12016-10-13T00:11:05 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
22016-10-13T00:21:08 *** waxwing_ has quit IRC
32016-10-13T00:21:47 *** waxwing_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
42016-10-13T00:47:03 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
52016-10-13T00:55:27 *** belcher has quit IRC
62016-10-13T00:55:50 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
72016-10-13T01:05:01 *** Alopex has quit IRC
82016-10-13T01:06:06 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
92016-10-13T01:07:37 *** btcdrak has quit IRC
102016-10-13T01:07:51 *** PRab has quit IRC
112016-10-13T01:12:48 *** wasi has quit IRC
122016-10-13T01:14:45 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132016-10-13T01:17:10 *** belcher is now known as JM-IRCRelay
142016-10-13T01:17:13 *** JM-IRCRelay is now known as belcher
152016-10-13T01:17:21 *** Alopex has quit IRC
162016-10-13T01:18:26 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172016-10-13T01:23:23 *** belcher has quit IRC
182016-10-13T01:23:59 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192016-10-13T01:34:58 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202016-10-13T01:59:40 *** waxwing_ has quit IRC
212016-10-13T02:05:11 *** alpalp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222016-10-13T03:07:59 *** alpalp has quit IRC
232016-10-13T03:12:11 *** Alopex has quit IRC
242016-10-13T03:12:55 *** PRab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
252016-10-13T03:13:17 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262016-10-13T03:28:11 *** Giszmo1 has quit IRC
272016-10-13T03:35:36 *** Alopex has quit IRC
282016-10-13T03:36:42 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292016-10-13T03:47:43 *** fengling has quit IRC
302016-10-13T03:54:27 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312016-10-13T03:58:49 *** [Author] has quit IRC
322016-10-13T04:00:15 *** mrkent has quit IRC
332016-10-13T04:04:23 *** [Author] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
342016-10-13T04:17:52 <warren> cfields: how's the deterministic toolchain coming?
352016-10-13T04:34:51 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362016-10-13T04:37:40 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
372016-10-13T04:41:39 *** Arnavion has quit IRC
382016-10-13T04:42:53 *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392016-10-13T04:57:06 *** Alopex has quit IRC
402016-10-13T04:58:11 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
412016-10-13T05:00:04 *** dermoth has quit IRC
422016-10-13T05:00:49 *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
432016-10-13T05:08:11 *** Alopex has quit IRC
442016-10-13T05:09:17 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452016-10-13T05:09:39 *** mrkent has quit IRC
462016-10-13T05:10:37 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472016-10-13T05:11:10 *** mrkent has quit IRC
482016-10-13T05:11:24 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
492016-10-13T05:12:12 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
502016-10-13T05:13:03 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512016-10-13T05:13:47 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522016-10-13T05:19:21 *** Alopex has quit IRC
532016-10-13T05:20:26 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542016-10-13T05:32:20 *** LeMiner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552016-10-13T05:40:13 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562016-10-13T05:45:22 *** pavel_ has quit IRC
572016-10-13T05:52:56 *** btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
582016-10-13T06:06:56 *** whphhg has quit IRC
592016-10-13T06:09:06 *** Alopex has quit IRC
602016-10-13T06:10:12 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
612016-10-13T06:17:20 *** kadoban has quit IRC
622016-10-13T06:17:25 *** kadoban_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
632016-10-13T06:38:32 *** kadoban_ is now known as kadoban
642016-10-13T06:49:51 *** moli has quit IRC
652016-10-13T06:52:31 <wumpus> cfields: I have backtraces for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8910 . That didn't help much I'm afraid though.
662016-10-13T06:53:21 *** BashCo has quit IRC
672016-10-13T06:56:50 *** kadoban has quit IRC
682016-10-13T06:56:58 *** kadoban_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692016-10-13T07:01:56 *** kadoban_ is now known as kadoban
702016-10-13T07:18:31 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712016-10-13T07:31:52 *** Soligor has quit IRC
722016-10-13T07:32:28 *** cheese_ has quit IRC
732016-10-13T07:34:28 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
742016-10-13T07:47:25 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
752016-10-13T07:53:03 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
762016-10-13T07:53:25 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
772016-10-13T07:53:50 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
782016-10-13T08:01:26 *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
792016-10-13T08:06:25 *** so has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
802016-10-13T08:08:12 *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
812016-10-13T08:14:45 *** whphhg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
822016-10-13T08:22:42 <GitHub157> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d0754799698d...d270c30d5530
832016-10-13T08:22:42 <GitHub157> bitcoin/master 3f92bc9 Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Add build instructions for FreeBSD
842016-10-13T08:22:43 <GitHub157> bitcoin/master d270c30 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8892: doc: Add build instructions for FreeBSD...
852016-10-13T08:22:58 <GitHub150> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8892: doc: Add build instructions for FreeBSD (master...2016_10_freebsd_build) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8892
862016-10-13T08:27:40 *** stan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
872016-10-13T08:31:02 <GitHub5> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d270c30d5530...8d46429c83ec
882016-10-13T08:31:03 <GitHub5> bitcoin/master 8aed5f6 Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: Translate all files, even if wallet disabled...
892016-10-13T08:31:03 <GitHub5> bitcoin/master 8d46429 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8911: qt: Translate all files, even if wallet disabled...
902016-10-13T08:31:14 <GitHub129> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8911: qt: Translate all files, even if wallet disabled (master...2016_10_qt_translations_wallet2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8911
912016-10-13T08:38:52 *** owowo has quit IRC
922016-10-13T08:41:54 *** harrymm has left #bitcoin-core-dev
932016-10-13T08:43:25 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
942016-10-13T08:45:53 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
952016-10-13T09:08:18 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962016-10-13T09:17:00 *** so has quit IRC
972016-10-13T09:17:00 *** baldur has quit IRC
982016-10-13T09:17:00 *** jl2012 has quit IRC
992016-10-13T09:17:00 *** GreenIsMyPepper has quit IRC
1002016-10-13T09:17:00 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1012016-10-13T09:17:02 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1022016-10-13T09:17:03 *** harrymm has quit IRC
1032016-10-13T09:17:03 *** mkarrer has quit IRC
1042016-10-13T09:17:04 *** gijensen has quit IRC
1052016-10-13T09:17:04 *** cjcj has quit IRC
1062016-10-13T09:17:05 *** LeMiner has quit IRC
1072016-10-13T09:17:05 *** sanada has quit IRC
1082016-10-13T09:17:06 *** ill has quit IRC
1092016-10-13T09:17:06 *** andytoshi has quit IRC
1102016-10-13T09:17:07 *** aj has quit IRC
1112016-10-13T09:17:07 *** berndj has quit IRC
1122016-10-13T09:17:08 *** gluytium_ has quit IRC
1132016-10-13T09:17:08 *** nickler_ has quit IRC
1142016-10-13T09:17:08 *** Eliel_ has quit IRC
1152016-10-13T09:17:08 *** kinlo has quit IRC
1162016-10-13T09:17:09 *** niska has quit IRC
1172016-10-13T09:17:09 *** Madars has quit IRC
1182016-10-13T09:17:09 *** da2ce7 has quit IRC
1192016-10-13T09:17:10 *** kanzure has quit IRC
1202016-10-13T09:17:11 *** jeremias has quit IRC
1212016-10-13T09:17:11 *** mr_burdell has quit IRC
1222016-10-13T09:17:11 *** TD-Linux has quit IRC
1232016-10-13T09:17:12 *** wumpus has quit IRC
1242016-10-13T09:17:12 *** Bootvis has quit IRC
1252016-10-13T09:17:12 *** owowo has quit IRC
1262016-10-13T09:17:12 *** jannes has quit IRC
1272016-10-13T09:17:12 *** Soligor has quit IRC
1282016-10-13T09:17:13 *** wasi has quit IRC
1292016-10-13T09:17:14 *** echonaut2 has quit IRC
1302016-10-13T09:17:14 *** davec_ has quit IRC
1312016-10-13T09:17:15 *** achow101 has quit IRC
1322016-10-13T09:17:16 *** zxzzt_ has quit IRC
1332016-10-13T09:17:17 *** AtashiCon has quit IRC
1342016-10-13T09:17:17 *** thestringpuller has quit IRC
1352016-10-13T09:17:17 *** jeremyrubin has quit IRC
1362016-10-13T09:17:17 *** jdumb1 has quit IRC
1372016-10-13T09:17:17 *** petertodd has quit IRC
1382016-10-13T09:17:18 *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
1392016-10-13T09:17:19 *** murr4y has quit IRC
1402016-10-13T09:17:19 *** wolfspraul has quit IRC
1412016-10-13T09:17:20 *** eenoch has quit IRC
1422016-10-13T09:17:21 *** lesderid has quit IRC
1432016-10-13T09:17:21 *** kadoban has quit IRC
1442016-10-13T09:17:22 *** btcdrak has quit IRC
1452016-10-13T09:17:22 *** PRab has quit IRC
1462016-10-13T09:17:22 *** ghtdak has quit IRC
1472016-10-13T09:17:24 *** BlueMatt has quit IRC
1482016-10-13T09:17:25 *** [b__b] has quit IRC
1492016-10-13T09:17:26 *** cysm has quit IRC
1502016-10-13T09:17:26 *** pindarhk has quit IRC
1512016-10-13T09:17:26 *** midnightmagic has quit IRC
1522016-10-13T09:17:26 *** ensign has quit IRC
1532016-10-13T09:17:26 *** paracyst has quit IRC
1542016-10-13T09:17:26 *** musalbas has quit IRC
1552016-10-13T09:17:27 *** eragmus has quit IRC
1562016-10-13T09:17:28 *** CyrusV has quit IRC
1572016-10-13T09:17:29 *** jasonv76 has quit IRC
1582016-10-13T09:17:29 *** Alopex has quit IRC
1592016-10-13T09:17:29 *** dermoth has quit IRC
1602016-10-13T09:17:30 *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
1612016-10-13T09:17:30 *** crudel has quit IRC
1622016-10-13T09:17:30 *** jrayhawk_ has quit IRC
1632016-10-13T09:17:30 *** cryptapus_afk has quit IRC
1642016-10-13T09:17:31 *** warren has quit IRC
1652016-10-13T09:17:31 *** trippysa1mon has quit IRC
1662016-10-13T09:17:31 *** ybit_ has quit IRC
1672016-10-13T09:17:31 *** crescendo has quit IRC
