962019-06-27T09:45:19 *** promag has quit IRC
1972019-06-27T09:51:38 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
1982019-06-27T09:57:36 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
1992019-06-27T09:57:50 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2002019-06-27T10:01:00 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2012019-06-27T10:02:50 *** promag has quit IRC
2022019-06-27T10:03:24 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2032019-06-27T10:05:18 *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042019-06-27T10:07:22 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
2052019-06-27T10:12:30 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2062019-06-27T10:14:35 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2072019-06-27T10:14:48 *** spinza has quit IRC
2082019-06-27T10:16:11 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2092019-06-27T10:16:58 *** hugohn has quit IRC
2102019-06-27T10:17:08 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
2112019-06-27T10:18:55 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2122019-06-27T10:19:45 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132019-06-27T10:21:52 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2142019-06-27T10:22:24 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
2152019-06-27T10:24:25 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2162019-06-27T10:53:47 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2172019-06-27T10:58:19 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
2182019-06-27T10:59:58 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2192019-06-27T10:59:59 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag closed pull request #12419: Force distinct destinations in CWallet::CreateTransaction (master...2018-02-distinct-destinations) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12419
2202019-06-27T11:00:01 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2212019-06-27T11:08:29 *** promag has quit IRC
2222019-06-27T11:17:23 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2232019-06-27T11:32:14 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
2242019-06-27T11:32:45 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2252019-06-27T11:34:52 *** promag has quit IRC
2262019-06-27T11:35:06 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2272019-06-27T11:35:33 *** omonk has quit IRC
2282019-06-27T11:38:32 *** omonk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2292019-06-27T11:39:29 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
2302019-06-27T11:44:31 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
2312019-06-27T11:47:35 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2322019-06-27T11:50:02 *** darosior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332019-06-27T11:54:21 *** profmac has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2342019-06-27T12:00:02 *** mrd1 has quit IRC
2352019-06-27T12:00:57 *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2362019-06-27T12:04:00 *** alpounet has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2372019-06-27T12:05:15 *** bralyclow2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2382019-06-27T12:05:37 *** surja795 has quit IRC
2392019-06-27T12:06:16 *** bralyclow2 has quit IRC
2402019-06-27T12:11:04 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2412019-06-27T12:15:28 *** promag has quit IRC
2422019-06-27T12:16:29 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2432019-06-27T12:20:52 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
2442019-06-27T12:24:45 *** awalvie_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2452019-06-27T12:31:00 *** awalvie_ has quit IRC
2462019-06-27T12:32:45 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
2472019-06-27T12:44:35 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482019-06-27T12:47:19 *** hugohn has quit IRC
2492019-06-27T12:48:35 *** Andriian has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2502019-06-27T12:57:51 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512019-06-27T13:01:13 *** hebasto has quit IRC
2522019-06-27T13:02:11 *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2532019-06-27T13:02:21 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
2542019-06-27T13:02:26 *** Andriian has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2552019-06-27T13:07:11 *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562019-06-27T13:07:28 *** queip has quit IRC
2572019-06-27T13:07:52 *** rafalcpp_ has quit IRC
2582019-06-27T13:13:13 *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592019-06-27T13:18:54 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602019-06-27T13:23:42 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
2612019-06-27T13:24:25 *** kljasdfvv has quit IRC
2622019-06-27T13:32:40 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
2632019-06-27T13:44:01 *** booyah_ has quit IRC
2642019-06-27T13:45:24 *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652019-06-27T13:46:55 *** jonatack has quit IRC
2662019-06-27T13:50:21 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2672019-06-27T13:51:27 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2682019-06-27T13:57:57 *** bralyclow01 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2692019-06-27T13:59:57 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702019-06-27T14:01:05 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
2712019-06-27T14:04:52 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
2722019-06-27T14:05:51 *** hebasto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732019-06-27T14:07:53 *** hugohn has quit IRC
2742019-06-27T14:16:40 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2752019-06-27T14:16:40 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #16299: bench: Move generated data to a dedicated translation unit (master...2019-06-benchmark-data) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16299
2762019-06-27T14:16:42 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2772019-06-27T14:17:50 *** lightlike has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2782019-06-27T14:18:08 *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2792019-06-27T14:24:53 *** booyah_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802019-06-27T14:25:22 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2812019-06-27T14:25:22 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3077f11dadff...7400135b7918
2822019-06-27T14:25:23 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9a84169 practicalswift: tests: Reduce compilation time and unneccessary recompiles by removing unu...