1682016-10-13T09:17:31 *** face has quit IRC
1692016-10-13T09:17:31 *** arowser has quit IRC
1702016-10-13T09:17:31 *** adam3us has quit IRC
1712016-10-13T09:17:32 *** sturles has quit IRC
1722016-10-13T09:17:32 *** amiller has quit IRC
1732016-10-13T09:17:32 *** gribble has quit IRC
1742016-10-13T09:17:32 *** PatBoy has quit IRC
1752016-10-13T09:17:33 *** ryan-c has quit IRC
1762016-10-13T09:17:33 *** squidicuz has quit IRC
1772016-10-13T09:17:33 *** nanotube has quit IRC
1782016-10-13T09:17:34 *** Arnavion has quit IRC
1792016-10-13T09:17:34 *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
1802016-10-13T09:17:34 *** isis has quit IRC
1812016-10-13T09:17:35 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
1822016-10-13T09:17:35 *** haakonn has quit IRC
1832016-10-13T09:17:35 *** adiabat has quit IRC
1842016-10-13T09:17:36 *** afk11 has quit IRC
1852016-10-13T09:17:36 *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
1862016-10-13T09:17:36 *** stan_ has quit IRC
1872016-10-13T09:17:37 *** nsh has quit IRC
1882016-10-13T09:17:38 *** michagogo has quit IRC
1892016-10-13T09:17:38 *** PaulCape_ has quit IRC
1902016-10-13T09:17:39 *** jonasschnelli has quit IRC
1912016-10-13T09:17:39 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
1922016-10-13T09:17:39 *** lclc has quit IRC
1932016-10-13T09:17:40 *** Yogh_ has quit IRC
1942016-10-13T09:17:40 *** jouke_ has quit IRC
1952016-10-13T09:17:40 *** Anduck has quit IRC
1962016-10-13T09:17:40 *** _mn3monic has quit IRC
1972016-10-13T09:17:40 *** Cory has quit IRC
1982016-10-13T09:17:40 *** sdaftuar has quit IRC
1992016-10-13T09:17:40 *** NicolasDorier has quit IRC
2002016-10-13T09:17:41 *** binns has quit IRC
2012016-10-13T09:17:41 *** helo has quit IRC
2022016-10-13T09:17:41 *** roasbeef has quit IRC
2032016-10-13T09:17:42 *** mturquette has quit IRC
2042016-10-13T09:17:42 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
2052016-10-13T09:17:43 *** phantomcircuit has quit IRC
2062016-10-13T09:17:44 *** morcos has quit IRC
2072016-10-13T09:17:44 *** bad_duck has quit IRC
2082016-10-13T09:17:44 *** sipa has quit IRC
2092016-10-13T09:17:45 *** aspect_ has quit IRC
2102016-10-13T09:17:45 *** blkdb has quit IRC
2112016-10-13T09:17:45 *** tadasv has quit IRC
2122016-10-13T09:17:46 *** Lightsword has quit IRC
2132016-10-13T09:17:46 *** arubi has quit IRC
2142016-10-13T09:17:47 *** mappum has quit IRC
2152016-10-13T09:17:47 *** asoltys has quit IRC
2162016-10-13T09:17:47 *** [Author] has quit IRC
2172016-10-13T09:17:47 *** fengling has quit IRC
2182016-10-13T09:17:48 *** Magma has quit IRC
2192016-10-13T09:19:53 *** limpkin_ has quit IRC
2202016-10-13T09:19:54 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
2212016-10-13T09:34:49 *** murch has quit IRC
2222016-10-13T09:37:16 *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2232016-10-13T10:09:48 *** so has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2252016-10-13T10:09:48 *** GreenIsMyPepper has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262016-10-13T10:09:48 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2272016-10-13T10:09:48 *** asoltys has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2282016-10-13T10:09:48 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2292016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2302016-10-13T10:09:48 *** tadasv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2312016-10-13T10:09:48 *** blkdb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2322016-10-13T10:09:48 *** aspect_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332016-10-13T10:09:48 *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2342016-10-13T10:09:48 *** bad_duck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2352016-10-13T10:09:48 *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2362016-10-13T10:09:48 *** phantomcircuit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2372016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2382016-10-13T10:09:48 *** kinlo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2392016-10-13T10:09:48 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2402016-10-13T10:09:48 *** mappum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2412016-10-13T10:09:48 *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2422016-10-13T10:09:48 *** baldur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2432016-10-13T10:09:48 *** gijensen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2442016-10-13T10:09:48 *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2452016-10-13T10:09:48 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2462016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472016-10-13T10:09:48 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482016-10-13T10:09:48 *** adam3us has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2492016-10-13T10:09:48 *** sturles has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2502016-10-13T10:09:48 *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512016-10-13T10:09:48 *** amiller has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522016-10-13T10:09:48 *** PatBoy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2532016-10-13T10:09:48 *** ryan-c has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2542016-10-13T10:09:48 *** squidicuz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552016-10-13T10:09:48 *** nanotube has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562016-10-13T10:09:48 *** BlueMatt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2572016-10-13T10:09:48 *** [b__b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2582016-10-13T10:09:48 *** cysm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592016-10-13T10:09:48 *** midnightmagic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602016-10-13T10:09:48 *** ensign has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2612016-10-13T10:09:48 *** paracyst has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2622016-10-13T10:09:48 *** musalbas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2632016-10-13T10:09:48 *** eragmus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2642016-10-13T10:09:48 *** CyrusV has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652016-10-13T10:09:48 *** jasonv76 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2662016-10-13T10:09:48 *** thestringpuller has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2672016-10-13T10:09:48 *** jeremyrubin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2682016-10-13T10:09:48 *** jdumb1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2692016-10-13T10:09:48 *** petertodd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702016-10-13T10:09:48 *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2712016-10-13T10:09:48 *** murr4y has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2722016-10-13T10:09:48 *** wolfspraul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732016-10-13T10:09:48 *** eenoch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742016-10-13T10:09:48 *** lesderid has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2752016-10-13T10:09:48 *** da2ce7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2762016-10-13T10:09:48 *** jeremias has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2772016-10-13T10:09:48 *** TD-Linux has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2782016-10-13T10:09:48 *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2792016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Bootvis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802016-10-13T10:09:48 *** AtashiCon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2812016-10-13T10:09:48 *** pindarhk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2822016-10-13T10:09:48 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2832016-10-13T10:09:48 *** face has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2842016-10-13T10:09:48 *** crescendo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2852016-10-13T10:09:48 *** ybit_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2862016-10-13T10:09:48 *** trippysa1mon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2872016-10-13T10:09:48 *** zxzzt_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2882016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Eliel_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2892016-10-13T10:09:48 *** nickler_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2902016-10-13T10:09:48 *** warren has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2912016-10-13T10:09:48 *** gluytium_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2922016-10-13T10:09:48 *** cryptapus_afk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2932016-10-13T10:09:48 *** achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2942016-10-13T10:09:48 *** berndj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2952016-10-13T10:09:48 *** aj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962016-10-13T10:09:48 *** jrayhawk_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2972016-10-13T10:09:48 *** davec_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2982016-10-13T10:09:48 *** andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2992016-10-13T10:09:48 *** echonaut2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3002016-10-13T10:09:48 *** crudel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3012016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3022016-10-13T10:09:48 *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3032016-10-13T10:09:48 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3042016-10-13T10:09:48 *** PRab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3052016-10-13T10:09:48 *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3062016-10-13T10:09:48 *** LeMiner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3072016-10-13T10:09:48 *** btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3082016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3092016-10-13T10:09:48 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3102016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3112016-10-13T10:09:48 *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3122016-10-13T10:09:48 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3132016-10-13T10:09:48 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3142016-10-13T10:09:48 *** [Author] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3152016-10-13T10:09:48 *** Magma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3162016-10-13T10:09:48 *** ill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3172016-10-13T10:09:48 *** niska has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3182016-10-13T10:09:48 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3192016-10-13T10:10:27 *** so has quit IRC