2832019-06-27T14:25:23 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7400135 MarcoFalke: Merge #16278: tests: Remove unused includes
2842019-06-27T14:25:25 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2852019-06-27T14:26:15 *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
2862019-06-27T14:26:26 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2872019-06-27T14:26:26 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #16278: tests: Remove unused includes (master...cut-compilation-bloat-in-unit-tests) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16278
2882019-06-27T14:26:39 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2892019-06-27T14:28:26 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2902019-06-27T14:28:50 *** setpill has quit IRC
2912019-06-27T14:30:32 *** promag has quit IRC
2922019-06-27T14:31:16 <promag_> instagibbs: re #16292 AFAIK next block height must equal current block count, that's why genesis has height 0
2932019-06-27T14:31:18 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16292 | wallet_resendwallettransaction.py: fix coinbase height by instagibbs · Pull Request #16292 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2942019-06-27T14:31:22 *** promag_ is now known as promag
2952019-06-27T14:34:08 <instagibbs> promag, no, `getblockcount` and co are actually doing `getblockchainheight`, bad naming
2962019-06-27T14:34:16 *** omonk has quit IRC
2972019-06-27T14:34:26 <promag> instagibbs: I was going to comment that yes
2982019-06-27T14:34:26 <instagibbs> and height starts with genesis as 0
2992019-06-27T14:34:37 <promag> it doens't count genesis
3002019-06-27T14:34:44 <promag> :/ sorry
3012019-06-27T14:34:52 <instagibbs> cool, someone had a PR for turning on bip34 for regtest, couldn't find it
3022019-06-27T14:35:24 <instagibbs> might be worth pushing forward
3032019-06-27T14:37:03 *** omonk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3042019-06-27T14:38:01 *** omonk has quit IRC
3052019-06-27T14:41:15 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3062019-06-27T14:41:28 *** omonk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3072019-06-27T14:43:55 *** astro has quit IRC
3082019-06-27T14:44:08 *** astro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3092019-06-27T14:45:38 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
3102019-06-27T14:50:18 *** d_t has quit IRC
3112019-06-27T14:57:46 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3122019-06-27T15:00:02 *** alpounet has quit IRC
3132019-06-27T15:02:17 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3142019-06-27T15:03:40 *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3152019-06-27T15:04:40 *** hack_bot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3162019-06-27T15:08:19 *** promag_ has quit IRC
3172019-06-27T15:20:05 *** arubi_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3182019-06-27T15:20:45 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3192019-06-27T15:22:44 *** arubi has quit IRC
3202019-06-27T15:24:47 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3212019-06-27T15:25:02 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
3222019-06-27T15:33:00 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
3232019-06-27T15:36:55 *** bralyclow01 has quit IRC
3242019-06-27T15:37:16 *** r8921039 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3252019-06-27T15:37:32 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3262019-06-27T15:42:32 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
3272019-06-27T15:57:36 *** r8921039 has quit IRC
3282019-06-27T15:58:43 *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
3292019-06-27T16:04:50 *** owowo has quit IRC
3302019-06-27T16:10:39 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3312019-06-27T16:23:11 *** spinza has quit IRC
3322019-06-27T16:26:00 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3332019-06-27T16:36:42 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3342019-06-27T16:40:19 <pinheadmz> During IBD, is fRelay set to false in `version` messages? Or do we just ignore incoming tx / inv-tx messages but "allow" them?
3352019-06-27T16:40:39 *** omonk has quit IRC
3362019-06-27T16:41:09 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3372019-06-27T16:41:10 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke reopened pull request #16294: qt: test: Create at most one testing setup (master...1906-qtTestOnlyOneTestingSetup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16294
3382019-06-27T16:41:10 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3392019-06-27T16:44:04 *** omonk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3402019-06-27T16:46:42 *** darosior has quit IRC
3412019-06-27T16:46:59 *** davec has quit IRC
3422019-06-27T16:55:26 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3432019-06-27T17:08:39 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3442019-06-27T17:09:25 *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3452019-06-27T17:18:46 *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
3462019-06-27T17:21:40 *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3472019-06-27T17:22:58 *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3482019-06-27T17:26:01 *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3492019-06-27T17:26:36 *** booyah_ has quit IRC
3502019-06-27T17:30:08 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
3512019-06-27T17:30:54 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3522019-06-27T17:32:54 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3532019-06-27T17:35:52 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
3542019-06-27T17:39:00 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
3552019-06-27T17:40:09 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3562019-06-27T17:42:01 *** darosior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3572019-06-27T17:44:56 *** Zenton has quit IRC
3582019-06-27T17:48:49 <sipa> /query andytoshi
3592019-06-27T17:58:04 *** csknk has quit IRC
3602019-06-27T18:00:02 *** hack_bot has quit IRC
3612019-06-27T18:00:59 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
3622019-06-27T18:02:52 *** omonk has quit IRC
3632019-06-27T18:04:29 *** ram has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3642019-06-27T18:04:43 *** ram is now known as Guest10124
3652019-06-27T18:05:50 *** omonk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3662019-06-27T18:06:43 *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
3672019-06-27T18:06:54 *** queip has quit IRC
3682019-06-27T18:06:59 *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3692019-06-27T18:10:43 *** aj has quit IRC
3702019-06-27T18:35:11 *** lightningbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3712019-06-27T18:38:18 *** captjakk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3722019-06-27T18:42:13 *** Skirmant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3732019-06-27T18:46:17 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3742019-06-27T18:47:25 <wumpus> pinheadmz: fRelay is set to true during ibd, as there's no way to change it for existing peers
3752019-06-27T18:48:50 <pinheadmz> wumpus: could there be an optimization there? We dont need tx invs during IBD...
3762019-06-27T18:48:51 *** darosior has quit IRC
3772019-06-27T18:53:39 <wumpus> pinheadmz: maybe, it doesn't really matter, I think, IDB takes so much more bandwidth than any amount of invs
3782019-06-27T18:54:18 <cfields> pinheadmz: -blocksonly, fyi
3792019-06-27T18:55:00 <pinheadmz> cfields: sure, but that doesn't stop peers from sending, we just dont process the inv or getdata
3802019-06-27T18:55:18 <wumpus> no, blocksonly really sets fRelay to false
3812019-06-27T18:55:24 <cfields> ^^
3822019-06-27T18:55:31 <pinheadmz> ah right right right tnx
3832019-06-27T18:58:38 <pinheadmz> but then after IBD theres no way to turn it back to true -- sounds like its not a concern
3842019-06-27T18:59:25 <wumpus> restarting without -blocksonly would effectively be the same, you'd lose all peers
3852019-06-27T19:00:12 <jonasschnelli> inv during IBD can also be interesting for light client wallets during IBD
3862019-06-27T19:00:42 <achow101> meeting?
3872019-06-27T19:00:49 <sipa> meeting!
3882019-06-27T19:01:00 <wumpus> #startmeeting
3892019-06-27T19:01:00 <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Jun 27 19:01:00 2019 UTC. The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
3902019-06-27T19:01:00 <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
3912019-06-27T19:01:04 <jonasschnelli> hi
3922019-06-27T19:01:09 <cfields> hi
3932019-06-27T19:01:11 <achow101> hi
3942019-06-27T19:01:17 <meshcollider> hi
3952019-06-27T19:01:19 <promag> hello
3962019-06-27T19:01:30 *** Guest45841 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3972019-06-27T19:01:44 <moneyball> hi
3982019-06-27T19:01:54 <wumpus> two topics on the list for today: 0.18.1: Backports #16035, depends build cache
3992019-06-27T19:01:57 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16035 | 0.18.1: Backports by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #16035 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4002019-06-27T19:02:15 <wumpus> any last minute topic proposals?
4012019-06-27T19:03:02 <wumpus> #topic High priority for review
4022019-06-27T19:03:05 <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
4032019-06-27T19:03:24 <wumpus> 5 blockers, 1 bugfix, 7(!) things requiring concept ACK
4042019-06-27T19:03:30 <wumpus> anything to add/remove/merge ?
4052019-06-27T19:04:03 <provoostenator> I'd like to nominate #16257 for 0.18.1
4062019-06-27T19:04:05 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16257 | [wallet] abort when attempting to fund a transaction above -maxtxfee by Sjors · Pull Request #16257 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4072019-06-27T19:04:33 <achow101> swap #15450 for #16227 please
4082019-06-27T19:04:35 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15450 | [GUI] Create wallet menu option by achow101 · Pull Request #15450 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4092019-06-27T19:04:37 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16227 | Refactor CWallets inheritance chain by achow101 · Pull Request #16227 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4102019-06-27T19:04:53 <wumpus> provoostenator:if you want to nominate a backport might be better to do it in MarcoFalke 's topic?
4112019-06-27T19:05:06 <provoostenator> Yes, sorry
4122019-06-27T19:05:48 <wumpus> oh, it's not merged yet to master
4132019-06-27T19:06:11 <wumpus> ok that should be under 'bugfix' the nI suppose
4142019-06-27T19:07:43 <provoostenator> Based on stats from Blockchair on 0.1 BTC fees, I think quite a few people are firing that footgun (unless there's another wallet that produces exact 0.1 BTC fees).
4152019-06-27T19:07:59 <wumpus> achow101: done
4162019-06-27T19:08:25 <wumpus> provoostenator: that's worrying
4172019-06-27T19:08:31 <provoostenator> https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transactions?q=fee(10000000)#
4182019-06-27T19:08:51 <provoostenator> It's beacuse if you set feeRate to "1" that doesn't mean 1 satoshi per byte.
4192019-06-27T19:09:42 <wumpus> right, sounds like a bug
4202019-06-27T19:10:04 <sipa> provoostenator: holy crap that's insane
4212019-06-27T19:10:55 <wumpus> another case of quietly ignoring an error
4222019-06-27T19:11:03 <wumpus> that's always a red flag
4232019-06-27T19:11:04 <provoostenator> It rounds down the fee instead of aborting. Which has been the case for years, but the "satoshi per byte" convention is newer, so maybe that's what causes the increase.
4242019-06-27T19:11:05 <promag> :o
4252019-06-27T19:11:18 <provoostenator> And the new PSBT methods also have this setting.
4262019-06-27T19:11:19 *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4272019-06-27T19:11:32 <sipa> provoostenator: that's 25 BTC in fees this month overall
4282019-06-27T19:12:01 <promag> this is the miner trolling X)
4292019-06-27T19:12:23 <provoostenator> Some of these are batches, but quite a few are small txs.
4302019-06-27T19:12:42 <provoostenator> For big batches something else happens: the user sets a higher fee, but then we round it down.
4312019-06-27T19:12:54 <provoostenator> Which can cause large batch transactions to get stuck.
4322019-06-27T19:12:54 <jonasschnelli> ^^
4332019-06-27T19:13:17 <provoostenator> In both cases, I think throwing an error is just better. User can always override the maxfee, or manually set a fee.
4342019-06-27T19:13:23 <sipa> agree
4352019-06-27T19:13:27 <achow101> how is that we are only running into this now? hasn't this behavior been in for ages?
4362019-06-27T19:13:57 <wumpus> agree
4372019-06-27T19:14:12 <promag> https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transactions?q=fee(20000000)#
4382019-06-27T19:14:27 <wumpus> achow101: no one ever reported it AFAIK
4392019-06-27T19:14:35 <promag> those are old
4402019-06-27T19:14:59 <wumpus> this is the first time I hear this is the case, it sounds awful
4412019-06-27T19:15:10 <sipa> it looks like in december 2017 there were ~100 cases of this per day as well
4422019-06-27T19:15:22 <wumpus> +1 for merging provoostenator's PR soon and doing 0.18.1
4432019-06-27T19:15:43 <provoostenator> I'll be quick to address feedback on the PR.
4442019-06-27T19:16:15 <wumpus> thanks
4452019-06-27T19:16:15 <jonasschnelli> thanks provoostenator for bringing this to attention
4462019-06-27T19:16:16 <promag> sipa: that was the ath period?
4472019-06-27T19:16:33 <sipa> promag: i just looked at dec 20th 2017
4482019-06-27T19:16:34 <provoostenator> December 2017 was fee madness yes.
4492019-06-27T19:16:51 <provoostenator> So people start manually setting the fee.
4502019-06-27T19:17:07 <sipa> so this is certainly not a few phenomenon, and also not the first that it seems actually impactful
4512019-06-27T19:17:13 <sipa> s/few/new/
4522019-06-27T19:17:24 <provoostenator> And also when mempool "weather reports" became popular, and more wallets started supporting fee settings. Most using the satoshi per byte unit.