3202016-10-13T10:10:27 *** GreenIsMyPepper has quit IRC
3212016-10-13T10:10:27 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
3222016-10-13T10:10:27 *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
3232016-10-13T10:10:27 *** mappum has quit IRC
3242016-10-13T10:10:27 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
3252016-10-13T10:10:28 *** kinlo has quit IRC
3262016-10-13T10:10:28 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
3272016-10-13T10:10:29 *** phantomcircuit has quit IRC
3282016-10-13T10:10:30 *** morcos has quit IRC
3292016-10-13T10:10:30 *** bad_duck has quit IRC
3302016-10-13T10:10:30 *** sipa has quit IRC
3312016-10-13T10:10:30 *** aspect_ has quit IRC
3322016-10-13T10:10:30 *** blkdb has quit IRC
3332016-10-13T10:10:30 *** tadasv has quit IRC
3342016-10-13T10:10:30 *** arubi has quit IRC
3352016-10-13T10:10:31 *** Lightsword has quit IRC
3362016-10-13T10:10:31 *** asoltys has quit IRC
3372016-10-13T10:10:31 *** baldur has quit IRC
3382016-10-13T10:10:31 *** jl2012 has quit IRC
3392016-10-13T10:10:32 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
3402016-10-13T10:10:32 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3412016-10-13T10:10:32 *** harrymm has quit IRC
3422016-10-13T10:10:32 *** mkarrer has quit IRC
3432016-10-13T10:10:32 *** gijensen has quit IRC
3442016-10-13T10:10:33 *** fengling has quit IRC
3452016-10-13T10:10:33 *** [Author] has quit IRC
3462016-10-13T10:10:33 *** Magma has quit IRC
3472016-10-13T10:10:33 *** LeMiner has quit IRC
3482016-10-13T10:10:34 *** andytoshi has quit IRC
3492016-10-13T10:10:34 *** aj has quit IRC
3502016-10-13T10:10:34 *** berndj has quit IRC
3512016-10-13T10:10:34 *** gluytium_ has quit IRC
3522016-10-13T10:10:34 *** nickler_ has quit IRC
3532016-10-13T10:10:34 *** Eliel_ has quit IRC
3542016-10-13T10:10:35 *** da2ce7 has quit IRC
3552016-10-13T10:10:35 *** jeremias has quit IRC
3562016-10-13T10:10:35 *** TD-Linux has quit IRC
3572016-10-13T10:10:36 *** wumpus has quit IRC
3582016-10-13T10:10:36 *** Bootvis has quit IRC
3592016-10-13T10:10:36 *** owowo has quit IRC
3602016-10-13T10:10:36 *** jannes has quit IRC
3612016-10-13T10:10:36 *** Soligor has quit IRC
3622016-10-13T10:10:36 *** wasi has quit IRC
3632016-10-13T10:10:37 *** echonaut2 has quit IRC
3642016-10-13T10:10:37 *** davec_ has quit IRC
3652016-10-13T10:10:37 *** achow101 has quit IRC
3662016-10-13T10:10:38 *** zxzzt_ has quit IRC
3672016-10-13T10:10:38 *** AtashiCon has quit IRC
3682016-10-13T10:10:38 *** thestringpuller has quit IRC
3692016-10-13T10:10:38 *** jeremyrubin has quit IRC
3702016-10-13T10:10:38 *** jdumb1 has quit IRC
3712016-10-13T10:10:38 *** petertodd has quit IRC
3722016-10-13T10:10:38 *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
3732016-10-13T10:10:39 *** murr4y has quit IRC
3742016-10-13T10:10:39 *** wolfspraul has quit IRC
3752016-10-13T10:10:39 *** eenoch has quit IRC
3762016-10-13T10:10:40 *** lesderid has quit IRC
3772016-10-13T10:10:40 *** JackH has quit IRC
3782016-10-13T10:10:40 *** ill has quit IRC
3792016-10-13T10:10:41 *** kadoban has quit IRC
3802016-10-13T10:10:41 *** btcdrak has quit IRC
3812016-10-13T10:10:41 *** PRab has quit IRC
3822016-10-13T10:10:41 *** ghtdak has quit IRC
3832016-10-13T10:10:42 *** BlueMatt has quit IRC
3842016-10-13T10:10:42 *** [b__b] has quit IRC
3852016-10-13T10:10:43 *** cysm has quit IRC
3862016-10-13T10:10:43 *** pindarhk has quit IRC
3872016-10-13T10:10:43 *** midnightmagic has quit IRC
3882016-10-13T10:10:43 *** ensign has quit IRC
3892016-10-13T10:10:43 *** paracyst has quit IRC
3902016-10-13T10:10:43 *** musalbas has quit IRC
3912016-10-13T10:10:43 *** eragmus has quit IRC
3922016-10-13T10:10:43 *** CyrusV has quit IRC
3932016-10-13T10:10:44 *** jasonv76 has quit IRC
3942016-10-13T10:10:44 *** niska has quit IRC
3952016-10-13T10:10:45 *** Alopex has quit IRC
3962016-10-13T10:10:45 *** dermoth has quit IRC
3972016-10-13T10:10:45 *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
3982016-10-13T10:10:45 *** crudel has quit IRC
3992016-10-13T10:10:46 *** jrayhawk_ has quit IRC
4002016-10-13T10:10:46 *** cryptapus_afk has quit IRC
4012016-10-13T10:10:46 *** warren has quit IRC
4022016-10-13T10:10:46 *** trippysa1mon has quit IRC
4032016-10-13T10:10:46 *** ybit_ has quit IRC
4042016-10-13T10:10:46 *** crescendo has quit IRC
4052016-10-13T10:10:46 *** face has quit IRC
4062016-10-13T10:10:46 *** arowser has quit IRC
4072016-10-13T10:10:46 *** adam3us has quit IRC
4082016-10-13T10:10:47 *** sturles has quit IRC
4092016-10-13T10:10:47 *** amiller has quit IRC
4102016-10-13T10:10:47 *** gribble has quit IRC
4112016-10-13T10:10:47 *** PatBoy has quit IRC
4122016-10-13T10:10:48 *** ryan-c has quit IRC
4132016-10-13T10:10:48 *** squidicuz has quit IRC
4142016-10-13T10:10:48 *** nanotube has quit IRC
4152016-10-13T10:11:24 *** murch has quit IRC
4162016-10-13T10:28:24 *** cjcj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4172016-10-13T10:28:24 *** GreenIsMyPepper has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4182016-10-13T10:28:24 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4192016-10-13T10:28:24 *** gijensen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4202016-10-13T10:28:24 *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4212016-10-13T10:28:24 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4222016-10-13T10:28:24 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4232016-10-13T10:28:24 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4242016-10-13T10:28:24 *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4252016-10-13T10:28:24 *** adam3us has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4262016-10-13T10:28:24 *** sturles has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4272016-10-13T10:28:24 *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4282016-10-13T10:28:24 *** amiller has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4292016-10-13T10:28:24 *** PatBoy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4302016-10-13T10:28:24 *** ryan-c has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4312016-10-13T10:28:24 *** squidicuz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4322016-10-13T10:28:24 *** nanotube has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4332016-10-13T10:28:24 *** BlueMatt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4342016-10-13T10:28:24 *** [b__b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4352016-10-13T10:28:24 *** cysm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4362016-10-13T10:28:24 *** midnightmagic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4372016-10-13T10:28:24 *** ensign has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4382016-10-13T10:28:24 *** paracyst has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4392016-10-13T10:28:24 *** musalbas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4402016-10-13T10:28:24 *** eragmus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4412016-10-13T10:28:24 *** CyrusV has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4422016-10-13T10:28:24 *** jasonv76 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4432016-10-13T10:28:24 *** thestringpuller has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4442016-10-13T10:28:24 *** jeremyrubin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4452016-10-13T10:28:24 *** jdumb1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4462016-10-13T10:28:24 *** petertodd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4472016-10-13T10:28:24 *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4482016-10-13T10:28:24 *** murr4y has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4492016-10-13T10:28:24 *** wolfspraul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4502016-10-13T10:28:24 *** eenoch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4512016-10-13T10:28:24 *** lesderid has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4522016-10-13T10:28:24 *** da2ce7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4532016-10-13T10:28:24 *** jeremias has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4542016-10-13T10:28:24 *** TD-Linux has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4552016-10-13T10:28:24 *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4562016-10-13T10:28:24 *** Bootvis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4572016-10-13T10:28:24 *** AtashiCon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4582016-10-13T10:28:24 *** pindarhk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4592016-10-13T10:28:24 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4602016-10-13T10:28:24 *** face has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4612016-10-13T10:28:24 *** crescendo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4622016-10-13T10:28:24 *** ybit_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4632016-10-13T10:28:24 *** trippysa1mon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4642016-10-13T10:28:24 *** zxzzt_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4652016-10-13T10:28:24 *** Eliel_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4662016-10-13T10:28:24 *** nickler_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4672016-10-13T10:28:24 *** warren has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4682016-10-13T10:28:24 *** gluytium_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4692016-10-13T10:28:24 *** cryptapus_afk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4702016-10-13T10:28:24 *** achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4712016-10-13T10:28:24 *** berndj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4722016-10-13T10:28:24 *** aj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4732016-10-13T10:28:24 *** jrayhawk_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4742016-10-13T10:28:24 *** davec_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4752016-10-13T10:28:24 *** andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4762016-10-13T10:28:24 *** echonaut2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4772016-10-13T10:28:24 *** crudel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4782016-10-13T10:28:24 *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4792016-10-13T10:28:24 *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4802016-10-13T10:28:24 