4532019-06-27T19:18:03 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
4542019-06-27T19:18:13 <achow101> ack with fixing it
4552019-06-27T19:18:19 <wumpus> really wonder why this is never reported, not strange some people complain about high fees at least then :(
4562019-06-27T19:18:51 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4572019-06-27T19:19:35 <wumpus> ok
4582019-06-27T19:19:40 <wumpus> #topic 0.18.1: Backports #16035 (MarcoFalke)
4592019-06-27T19:19:42 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16035 | 0.18.1: Backports by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #16035 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4602019-06-27T19:20:33 <jonasschnelli> maxfee should be batch sane
4612019-06-27T19:21:35 <wumpus> I don't know what Marco wants to discuss about this topic,doesn't seem like he's here
4622019-06-27T19:21:47 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4632019-06-27T19:21:47 *** shesek has quit IRC
4642019-06-27T19:21:47 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4652019-06-27T19:22:21 <cfields> Marco!
4662019-06-27T19:22:24 <MarcoFalke> sry
4672019-06-27T19:22:31 <MarcoFalke> here, hi
4682019-06-27T19:22:39 <cfields> so close.
4692019-06-27T19:22:40 <MarcoFalke> I wrapped up on the backports
4702019-06-27T19:22:41 <promag> cfields: wow
4712019-06-27T19:22:53 <jonasschnelli> heh
4722019-06-27T19:23:15 <wumpus> MarcoFalke: ^^ looks like we have a last-minute one by provoostenator and then really want to do 0.18.1
4732019-06-27T19:23:27 <wumpus> MarcoFalke: thanks
4742019-06-27T19:23:30 <sipa> promag: all of dec 2017 had 6336 instances; way worse than now
4752019-06-27T19:23:56 <MarcoFalke> Would be nice if one or two went through my cherry-picks (to check if they are solved correctly) and if the commits itself make sense
4762019-06-27T19:24:18 <wumpus> yes
4772019-06-27T19:24:37 <wumpus> #action check MarcoFalke's backports in #16035
4782019-06-27T19:24:39 <MarcoFalke> provoostenator's fix still needs review. I'd rather have it backported after the existing backports are merged (and reviewed)
4792019-06-27T19:24:40 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16035 | 0.18.1: Backports by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #16035 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4802019-06-27T19:24:53 <wumpus> MarcoFalke: absolutely
4812019-06-27T19:25:01 <MarcoFalke> I think fanquake and promag already had a look
4822019-06-27T19:25:04 <wumpus> it should always be in master first
4832019-06-27T19:25:37 <MarcoFalke> I don't want to nag them again to re-ACK, so my backport branch is final
4842019-06-27T19:25:55 <wumpus> ok
4852019-06-27T19:25:55 <ddustin> How do we know the .1 fees aren't miners?
4862019-06-27T19:26:26 <promag> yes, most of the backports are clean cherry picks, and the others are trivial. Also non critical changes imo.
4872019-06-27T19:26:32 <sipa> ddustin: we don't, but 0.1 BTC is a suspicious number
4882019-06-27T19:26:47 <wumpus> ddustin: we don't, though it seems unlikely for miners to pay themselves so much fees when they can include their own transactions for free
4892019-06-27T19:27:06 <promag> are we tagging 0.18.1 after that PR?
4902019-06-27T19:27:21 <wumpus> promag: I think so
4912019-06-27T19:27:29 <MarcoFalke> If nothing else pops up, hehe
4922019-06-27T19:27:39 <wumpus> right
4932019-06-27T19:28:24 <promag> :(
4942019-06-27T19:28:34 <promag> I think #13339 should be in 0.18
4952019-06-27T19:28:36 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13339 | wallet: Replace %w by wallet name in -walletnotify script by promag · Pull Request #13339 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4962019-06-27T19:28:39 <wumpus> #topic depends build cache (cfields)
4972019-06-27T19:28:50 <wumpus> promag:that's a feature
4982019-06-27T19:29:20 <wumpus> I don't see why it'd be backported
4992019-06-27T19:29:49 <promag> multiwallet is kind of useless for integrators without that
5002019-06-27T19:29:53 <sipa> actually; the cases in dec 2017 were not absurd; they were all paying reasonable feerates for that time
5012019-06-27T19:29:57 <wumpus> we're talking about 0.18.1 here the 0.19 feature freeze is somewhat further waway
5022019-06-27T19:30:22 <promag> wumpus: i understand, it's a bit sad it missed 0.18
5032019-06-27T19:30:40 <wumpus> (2019-09-15 to be exact)
5042019-06-27T19:30:49 <wumpus> promag: yes, blame windows and its absurd escaping rules
5052019-06-27T19:31:05 <wumpus> absurd and inconsistent
5062019-06-27T19:31:20 <cfields> So for the travis/depends bottleneck issue, I thought of some low-hanging fruit that I think would have quite an impact. By simply sharing the intermediate depends binary packages globally among builds, we avoid situations where dozens of PRs are all rebuilding all of depends.
5072019-06-27T19:31:20 <cfields> Instead, the first to finish would send it to the cache server, and each client would check for that package before building it itself. Because all packages-names are deterministically generated and unique, there should be no filename collisions, so maintenance should be effectively zero on the storage side. At most, a cron job to delete the oldest files now and then.
5082019-06-27T19:31:35 <promag> wumpus: I've asked if we could just ignore windows, let's move to the PR later
5092019-06-27T19:31:41 <cfields> As a side-effect, it would also kick in and avoid complete depends builds when Travis fails to download its cache.
5102019-06-27T19:31:42 <cfields> I'll try to hack it together this week. It may be enough that we don't need to make the bigger changes we discussed a few weeks ago.
5112019-06-27T19:32:17 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5122019-06-27T19:32:35 <wumpus> cfields: how would this cache server work, e.g. how to prevent PRs from uploading arbitrary binary dependencies, or do you intend to build them outside of travis?
5132019-06-27T19:32:40 <MarcoFalke> cfields: The cache would be read-write by anyone?
5142019-06-27T19:33:14 <wumpus> this has always been the problem with uploading any kind of data from travis
5152019-06-27T19:33:28 <achow101> you can configure travis to have local secrets as environment variables
5162019-06-27T19:33:48 <achow101> so you have an api key or something in one of the travis environment vars that lets you upload to the server
5172019-06-27T19:33:50 <promag> achow101: I could write a PR to dump those secrets?
5182019-06-27T19:33:59 *** timothy has quit IRC
5192019-06-27T19:34:04 <MarcoFalke> You can disable secrets for prs
5202019-06-27T19:34:13 <cfields> wumpus: Indeed. It's also going to be a problem with some of the other, more complicated splits that we discussed. I figure this is a much smaller surface to experiment with.
5212019-06-27T19:34:20 <wumpus> for branches that would be OK, that's proabably enough
5222019-06-27T19:34:53 <wumpus> no one is going to merge a PR that dumps secrets and if so we have much bigger issues :)
5232019-06-27T19:35:05 <MarcoFalke> I feel like the same problem would be solved by having a shorter cache expiry on travis for pull requests
5242019-06-27T19:35:17 <cfields> wumpus: I'm thinking it may be possible to leverage github tags somehow for "allowed to cache" or so. That way the cache is always primed before another PR branches from it.
5252019-06-27T19:35:35 <wumpus> I'm sad that we need this
5262019-06-27T19:35:37 <achow101> https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/environment-variables#defining-encrypted-variables-in-travisyml
5272019-06-27T19:35:44 <wumpus> so the alternative CI ideas were a dead end?
5282019-06-27T19:36:00 <achow101> travis lets you encrypt variables, but it's not available for PRs for the reason that promag said
5292019-06-27T19:36:22 <MarcoFalke> Travis already re-generates and caches depends on master, the pull requests are just too slow to pick it up, since they still have their own cache
5302019-06-27T19:36:28 <jonasschnelli> semaphore2 would have a nice cache tool
5312019-06-27T19:36:37 <cfields> wumpus: nono, this was just something that occured to me today. I thought it was a good idea, but if you don't like it, no big deal.
5322019-06-27T19:36:42 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
5332019-06-27T19:36:42 <jonasschnelli> that lets you manually control the key/storage-blobs
5342019-06-27T19:36:59 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: semaphore2 sounds great, but it doesn't allow viewing the test logs?!?
5352019-06-27T19:37:07 <MarcoFalke> cfields: Have you seen my comment?
5362019-06-27T19:37:17 <jonasschnelli> they promised to get this done in the next days...
5372019-06-27T19:37:27 <wumpus> cfields: it just feels so hacky to implement our own caching on an external server because travis is too stupid to handle that correctly, it seems a base thing !
5382019-06-27T19:37:30 <jonasschnelli> but,.. maybe its something we should follow but not do now
5392019-06-27T19:37:50 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5402019-06-27T19:38:16 <wumpus> cfields: I'm not against your idea, but it seems to go from bad to worse, what's the next thing we have to implement for them :)
5412019-06-27T19:38:41 <jonasschnelli> indeed
5422019-06-27T19:38:45 <cfields> MarcoFalke: yes, that's what I was attempting to address. All PRs would immediately have access to those files instead of waiting on the cache.
5432019-06-27T19:39:00 <jonasschnelli> since we are customer of travis, can we not request a feature?
5442019-06-27T19:39:21 <wumpus> that will probably take too long, if they pick it up
5452019-06-27T19:39:28 <jonasschnelli> very likely
5462019-06-27T19:39:28 <cfields> wumpus: I'm not sure that's fair. They have storage/upload capabilities, but we're just using the cache.
5472019-06-27T19:39:32 <MarcoFalke> cfields: With immediately you mean "after the depends built finished"?
5482019-06-27T19:40:28 *** Zenton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5492019-06-27T19:41:00 <wumpus> cfields: oh we'd be using their upload/storage capabilities?
5502019-06-27T19:41:11 <MarcoFalke> So we'd have to wait either until our own depends server finishes the depends built or until travis finishes it. I don't see the difference
5512019-06-27T19:41:12 <wumpus> cfields: that makes sense, I wasn't aware of that
5522019-06-27T19:41:13 <cfields> MarcoFalke: I mean: PR1 is created which touches depends, then PR2 is created, then PR1 is merged, PR2 rebuilds depends next time it's bumped whether it touched them or not.
5532019-06-27T19:41:23 <cfields> (I believe I typed that out right)
5542019-06-27T19:41:34 <wumpus> cfields: I thought this would have to be some external server run by ourselves
5552019-06-27T19:41:39 <promag> cfields: also doesn't work for prs
5562019-06-27T19:41:56 <cfields> wumpus: well, that was my open question, but I guess you've answered it.
5572019-06-27T19:42:09 <cfields> promag: wait, really?
5582019-06-27T19:42:20 <promag> https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/uploading-artifacts/
5592019-06-27T19:42:36 <promag> is this what you mean?
5602019-06-27T19:43:03 <cfields> promag: ugh. Ok. That's probably why we don't do this already, huh? :)
5612019-06-27T19:43:41 <achow101> promag: I don't believe that any blocks you from making the upload part of your script itself
5622019-06-27T19:44:28 <cfields> Ok, I'll go back to the drawing board. Thanks, all.