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4812016-10-13T10:28:24 *** PRab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4822016-10-13T10:28:24 *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4832016-10-13T10:28:24 *** LeMiner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4842016-10-13T10:28:24 *** btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4852016-10-13T10:28:24 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4862016-10-13T10:28:24 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4872016-10-13T10:28:24 *** Soligor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4882016-10-13T10:28:24 *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4892016-10-13T10:28:24 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4902016-10-13T10:28:24 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4912016-10-13T10:28:24 *** [Author] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4922016-10-13T10:28:24 *** Magma has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4932016-10-13T10:28:24 *** ill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4942016-10-13T10:28:24 *** niska has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4952016-10-13T10:28:24 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4962016-10-13T10:28:24 *** asoltys has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4972016-10-13T10:28:24 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4982016-10-13T10:28:24 *** Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4992016-10-13T10:28:24 *** tadasv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5002016-10-13T10:28:24 *** blkdb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5012016-10-13T10:28:24 *** aspect_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5022016-10-13T10:28:25 *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5032016-10-13T10:28:25 *** bad_duck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5042016-10-13T10:28:25 *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5052016-10-13T10:28:25 *** phantomcircuit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5062016-10-13T10:28:25 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5072016-10-13T10:28:25 *** kinlo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5082016-10-13T10:28:25 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5092016-10-13T10:28:25 *** mappum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5102016-10-13T10:28:25 *** so has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5112016-10-13T10:28:37 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5122016-10-13T10:28:37 *** kanzure has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5132016-10-13T10:28:37 *** mr_burdell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5142016-10-13T10:28:37 *** sanada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5152016-10-13T10:28:37 *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5162016-10-13T10:28:37 *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5172016-10-13T10:28:37 *** isis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5182016-10-13T10:28:37 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5192016-10-13T10:28:37 *** haakonn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5202016-10-13T10:28:37 *** adiabat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5212016-10-13T10:28:37 *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5222016-10-13T10:28:39 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5232016-10-13T10:28:44 *** limpkin_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5242016-10-13T10:28:44 *** Madars has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5252016-10-13T10:28:44 *** stan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5262016-10-13T10:28:44 *** nsh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5272016-10-13T10:28:44 *** michagogo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5282016-10-13T10:28:44 *** PaulCape_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5292016-10-13T10:28:44 *** sdaftuar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5302016-10-13T10:28:44 *** jonasschnelli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5312016-10-13T10:28:44 *** lclc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5322016-10-13T10:28:44 *** Yogh_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5332016-10-13T10:28:44 *** jouke_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5342016-10-13T10:28:44 *** Anduck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5352016-10-13T10:28:44 *** _mn3monic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5362016-10-13T10:28:44 *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5372016-10-13T10:28:44 *** NicolasDorier has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5382016-10-13T10:28:44 *** binns has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5392016-10-13T10:28:44 *** helo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5402016-10-13T10:28:44 *** roasbeef has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5412016-10-13T10:28:44 *** mturquette has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5422016-10-13T10:28:46 *** baldur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5432016-10-13T10:28:46 *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5442016-10-13T10:28:47 *** kanzure has quit IRC
5452016-10-13T10:28:55 *** kanzure has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5462016-10-13T10:29:27 *** kinlo has quit IRC
5472016-10-13T10:29:27 *** kinlo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5482016-10-13T10:30:09 *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
5492016-10-13T10:30:22 *** PaulCape_ has quit IRC
5502016-10-13T10:30:27 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5512016-10-13T10:32:37 *** luke-jr is now known as Guest88054
5522016-10-13T10:32:37 *** mr_burdell is now known as Guest13412
5532016-10-13T10:32:40 *** Madars is now known as Guest20119
5542016-10-13T10:32:43 *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
5552016-10-13T10:32:43 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5562016-10-13T10:32:51 *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
5572016-10-13T10:35:18 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5582016-10-13T10:35:26 <GitHub12> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.13: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/633c4a1f3690152bdda4b0ac7bcfde22c237183e
5592016-10-13T10:35:27 <GitHub12> bitcoin/0.13 633c4a1 Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: Periodic translations update...
5602016-10-13T10:35:40 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
5612016-10-13T10:35:40 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5622016-10-13T10:35:40 *** mappum has quit IRC
5632016-10-13T10:35:40 *** mappum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5642016-10-13T10:37:09 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5652016-10-13T10:39:11 *** Alina-malina has quit IRC
5662016-10-13T10:39:11 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5672016-10-13T10:40:16 *** fengling has quit IRC
5682016-10-13T10:40:34 *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5692016-10-13T11:01:56 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5702016-10-13T11:02:48 *** Guest88054 has quit IRC
5712016-10-13T11:03:01 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5722016-10-13T11:06:52 *** mrkent has quit IRC
5732016-10-13T11:19:41 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
5742016-10-13T11:29:37 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5752016-10-13T11:41:56 *** fengling has quit IRC
5762016-10-13T11:55:24 *** shaiguit1r has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5772016-10-13T11:55:34 *** shaiguitar has quit IRC
5782016-10-13T12:02:09 *** molz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5792016-10-13T12:02:47 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5802016-10-13T12:05:16 *** moli has quit IRC
5812016-10-13T12:07:32 *** mrkent has quit IRC
5822016-10-13T12:12:11 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5832016-10-13T12:13:09 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5842016-10-13T12:32:44 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
5852016-10-13T12:35:29 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5862016-10-13T12:48:35 *** limpkin_ is now known as limpkin
5872016-10-13T13:01:00 *** molz has quit IRC
5882016-10-13T13:03:38 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5892016-10-13T13:06:31 *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5902016-10-13T13:06:32 *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5912016-10-13T13:08:12 *** mrkent has quit IRC
5922016-10-13T13:18:58 *** Cheeseo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5932016-10-13T13:20:03 *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5942016-10-13T13:24:24 *** waxwing_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5952016-10-13T13:24:50 *** waxwing_ is now known as waxwing
5962016-10-13T13:36:09 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5972016-10-13T13:38:13 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
5982016-10-13T13:40:15 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5992016-10-13T13:56:09 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
6002016-10-13T13:59:16 *** skyraider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6012016-10-13T14:04:16 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6022016-10-13T14:28:12 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
6032016-10-13T14:28:28 *** mrkent has quit IRC
6042016-10-13T14:29:05 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6052016-10-13T14:29:40 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6062016-10-13T14:39:44 <BlueMatt> #8904 doesnt need backporting - the test is overspecified but thats ok, just needs fixing on master
6072016-10-13T14:39:53 <BlueMatt> nvm, no one is here, I'll post on github
6082016-10-13T14:46:50 <sipa> if nobody is here, who are you?
6092016-10-13T14:47:01 *** arowser has quit IRC
6102016-10-13T14:48:17 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6112016-10-13T14:48:49 <BlueMatt> I am your Conscience
6122016-10-13T14:49:03 <sipa> if nobody is here, who am i?
6132016-10-13T14:49:15 <BlueMatt> you are my Conscience
6142016-10-13T14:51:24 <bsm117532> RuntimeError: maximum recursion depth exceeded
6152016-10-13T14:51:52 * btcdrak segfaults
6162016-10-13T14:51:54 <sipa> so i'm my own conscience's conscience?