5632019-06-27T19:44:47 <MarcoFalke> cfields: I wonder what would happen if we disabled the cache for pull requests completely
5642019-06-27T19:44:47 <wumpus> thanks cfields for working on this
5652019-06-27T19:44:59 <MarcoFalke> So they would always get the freshest cache from master
5662019-06-27T19:45:52 <wumpus> that seems preferable, as long as the PR doesn't change depends (in which case you can expect slowness anyway)
5672019-06-27T19:45:56 <promag> achow101: true, but then you have to manage all of that
5682019-06-27T19:46:20 <cfields> MarcoFalke: Hmm, let's take a look after the meeting?
5692019-06-27T19:46:36 <MarcoFalke> I guess it would make it impossible to run travis on pulls that change depends (as pointed out by wumpus)
5702019-06-27T19:46:37 <cfields> I wasn't aware you could configure that.
5712019-06-27T19:46:49 <cfields> (or forgot)
5722019-06-27T19:47:21 <wumpus> right
5732019-06-27T19:47:29 <cfields> MarcoFalke: each push would just nuke its own cache and rebuild, I think?
5742019-06-27T19:49:18 <MarcoFalke> So maybe we could wipe all pull request caches after 1-3 days?
5752019-06-27T19:49:43 <MarcoFalke> Not a perfect solution, but might approximate well enough
5762019-06-27T19:50:24 <wumpus> if it's better than it's better
5772019-06-27T19:50:31 <cfields> MarcoFalke: are there options for that now as well?
5782019-06-27T19:50:58 <MarcoFalke> I could write a script for it (and ping travis on my issue from last year)
5792019-06-27T19:51:22 <cfields> script via api?
5802019-06-27T19:51:29 <cfields> Either way, +1 on the ping :)
5812019-06-27T19:51:38 <wumpus> it's definitely possible to wipe caches through the API
5822019-06-27T19:51:46 <wumpus> per PR or for all of them
5832019-06-27T19:53:19 <cfields> Ok. Going to have to think on it some. But +1 for whatever makes it better.
5842019-06-27T19:53:31 <wumpus> ok, that concludes the meeting I think
5852019-06-27T19:54:44 <wumpus> thanks everyone
5862019-06-27T19:54:47 <wumpus> #endmeeting
5872019-06-27T19:54:47 <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Jun 27 19:54:47 2019 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
5882019-06-27T19:54:47 <lightningbot> Minutes: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-06-27-19.01.html
5892019-06-27T19:54:47 <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-06-27-19.01.txt
5902019-06-27T19:54:47 <lightningbot> Log: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-06-27-19.01.log.html
5912019-06-27T19:55:17 <promag> correct me if i'm wrong, what we really wish for is depends/built cached across pr's? (cache by last depends commit, conf params, arc etc)
5922019-06-27T19:55:19 *** Skirmant has quit IRC
5932019-06-27T19:56:14 <cfields> promag: yes. That's how it currently works. But it's racy, and there are some nasty pitfalls.
5942019-06-27T19:56:49 <promag> ok :)
5952019-06-27T19:57:36 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
5962019-06-27T19:58:33 <promag> wumpus: whenever you can https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13339#issuecomment-504653790
5972019-06-27T19:58:37 <jonasschnelli> cfields: why is it racy? Do they use non-atomic copies/overwrites?
5982019-06-27T20:00:20 <cfields> promag: say I have a PR that changes one of the base depends files, say depends/Makefile. That will cause all of depends to be rebuilt for that PR. When it's merged into master, the master branch is rebuilt and the depends are cached at that point. But all existing PRs have their own cache already from the previous master build. So when they're rebased to master, they have to rebuild everything again.
5992019-06-27T20:01:14 *** spinza has quit IRC
6002019-06-27T20:01:15 <cfields> So basically touching depends/ causes a huge slowdown across all PRs and builds for a while.
6012019-06-27T20:02:10 <jonasschnelli> bah...
6022019-06-27T20:02:12 <cfields> promag: it looks like only the addon is disabled for PRs, not the artifact tool?
6032019-06-27T20:02:20 <promag> cfields: "So when they're rebased to master, they have to rebuild everything again." why?
6042019-06-27T20:03:22 <promag> uploading artifacts belongs to the deployment step, which travis skips for prs, see https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/deployment/#pull-requests
6052019-06-27T20:03:48 <cfields> promag: because their depends are now stale, master bumped something.
6062019-06-27T20:03:52 <cfields> blah, ok.
6072019-06-27T20:04:13 *** Skirmant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6082019-06-27T20:04:23 *** goatpig has quit IRC
6092019-06-27T20:04:24 *** Guest45841 has quit IRC
6102019-06-27T20:04:40 <jonasschnelli> cfields: Yeah. I guess it has to. Writing with moving can be make atomic. But I guess if a worker is reading the cache while another worker is writing the same is problematic. They probably lock the cache during reads.
6112019-06-27T20:05:03 <jonasschnelli> *can be made atomic
6122019-06-27T20:05:03 <cfields> jonasschnelli: yep.
6132019-06-27T20:05:34 <jonasschnelli> Though writing 40MB should be a matter of ms'es
6142019-06-27T20:05:38 <cfields> jonasschnelli: it's also a question of inheritance, though. Who pulls from whom and when?
6152019-06-27T20:05:47 <cfields> That's the main complication.
6162019-06-27T20:05:53 <jonasschnelli> I guess that fallback model makes sense to me.
6172019-06-27T20:06:09 <jonasschnelli> Check if the branch has a cache or fall back to master (or more grained)
6182019-06-27T20:06:16 <promag> but we aren't changing depends that much are we?
6192019-06-27T20:06:53 <jonasschnelli> can't we not just cache single depends packages instead of a whole host package?
6202019-06-27T20:07:32 <cfields> jonasschnelli: that's close to what I was suggesting.
6212019-06-27T20:07:38 <jonasschnelli> like md5( host || package-name || package-version)
6222019-06-27T20:07:55 <cfields> jonasschnelli: s/md5/sha2, and that's how it currently works :)
6232019-06-27T20:08:07 <jonasschnelli> aha...
6242019-06-27T20:08:10 <jonasschnelli> TIL
6252019-06-27T20:08:34 <jonasschnelli> cfields: but that is how the depends internally caches... right?
6262019-06-27T20:08:36 <cfields> It recurses through the dependency chain, though.
6272019-06-27T20:08:42 <jonasschnelli> but not how we write it to the travis cache?
6282019-06-27T20:08:59 <cfields> jonasschnelli: we just write those files to the cache, and the next build picks them up...
6292019-06-27T20:09:19 <cfields> I was suggesting that we could somehow write them to a big global cache, and let future builds try to fetch them before building themselves.
6302019-06-27T20:09:32 <jonasschnelli> yes...
6312019-06-27T20:09:49 *** scoop has quit IRC
6322019-06-27T20:09:51 <jonasschnelli> need to read back... I guess
6332019-06-27T20:10:20 <cfields> that operation can be write-only, because 2 package names will never collide with each-other. So it would be trivial to automate.
6342019-06-27T20:10:40 <jonasschnelli> I was just hopping,... lets assume Qt dependency has changed, we grab all the others (since sha2( host || package-name || package-version) is cached) and just compile the new Qt
6352019-06-27T20:10:42 <cfields> But the question of access causes it to break down, as everyone was quick to remind me :(
6362019-06-27T20:11:10 <cfields> Yes, that's how it works.
6372019-06-27T20:11:32 <cfields> The problem is when, for example, openssl is changed. That ALSO causes qt rebuilds.
6382019-06-27T20:11:50 <cfields> So anything that's more low-level than the package descriptors screws everything up for a while.
6392019-06-27T20:11:57 <jonasschnelli> so take the dependency package & version into the hash?
6402019-06-27T20:12:56 <cfields> jonasschnelli: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/depends/funcs.mk#L42
6412019-06-27T20:13:16 <jonasschnelli> I should be quite... :)
6422019-06-27T20:13:31 <cfields> Not exactly the easiest thing to read, but it takes all of that into account. The hashes are nearly guaranteed to be unique.
6432019-06-27T20:13:58 <cfields> jonasschnelli: you're fine! It's not exactly straightforward.
6442019-06-27T20:14:04 <jonasschnelli> [22:10:42] <cfields> But the question of access causes it to break down, as everyone was quick to remind me :(
6452019-06-27T20:14:20 <jonasschnelli> ^ -- do you mean with that that reading while writing is racy?
6462019-06-27T20:14:46 <cfields> jonasschnelli: no, I mean allowing open access to upload somewhere without being DoS'd.
6472019-06-27T20:15:08 <jonasschnelli> Oh. I see.
6482019-06-27T20:15:29 <cfields> That's why we've ultimately avoided having Travis do any useful uploading.
6492019-06-27T20:15:30 <jonasschnelli> I was trying to check wether with samephores2 cache manager this would be possible...
6502019-06-27T20:15:42 *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6512019-06-27T20:15:51 <jonasschnelli> since they have key/blob storage, I think it would
6522019-06-27T20:16:13 <cfields> So I think the ideal solution for us would be to allow for merged caches.
6532019-06-27T20:16:25 <cfields> I'll have to think about it some more, but I believe that would be perfect.
6542019-06-27T20:16:45 <jonasschnelli> cfields: merged between branches?
6552019-06-27T20:16:56 <jonasschnelli> (single global cache)
6562019-06-27T20:17:14 <cfields> We have a per-branch (master) cache as well a per-PR branch. If both of those were fetched and extracted, I think we would almost always skip rebuilding.
6572019-06-27T20:17:22 <cfields> s/we/Travis.
6582019-06-27T20:17:52 <jonasschnelli> I see.
6592019-06-27T20:17:58 <cfields> Right now, according to MarcoFalke, we can choose.
6602019-06-27T20:18:23 <cfields> Hmm.
6612019-06-27T20:19:45 <cfields> I'll experiment with that. Might be easy for Travis to implement, too.
6622019-06-27T20:20:43 <jonasschnelli> Yes. Asking them costs nothing...
6632019-06-27T20:24:44 <jb55> re promag on #13339: yes please! walletnotify seems kind of gimped now without it getting the walletname. running patched versions isn't fun either :[
6642019-06-27T20:24:47 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13339 | wallet: Replace %w by wallet name in -walletnotify script by promag · Pull Request #13339 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6652019-06-27T20:25:24 <jonasschnelli> jb55: auto debug log parsing notification! Yay!
6662019-06-27T20:26:20 <promag> jonasschnelli: that's some badass suggestion
6672019-06-27T20:26:48 <promag> jonasschnelli: multiprocess ipc with debug log parsing ;)
6682019-06-27T20:27:40 <promag> but really, say you have 10s of wallets loaded, how can you know which wallet to call gettransaction?
6692019-06-27T20:27:48 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6702019-06-27T20:29:02 <jonasschnelli> promag: just parse [default wallet] AddToWallet f9abce7434904fcf8b5d3c4a6e4e07d25373c7f9c76a216c8fb45027a79b6c0c
6712019-06-27T20:29:25 <jonasschnelli> something like (.*) AddToWallet (.*)
6722019-06-27T20:29:48 *** kristapsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6732019-06-27T20:29:52 <jonasschnelli> (am I really suggesting this?)