6172016-10-13T14:54:01 <kanzure> dmv5 says no
6182016-10-13T14:55:09 <bsm117532> I wouldn't rely on a DSM5 you got from the DMV :-P
6192016-10-13T14:57:58 <kanzure> oh oops.
6202016-10-13T15:04:07 *** murch has quit IRC
6212016-10-13T15:04:20 *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6222016-10-13T15:06:23 *** molz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6232016-10-13T15:09:32 *** moli has quit IRC
6242016-10-13T15:15:36 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6252016-10-13T15:16:34 <btcdrak> wumpus: is there a meeting today?
6262016-10-13T15:16:39 <BlueMatt> yes
6272016-10-13T15:17:02 <btcdrak> wumpus: you've changed your hair colour?
6282016-10-13T15:17:39 *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6292016-10-13T15:24:18 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6302016-10-13T15:29:12 *** mrkent has quit IRC
6312016-10-13T15:48:22 <wumpus> btcdrak: yes re: meeting, no re: hair colour
6322016-10-13T15:51:35 <wumpus> thanks for reminding me it's thursday though, I'd probably have forgot the meeting otherwise :)
6332016-10-13T15:52:15 *** adiabat has quit IRC
6342016-10-13T15:52:16 <sipa> i can confirm that at least until yesterday around noon, wumpus' hair color had not changed measurably
6352016-10-13T16:19:26 <jtimon> updated https://github.com/jtimon/consensus-doc/blob/generated/libconsensus.pdf with more images. any comments or suggestions welcomed
6362016-10-13T16:19:29 *** arowser has quit IRC
6372016-10-13T16:19:36 *** harrymm has quit IRC
6382016-10-13T16:19:46 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6392016-10-13T16:21:14 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6402016-10-13T16:22:06 <jtimon> or questions
6412016-10-13T16:25:02 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6422016-10-13T16:30:03 *** mrkent has quit IRC
6432016-10-13T16:36:02 <GitHub104> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #8914: Kill insecure_random and associated global state (master...2016_10_kill_insecurerandom) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8914
6442016-10-13T16:38:56 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6452016-10-13T16:44:53 *** warren has quit IRC
6462016-10-13T16:45:38 *** zooko has quit IRC
6472016-10-13T16:46:29 *** adam3us has quit IRC
6482016-10-13T16:47:53 *** achow101 has quit IRC
6492016-10-13T16:48:57 <GitHub196> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8d46429c83ec...e2a17e43e36f
6502016-10-13T16:48:57 <GitHub196> bitcoin/master 4cdece4 Dagur Valberg Johannsson: [qa] Fix compact block shortids for a test case
6512016-10-13T16:48:58 <GitHub196> bitcoin/master e2a17e4 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8904: [qa] Fix compact block shortids for a test case...
6522016-10-13T16:49:12 <GitHub114> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8904: [qa] Fix compact block shortids for a test case (master...shortid-coinbase) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8904
6532016-10-13T16:52:14 *** adam3us has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6542016-10-13T16:54:53 *** warren has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6552016-10-13T16:57:07 <GitHub192> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e2a17e43e36f...e2b8c394d61d
6562016-10-13T16:57:08 <GitHub192> bitcoin/master 4408558 jonnynewbs: Update bitcoin-tx to output witness data.
6572016-10-13T16:57:08 <GitHub192> bitcoin/master e2b8c39 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8817: update bitcoin-tx to output witness data...
6582016-10-13T16:57:17 <GitHub18> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8817: update bitcoin-tx to output witness data (master...bitcoin-tx-witness) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8817
6592016-10-13T17:00:21 *** trippysa1mon has quit IRC
6602016-10-13T17:01:02 *** trippysalmon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6612016-10-13T17:02:11 *** achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6622016-10-13T17:13:35 *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6632016-10-13T17:25:23 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6642016-10-13T17:40:18 <GitHub60> [bitcoin] petertodd opened pull request #8915: Add copyright/patent issues to possible NACK reasons (master...2016-10-13-sound-legal-justification) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8915
6652016-10-13T17:47:41 *** chauncie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6662016-10-13T18:06:21 *** JackH has quit IRC
6672016-10-13T18:14:16 <MarcoFalke> wumpus: I think it is better to just cherry-pick https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8643
6682016-10-13T18:22:14 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6692016-10-13T18:22:53 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
6702016-10-13T18:22:56 <wumpus> yes, I'm working on backports now, will include that one
6712016-10-13T18:23:46 <wumpus> #8393 is turning out a bit tricky (due to CConnMan) the rest seems easy
6722016-10-13T18:24:42 <achow101> I think #8899 can be merged
6732016-10-13T18:25:20 <instagibbs> achow101, no it can not. There is an outstanding bug.
6742016-10-13T18:25:54 <instagibbs> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8499#issuecomment-253184633
6752016-10-13T18:26:07 <achow101> instagibbs: 8899, not 8499 (notice the 8)
6762016-10-13T18:26:13 *** thomasthetank has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6772016-10-13T18:26:19 <instagibbs> ah :)
6782016-10-13T18:28:05 <wumpus> yes, #8899 seems ready (not #8499)
6792016-10-13T18:30:20 <wumpus> I think sipa has a good point there, but I'm not sure of the matter, it's probably better to just take over boost's patch
6802016-10-13T18:30:28 <wumpus> maybe the issue should be raised upstream though
6812016-10-13T18:31:45 <thomasthetank> hey, when i verify my txoutproof it returns incorrect txids
6822016-10-13T18:33:23 <thomasthetank> i noticed the txoutproof size goes from 248 to 235 bytes after being parsed
6832016-10-13T18:33:26 <jl2012> i hope 8499 will be ready in a few days. I have a branch here but sipa is working on a different solution: https://github.com/jl2012/bitcoin/commits/badwitnesscheck-1012
6842016-10-13T18:33:32 <thomasthetank> is that standard
6852016-10-13T18:34:34 <wumpus> thomasthetank: not sure, may be better to file an issue on github w/ exact input and output
6862016-10-13T18:39:38 *** thomasthetank has quit IRC
6872016-10-13T18:40:32 <GitHub164> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8643: [0.13 backport] Added feeler connections increasing good addrs in the tried table. (0.13...2016/08/feeler_013) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8643
6882016-10-13T18:44:57 <GitHub192> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #8916: 0.13.1 backports (0.13...2016_10_backports) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8916
6892016-10-13T18:47:39 *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
6902016-10-13T18:53:03 <wumpus> woohoo, just #8499 left https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr%20%20label%3A%22Needs%20backport%22%20milestone%3A0.13.1%20
6912016-10-13T18:55:17 <GitHub144> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 0.13: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/633c4a1f3690...4ed26277347c
6922016-10-13T18:55:17 <GitHub144> bitcoin/0.13 49be9f0 Michael Ford: Fix wake from sleep issue with Boost 1.59.0
6932016-10-13T18:55:17 <GitHub189> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #8899: [0.13] Fix wake from sleep issue with Boost 1.59.0 (0.13...backport-boost-windows-patch) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8899
6942016-10-13T18:55:18 <GitHub144> bitcoin/0.13 4ed2627 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #8899: [0.13] Fix wake from sleep issue with Boost 1.59.0...
6952016-10-13T18:57:20 <BlueMatt> woohoo
6962016-10-13T18:57:27 <BlueMatt> !
6972016-10-13T19:00:12 <sipa> doing
6982016-10-13T19:00:20 <achow101> meeting?
6992016-10-13T19:00:27 <gmaxwell> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr btcdrak sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier
7002016-10-13T19:00:34 <kanzure> hi.
7012016-10-13T19:00:34 <btcdrak> ping
7022016-10-13T19:00:39 <instagibbs> pre-sent
7032016-10-13T19:00:48 <sdaftuar> hi
7042016-10-13T19:00:54 <jtimon> hi
7052016-10-13T19:01:00 <BlueMatt> o where art though fearless leader wumpus
7062016-10-13T19:01:02 <michagogo> hi
7072016-10-13T19:01:10 <gmaxwell> Who called this meeting?
7082016-10-13T19:01:22 <BlueMatt> wumpus: said we were meeting earlier
7092016-10-13T19:01:32 <gmaxwell> Obviously a trap.
7102016-10-13T19:01:36 <BlueMatt> anyway, topic recommendations while we're waiting for a #?