6742019-06-27T20:31:12 *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6752019-06-27T20:34:08 <promag> jonasschnelli: just saying that -walletnotify is incomplete, I'm also not fond of the %w thing
6762019-06-27T20:34:11 <MarcoFalke> cfields: It would be nice if we could seed the last time the depends folder was changed into the hash in the cache name
6772019-06-27T20:34:33 <jonasschnelli> promag: sure. Your PR makes complete sense to me.
6782019-06-27T20:34:45 <jonasschnelli> The debug.log -> notification is silly
6792019-06-27T20:35:00 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6802019-06-27T20:35:02 *** rh0nj has quit IRC
6812019-06-27T20:35:27 *** scoop has quit IRC
6822019-06-27T20:36:44 *** promag_ has quit IRC
6832019-06-27T20:37:17 *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6842019-06-27T20:37:20 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
6852019-06-27T20:37:36 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6862019-06-27T20:37:47 <promag> jonasschnelli: well not really, maybe better than running a patched version ?
6872019-06-27T20:38:10 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
6882019-06-27T20:38:18 <promag> jonasschnelli: btw have a look at #16285
6892019-06-27T20:38:20 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16285 | rpc: Improve scantxoutset response and help message by promag · Pull Request #16285 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
6902019-06-27T20:38:35 <jonasschnelli> promag: probably... depends on whos doing the patch and in what environment
6912019-06-27T20:39:37 <cfields> MarcoFalke: then it would be non-deterministic?
6922019-06-27T20:41:20 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6932019-06-27T20:41:23 <MarcoFalke> assume the current travis cache name is `env|sha2`
6942019-06-27T20:41:41 <MarcoFalke> the new one would be `(env && git log -1 ./depends)|sha2`
6952019-06-27T20:41:53 <MarcoFalke> Would be deterministic, no?
6962019-06-27T20:42:09 *** jarthur has quit IRC
6972019-06-27T20:42:11 <MarcoFalke> and it would change every time depends changes
6982019-06-27T20:42:51 <MarcoFalke> But it doesn's look like this is possible
6992019-06-27T20:45:02 <cfields> right, it'd have to be bumped manually.
7002019-06-27T21:00:01 *** Guest10124 has quit IRC
7012019-06-27T21:04:01 *** captjakk has quit IRC
7022019-06-27T21:05:25 *** captjakk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7032019-06-27T21:05:43 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
7042019-06-27T21:06:23 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7052019-06-27T21:10:38 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7062019-06-27T21:13:25 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
7072019-06-27T21:14:39 *** jackgassett has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7082019-06-27T21:16:51 *** d_t has quit IRC
7092019-06-27T21:17:46 *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7102019-06-27T21:18:45 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7112019-06-27T21:20:39 *** captjakk has quit IRC
7122019-06-27T21:21:43 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
7132019-06-27T21:22:00 *** scoop has quit IRC
7142019-06-27T21:22:34 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7152019-06-27T21:25:17 *** ddustin has quit IRC
7162019-06-27T21:27:31 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
7172019-06-27T21:30:49 *** captjakk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7182019-06-27T21:31:34 *** captjakk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7192019-06-27T21:34:47 <luke-jr> no meeting highlight today :o
7202019-06-27T21:36:07 *** hugohn has quit IRC
7212019-06-27T21:37:47 *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
7222019-06-27T21:38:31 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7232019-06-27T21:38:50 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7242019-06-27T21:38:50 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
7252019-06-27T21:40:15 *** ddustin has quit IRC
7262019-06-27T21:40:34 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7272019-06-27T21:43:32 *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7282019-06-27T21:48:51 *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7292019-06-27T21:49:28 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
7302019-06-27T21:52:00 *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7312019-06-27T21:53:05 *** scoop has quit IRC
7322019-06-27T22:04:22 *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7332019-06-27T22:08:17 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7342019-06-27T22:08:34 *** scoop has quit IRC
7352019-06-27T22:19:21 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7362019-06-27T22:20:32 *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7372019-06-27T22:21:55 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7382019-06-27T22:21:55 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider closed pull request #16192: Wallet: Catches situations where capping on maxtxfee drops the fee too low (master...issue-10122) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16192
7392019-06-27T22:21:57 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
7402019-06-27T22:22:03 *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
7412019-06-27T22:24:34 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
7422019-06-27T22:29:21 *** surja795 has quit IRC
7432019-06-27T22:30:01 *** ddustin has quit IRC
7442019-06-27T22:30:40 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7452019-06-27T22:33:49 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7462019-06-27T22:35:28 *** ddustin has quit IRC
7472019-06-27T22:38:22 *** hugohn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7482019-06-27T22:38:23 *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
7492019-06-27T22:39:07 *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7502019-06-27T22:43:27 *** hugohn has quit IRC
7512019-06-27T22:53:03 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
7522019-06-27T22:58:13 *** EagleTM has quit IRC
7532019-06-27T22:58:53 *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
7542019-06-27T23:02:49 *** rafalcpp_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7552019-06-27T23:03:52 *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
7562019-06-27T23:04:13 *** queip has quit IRC
7572019-06-27T23:05:05 *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7582019-06-27T23:08:14 *** captjakk has quit IRC
7592019-06-27T23:10:23 *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7602019-06-27T23:34:47 *** Skirmant has quit IRC
7612019-06-27T23:34:52 *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7622019-06-27T23:38:48 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
7632019-06-27T23:47:09 *** Skirmant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7642019-06-27T23:48:36 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7652019-06-27T23:55:29 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
7662019-06-27T23:57:07 *** EagleTM has quit IRC