7112016-10-13T19:01:48 <jtimon> I assume 0.13.1
7122016-10-13T19:01:58 <kanzure> 0.13.0 wallet bug about importaddress and scriptpubkeys
7132016-10-13T19:02:09 <kanzure> (and witnesses)
7142016-10-13T19:02:48 <gmaxwell> Backport statuses
7152016-10-13T19:02:57 <jtimon> libconsensus verifyBlock vs processBlock (ie the latter takes care of reorgs, updates the utxo, etc)
7162016-10-13T19:03:03 <kanzure> jtimon: thanks for https://github.com/jtimon/consensus-doc/blob/generated/libconsensus.pdf
7172016-10-13T19:03:18 <kanzure> jtimon: i suggest emailing that to mailing list at some point
7182016-10-13T19:03:20 <achow101> prefinal alert
7192016-10-13T19:03:27 <jtimon> kanzure: I already did
7202016-10-13T19:04:02 <wumpus> #startmeeting
7212016-10-13T19:04:02 <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Oct 13 19:04:02 2016 UTC. The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
7222016-10-13T19:04:02 <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
7232016-10-13T19:04:49 <BlueMatt> ok, start with 13.1 status update?
7242016-10-13T19:04:52 <wumpus> #topic 0.13.1
7252016-10-13T19:04:56 <jtimon> kanzure: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-October/013204.html
7262016-10-13T19:05:10 <wumpus> I've just done all the remaining backports in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8916
7272016-10-13T19:05:12 <BlueMatt> looks like we're one pr away from 13.1, sipa jl2012 or sdaftuar, where are we?
7282016-10-13T19:05:19 <sipa> close.
7292016-10-13T19:05:20 <BlueMatt> on 8916
7302016-10-13T19:05:27 <MarcoFalke> #link https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8916
7312016-10-13T19:05:28 <wumpus> this leaves #8499
7322016-10-13T19:05:41 <BlueMatt> oh, sorry, 8916 is backports, meant 8499
7332016-10-13T19:05:47 <sipa> close.
7342016-10-13T19:05:48 <btcdrak> was 8393 backported yet?
7352016-10-13T19:06:12 <wumpus> 0.13.0 wallet bug about importaddress and scriptpubkeys <- issue id?
7362016-10-13T19:06:40 <wumpus> btcdrak: yes, that one is part of #8916
7372016-10-13T19:06:43 <sipa> jl2012 has been writing a lot of tests for 8499, as there are a lot of edge cases. i believe they're all identified and fixable noe
7382016-10-13T19:06:48 <BlueMatt> ok, so i guess hopefully by next meeting (or late this week) the final few commits on #8499 should be ready for review and we can finalize then?
7392016-10-13T19:06:49 <sipa> wumpus: will file one soon
7402016-10-13T19:07:44 <wumpus> so there's another blocker for 0.13.1? ok
7412016-10-13T19:07:57 <sipa> it's part of 8499
7422016-10-13T19:08:09 <sipa> will be fixed simulteneously
7432016-10-13T19:08:24 <jtimon> wumpus: bip9 parameters?
7442016-10-13T19:08:58 <gmaxwell> BIP9 recommends it be set roughly a month after software release. I don't currently see a reason to deviate from that.
7452016-10-13T19:09:01 <wumpus> jtimon: that's a topic suggestion I suppose?
7462016-10-13T19:09:28 <gmaxwell> There should be some list discussion. I have been one on oneing with large users of Bitcoin for the last couple weeks.
7472016-10-13T19:09:29 <jtimon> gmaxwell: ack
7482016-10-13T19:09:36 <instagibbs> So would the idea be to set it only at final release and not RC?
7492016-10-13T19:09:56 <gmaxwell> instagibbs: I think we would set it at RC and take a guess.
7502016-10-13T19:09:56 <sipa> it should be set for RC
7512016-10-13T19:10:06 <sipa> but if a new RC is needed, we can jncrement
7522016-10-13T19:10:10 <instagibbs> Ok.
7532016-10-13T19:10:36 <gmaxwell> it doesn't have to be precise. The strong invariaent is that the start date should be _after_ the release. :)
7542016-10-13T19:10:43 <michagogo> Worst case, if there are a lot of RCs that can be adjusted before the last one
7552016-10-13T19:10:48 <wumpus> there can't be changes between the last RC and final
7562016-10-13T19:10:53 <MarcoFalke> Huh? If we just increment it may cause a consensus bug?
7572016-10-13T19:10:55 <wumpus> so it must be set for every RC too, I'm afraid
7582016-10-13T19:10:56 <gmaxwell> keeping in mind that it'll take minimum of 4 weeks to activate post start.
7592016-10-13T19:11:03 <MarcoFalke> I mean nodes don't agree
7602016-10-13T19:11:04 <sipa> MarcoFalke: assuming miners run RCs
7612016-10-13T19:11:07 <michagogo> But the last RC is generally within a week or so of final release
7622016-10-13T19:11:12 <jtimon> MarcoFalke: people should not use rc apart from testing
7632016-10-13T19:11:13 <michagogo> (Or, the other way around...)
7642016-10-13T19:11:16 <wumpus> michagogo: yes
7652016-10-13T19:11:21 <sipa> indeed
7662016-10-13T19:11:21 <MarcoFalke> fine
7672016-10-13T19:11:34 <sipa> when do we exoect 0.13.1rc1?
7682016-10-13T19:11:37 <gmaxwell> so I would recommend taking a best guess and changing it if release ends up past that date.
7692016-10-13T19:11:38 <wumpus> #topic BIP9 parameters
7702016-10-13T19:11:52 <cfields> whoops. Late, but made it.
7712016-10-13T19:11:54 <BlueMatt> lets avoid setting it differently in different rcs
7722016-10-13T19:11:58 <sdaftuar> i don't think we can just change bip9 params during the rc process
7732016-10-13T19:12:03 <sdaftuar> that's a consensus change
7742016-10-13T19:12:11 <sdaftuar> we almost screwed this up in 0.13.0
7752016-10-13T19:12:12 <wumpus> sipa: all depends on #8499 + the bug fix for 0.13.1
7762016-10-13T19:12:34 <wumpus> I'd do 0.13.1 today if it was not for those
7772016-10-13T19:12:36 <sipa> i'm sure we'll be ready next seek
7782016-10-13T19:12:50 <sipa> (i'd like to say tomorrow, but who knows)
7792016-10-13T19:12:58 <morcos> it seems not a bad idea to take a conservative estimate of the length of time the RC process will take, add a month to that and use the date.
7802016-10-13T19:13:00 <BlueMatt> proposal: do not set activation parameters in rc1, set them in an rc when we believe we are ready (ie last rc + 1 week or so) and then let that sit for a week before final tag
7812016-10-13T19:13:10 <morcos> so use 2 months after the time you issue the first RC for instance?
7822016-10-13T19:13:13 <jtimon> morcos: that makes sense to me
7832016-10-13T19:13:15 <wumpus> I usually estimate a month for the RC phase, for major releases
7842016-10-13T19:13:16 <btcdrak> BlueMatt: +1
7852016-10-13T19:13:16 <instagibbs> I think picking and staying with it is best.
7862016-10-13T19:13:22 <morcos> or right, like matt said
7872016-10-13T19:13:23 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: the RC's are supposted to be the same as the release.
7882016-10-13T19:13:25 <btcdrak> There is no way rc1 will pass anyway.
7892016-10-13T19:13:31 <sipa> btcdrak: unsure.
7902016-10-13T19:13:33 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: then lets call the first rc beta :)
7912016-10-13T19:13:34 <morcos> btcdrak: ha ha
7922016-10-13T19:13:54 <gmaxwell> btcdrak: I think it's likely to do so, I've spent a lot more time on 0.13 branch than master lately.
7932016-10-13T19:14:02 <jtimon> BlueMatt's solution is fine as well
7942016-10-13T19:14:04 <wumpus> the last RC is supposed to be the same as the release, you could do a RC that is not *really* a release candidate I guess ...
7952016-10-13T19:14:18 <BlueMatt> ok, so new proposal: lets do a "beta" phase first, and then graduate to rc?
7962016-10-13T19:14:18 <michagogo> Prerc1?
7972016-10-13T19:14:22 <michagogo> rc0?
7982016-10-13T19:14:23 <btcdrak> 0.13.1pre
7992016-10-13T19:14:42 <jtimon> btcdrak: if we know rc1 won't pass how come we make it an rc?
8002016-10-13T19:14:52 <gmaxwell> I think we're over thinking it. The purpose of the starting time was simply to avoid the case where there was a risk that a feature got activated before any released version of the implementation for it existed at all-- because we found that miners were running master/candidates.
8012016-10-13T19:14:55 <wumpus> I guess we can use beta now that bitcoin core itself is no longer beta
8022016-10-13T19:15:00 <michagogo> jtimon: its more like, if it passes, something's "wrong"
8032016-10-13T19:15:10 <jtimon> michagogo: not following
8042016-10-13T19:15:12 <wumpus> thoug hI"d prefer just calling it rc, all tooling is setup for that
8052016-10-13T19:15:14 <michagogo> Like when your code compiles without errors the first time
8062016-10-13T19:15:15 <sipa> i don't like this. just pick a date reasonably far in the future and do rc1
8072016-10-13T19:15:26 <BlueMatt> so set parameters to 1.5 months for rc1? or 2?
8082016-10-13T19:15:27 <gmaxwell> Considering that there is a _minimum_ 4032 block interval from startdate to activation, there is a LOT of safty margin here.
8092016-10-13T19:15:37 <wumpus> sipa: +1
8102016-10-13T19:15:45 <wumpus> just estimate 2 months for the RC process
8112016-10-13T19:15:46 <cfields> sipa: agreed. Otherwise there's no way we'll be able to explain the semantics.
8122016-10-13T19:15:48 <wumpus> that should be ample enough
8132016-10-13T19:15:48 <BlueMatt> ok, I'm ok with something like 2 months from rc1
8142016-10-13T19:15:55 <btcdrak> most releases take 3 or 4 rcs, so if we set the date for 5 weeks on rc1 that would cover it I am sure.
8152016-10-13T19:15:58 <morcos> or is wumpus saying 3 months
8162016-10-13T19:16:07 <jtimon> michagogo: you mean we expect to have more than one? sure, but we shouldn't make it rc if there's known bugs or required changes is my point
8172016-10-13T19:16:09 <BlueMatt> ehh, I'd rather be conservative btcdrak
8182016-10-13T19:16:12 <wumpus> no, two months is fine
8192016-10-13T19:16:15 <morcos> 2 months for process, one for it to be released
8202016-10-13T19:16:17 <BlueMatt> i mean I'm ok with 1.5 months, too
8212016-10-13T19:16:17 <achow101> I think two months after rc1 is fine
8222016-10-13T19:16:27 <michagogo> jtimon: well, obviously the goal is for rc1 to = final
8232016-10-13T19:16:28 <morcos> ok, i'm fine with either, less than 2 is a bit rushing it
8242016-10-13T19:16:33 <btcdrak> this is like an auction.
8252016-10-13T19:16:40 <gmaxwell> There are many people who _urgently_ want segwit activated yesturday.
8262016-10-13T19:16:40 <jtimon> michagogo: undesrtood
8272016-10-13T19:16:42 <wumpus> usually I estimate 1 month for rc1->final, but this maybe be more involved than usual, dunno
8282016-10-13T19:16:46 <michagogo> Just like when you write code the goal is for it to compile perfectly the first time :P
8292016-10-13T19:16:56 <BlueMatt> wumpus: or less, hopefully
8302016-10-13T19:17:05 <BlueMatt> :p
8312016-10-13T19:17:07 <sipa> i think this rc will be much shorter
8322016-10-13T19:17:14 <wumpus> BlueMatt: well this is a minor release, so it *should* be shorter
8332016-10-13T19:17:17 <gmaxwell> I think it would be fine to set start date 1 month after final. Even then if RCs take two months we still will not be at risk of activation before a software release.
8342016-10-13T19:17:18 <btcdrak> well we could just commit to sleepless nights to make release happen on time :-p
8352016-10-13T19:17:30 <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: the downside to rushing this out is that there's less time for everyone to test with the updated policy changes on testnet
8362016-10-13T19:17:32 <gmaxwell> er 1 month after RC1 not final.
8372016-10-13T19:17:44 <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: most of them are no-ops on testnet.
8382016-10-13T19:17:55 <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: how so?
8392016-10-13T19:17:58 <gmaxwell> though I have been running with the patches applied and testnet set to enforce policy.
8402016-10-13T19:18:06 <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: testnet doesn't enforce standardness rules.
8412016-10-13T19:18:08 *** BashCo has quit IRC
8422016-10-13T19:18:13 <BlueMatt> i mean can we get testnet miners to do compact-enforcement today?
8432016-10-13T19:18:13 <sdaftuar> yes it does, for the script checks
8442016-10-13T19:18:17 <BlueMatt> that should be most of it?
8452016-10-13T19:18:35 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: Lightsword please do that ^
8462016-10-13T19:18:38 <btcdrak> well remember there are non Core nodes mining on testnet
8472016-10-13T19:18:43 <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: am i missing something?
8482016-10-13T19:19:00 <btcdrak> I think lightsword's miner must be off, none of roasbeef's txs are getting mined.
8492016-10-13T19:19:06 <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: no, though not all the new policy is scriptchecks.
8502016-10-13T19:19:23 <gmaxwell> In any case, I don't think we should decide for sure here, we should make a list post.
8512016-10-13T19:19:23 <cfields> btcdrak: I'll be firing mine up in the next day or two
8522016-10-13T19:19:38 <sdaftuar> gmaxwell: sure not all, but the most significant ones IMO
8532016-10-13T19:19:41 <jtimon> prosed topic, maybe not for today: testnet4
8542016-10-13T19:19:50 <btcdrak> There are 4k unconfirmed "spam" txs https://testnet.smartbit.com.au/
8552016-10-13T19:20:09 <gmaxwell> But I think we should be suggesting 1month post rc1 as the starting time, when we do. Unless something specific comes up that suggests otherwise.
8562016-10-13T19:20:13 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: agreed, for now lets recommend 1.25 months from rc1 release on the list, and get some testnet miners spun up mining #8499 today so that we're less worried about sdaftuar's objection?
8572016-10-13T19:20:35 <gmaxwell> Keep in mind, in prior softforks the starting time was infinitely far in the past. And BIP9 made its way through 95% of its development with no starting time.
8582016-10-13T19:20:42 <michagogo> BlueMatt: perhaps 50 days for roundness
8592016-10-13T19:20:44 <michagogo> Or 55
8602016-10-13T19:20:56 <sipa> nov 15.
8612016-10-13T19:21:10 <michagogo> That's good too
8622016-10-13T19:21:16 <btcdrak> great.
8632016-10-13T19:21:23 <michagogo> (A birthday gift for my brother, perhaps?)
8642016-10-13T19:21:23 <gmaxwell> it was added because for one prior sf we ended up with >30% hashpower weeks before release... and that was for a SF with no quieting period... so it had a real risk of activating basically before a release.
8652016-10-13T19:22:07 <wumpus> I doubt that's a risk for segwit
8662016-10-13T19:22:16 <gmaxwell> Agreed.
8672016-10-13T19:22:19 <jtimon> gmaxwell: I think it's useful beyond that
8682016-10-13T19:22:41 <btcdrak> yes, the fact BIP9 requires 4-6 weeks to kick in realistically, makes it less of an issue
8692016-10-13T19:23:02 <sipa> nov 15 is close to a retarget
8702016-10-13T19:23:06 <gmaxwell> 4-8 weeks with 6 weeks being the average if all miners immediately upgrade.
8712016-10-13T19:23:08 <btcdrak> ok so Nov 15th it is?
8722016-10-13T19:23:11 <sipa> maybe we want to pick a date just before a retarget
8732016-10-13T19:23:35 <achow101> nov 15th sounds good (at 00:00 AM?)
8742016-10-13T19:23:36 <btcdrak> sipa: yes and remember Bitfury are turning on a _lot_ of hash rate going forward
8752016-10-13T19:23:38 <gmaxwell> btcdrak: probably shouldn't be just setting it here, but just have a feel for what we think is reasonable.
8762016-10-13T19:23:54 * jtimon wishes we had chosen hieght instead of time not to wonder what will be close to retarget
8772016-10-13T19:24:11 <sipa> yes, let's propose on the ML
8782016-10-13T19:24:16 <BlueMatt> ok, seems like we have rough consensus on a month after rc1 is probably a reasonable recommendation, so lets propose to the ml
8792016-10-13T19:24:23 <instagibbs> Ack
8802016-10-13T19:24:50 <wumpus> yes
8812016-10-13T19:24:59 <gmaxwell> sipa: do you want to do the list thing, or should I or?
8822016-10-13T19:25:05 <sipa> i will
8832016-10-13T19:25:08 <jtimon> ack on following up on the mailing list, it seems nobody is unhappy about either rc1 + 1 month nor rc2 + 2 month
8842016-10-13T19:25:19 <wumpus> #action propose segwit activation parameters on the ML
8852016-10-13T19:25:20 <jtimon> nor 15 nov
8862016-10-13T19:25:29 <BlueMatt> ok, next topic?
8872016-10-13T19:25:49 <wumpus> #topic testnet4 (jtimon)
8882016-10-13T19:26:03 <BlueMatt> why?
8892016-10-13T19:26:08 <achow101> ^
8902016-10-13T19:26:12 <wumpus> @jtimon
8912016-10-13T19:26:16 <jtimon> well, I would prefer to discuss verifyBlock vs processBlock actually
8922016-10-13T19:26:33 <wumpus> lol you proposed the topic
8932016-10-13T19:26:42 <jtimon> but some people complained about testnet being unreliable
8942016-10-13T19:27:00 <BlueMatt> isnt that a number of miners thing?
8952016-10-13T19:27:04 <wumpus> do you have a concrete proposal to fix that?
8962016-10-13T19:27:08 <gmaxwell> That has little to do with 'testnet4' I think. It just is that testnet is not consistently mined.
8972016-10-13T19:27:08 <sipa> i don't know that resetting would help
8982016-10-13T19:27:11 <jtimon> my main interest would be to remove the special case for testnet on pow
8992016-10-13T19:27:26 <BlueMatt> that would make it more unreliable?
9002016-10-13T19:27:31 <jtimon> don't drop diff to 1, maybe just add a max difficulty or something simpler
9012016-10-13T19:27:55 <jtimon> BlueMatt: I doubts so
9022016-10-13T19:28:09 <BlueMatt> i mean we added that rule because testnet was unreliable
9032016-10-13T19:28:22 <jtimon> BlueMatt: and did it solved it?
9042016-10-13T19:28:25 <BlueMatt> though i have no intuition for properly setting a max testnet diff that is reasonable
9052016-10-13T19:28:33 <BlueMatt> jtimon: it made it an order of magnitude (or two) better
9062016-10-13T19:28:38 <wumpus> yes, without it it is even worse
9072016-10-13T19:28:44 <jtimon> BlueMatt: fair enough
9082016-10-13T19:28:44 <btcdrak> max diff would be a disaster
9092016-10-13T19:28:51 <jtimon> maybe next topic?
9102016-10-13T19:28:55 <sipa> we could live without the permanent reset bug, though
9112016-10-13T19:29:01 <wumpus> any other topics?
9122016-10-13T19:29:59 <wumpus> *crickets*
9132016-10-13T19:30:37 <achow101> the prefinal alert that was supposed to happen but didn't?
9142016-10-13T19:30:41 <wumpus> well, that concludes the meeting early I guess. Let's make sure we can have a 0.13.1rc1 by next week
9152016-10-13T19:30:42 <jtimon> libconsensus: verifyBlock vs processBlock (ie the latter takes care of reorgs, updates the utxo, etc)
9162016-10-13T19:30:50 <BlueMatt> achow101: suggested prefinal alert
9172016-10-13T19:31:09 <gmaxwell> jtimon: a lot of people would like us to have a signed testnet using the pluggable pow stuff that is in elements, so that it would have perfectly predictable blocks and perfectly predictable reorgs.
9182016-10-13T19:31:37 <gmaxwell> achow101: we need to write explination text for bitcoin.org and I haven't had time to do it and no one else has stepped up.
9192016-10-13T19:31:44 <gmaxwell> I have an alert ready to go.
9202016-10-13T19:31:49 <jtimon> gmaxwell: I would be more than happy to put that in core if it's desirable, thanks for letting me know
9212016-10-13T19:31:50 <wumpus> #topic prefinal alert
9222016-10-13T19:31:52 <achow101> copy-paste from email
9232016-10-13T19:32:25 <gmaxwell> Needs to have an explination of the alert system, why it's gone now. And a description of the future steps that we discussed here.
9242016-10-13T19:33:04 <gmaxwell> achow101: do you want to try drafting something? I would be happy to review/edit.
9252016-10-13T19:33:15 <achow101> sure, I can try writing it
9262016-10-13T19:33:58 <gmaxwell> sounds good.
9272016-10-13T19:34:21 <wumpus> #action achow101 post about alert system for bitcoin.org
9282016-10-13T19:34:44 <wumpus> thanks
9292016-10-13T19:34:56 <btcdrak> Just a random information topic, there is a segwit dev guide for downstream published here https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_wallet_dev/
9302016-10-13T19:34:57 <gmaxwell> jtimon: if we're going to do any 'new testnet thing' we should figure out how to extract the good test cases from the existing testnet. E.g. instrumenting for code coverage and syncing testnet while noting which transactions increased coverage.
9312016-10-13T19:35:03 *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9322016-10-13T19:35:10 <wumpus> btcdrak: awesome!
9332016-10-13T19:35:31 <wumpus> #link segwit dev guide for downstream https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_wallet_dev/
9342016-10-13T19:35:57 <gmaxwell> we have other upcoming doc works. We should have a segwit deployment guide-- covering things like explaining how to setup perimiter nodes to shield unupgraded custom stuff-- ready at the start of the segwit queting period.
9352016-10-13T19:36:11 <achow101> apparently no one but me knew that dev guide even existed...
9362016-10-13T19:36:27 <gmaxwell> But we can get contributors outside of the regulars for this meeting, for the audience here advice on content would be good.
9372016-10-13T19:36:31 <morcos> it seems to me a better way to make testnet usable is to just pool some funding to have some small but non-trivial hashpower running it rather than implement more differences in behavior from mainnet
9382016-10-13T19:36:42 <wumpus> achow101: a lot of good information exists but the knowledge of that information is pretty sparse
9392016-10-13T19:36:53 <wumpus> achow101: has always been a problem in bitcoin :(
9402016-10-13T19:36:59 *** molz has quit IRC
9412016-10-13T19:37:04 <gmaxwell> morcos: the problem is that some clown pool will occasionally drop a petahash onto it an drive the difficulty up.
9422016-10-13T19:37:05 <jtimon> gmaxwell: is there any recommended tool for coverage in bitcoin core?
9432016-10-13T19:37:35 <wumpus> jtimon: valgrind?
9442016-10-13T19:37:44 <jcorgan> gmaxwell: i could likely help with some of the documentation work, if there is someone on the team to work with
9452016-10-13T19:37:56 <gmaxwell> jtimon: lcov works. But to get data inline like that some stunts involving gprof can be done.
9462016-10-13T19:38:26 <gmaxwell> You can ask the gprof stuff to dump the current data with a function call, IIRC.. so presumably one could instrument doing that after processing each transaction.
9472016-10-13T19:38:27 <jtimon> oh, I just recently starting using lcov, nice
9482016-10-13T19:39:25 <gmaxwell> in any case, there are tests in testnet that do not exist in any unit test. It would be good to find most of them and be able to start out a new testnet where the first few hundred blocks excercise all of them.
9492016-10-13T19:39:26 <Chris_Stewart_5> gmaxwell: Content on what docs? Segwit docs?
9502016-10-13T19:39:34 <wumpus> after each block may be enough granularity
9512016-10-13T19:40:07 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9522016-10-13T19:40:12 <gmaxwell> Chris_Stewart_5: on what materials should be covered in a deployment guide. For non-miners the only really important thing that comes to mind to me is instructions on setting up peremiter nodes.
9532016-10-13T19:40:31 <Chris_Stewart_5> Gotcha.
9542016-10-13T19:40:40 <gmaxwell> but no doubt there are other things.
9552016-10-13T19:40:51 <sdaftuar> all the policy changes!
9562016-10-13T19:41:05 <Chris_Stewart_5> jtimon: I think cfields has some sort of website that shows lcov coverage
9572016-10-13T19:41:12 <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: fair enough, though I expect those to be 99% invisible, but good to cover them more.
9582016-10-13T19:41:41 <cfields> Chris_Stewart_5: that was a one-time thing for segwit. Just need to fix up the makefile stuff so it can be auto-generated again
9592016-10-13T19:43:00 <wumpus> gah, looks like my backport of #8393 in #8916 is failing the RPC tests
9602016-10-13T19:43:13 <sdaftuar> wumpus: i'm running locally... compact blocks again
9612016-10-13T19:43:35 <sdaftuar> wumpus: i can reproduce at least
9622016-10-13T19:43:39 <wumpus> okay thanks!
9632016-10-13T19:43:39 <jtimon> Chris_Stewart_5: gmaxwell: awesome, maybe we should consider putting some lcov stuff as tooling? something like in https://github.com/jgriffiths/libwally-core#generating-a-coverage-report ? stupid people like me appreciate these things...
9642016-10-13T19:44:38 <jtimon> maybe I should start with that before a nexttestnet, anyway, I'll come back to you and cfields, we're mixing topics
9652016-10-13T19:44:52 <wumpus> jtimon: recently created a bitcoin-maintainer-tools repo https://github.com/laanwj/bitcoin-maintainer-tools, would make sense to add to that
9662016-10-13T19:45:24 <Chris_Stewart_5> jtimon: I think it is an easy way to direct new developers where it might be easiest to contribute to, as they can easily see where we are lacking tests
9672016-10-13T19:45:30 <cfields> jtimon: we have an --enable-lcov (or something like that). But it's broken atm.
9682016-10-13T19:46:21 <jtimon> awesome, so there's work to be done here but there's a base, thank you guys
9692016-10-13T19:46:26 <cfields> just need to get it fixed up again, shouldn't be too tough.
9702016-10-13T19:46:36 <wumpus> we should probably create an issue for that
9712016-10-13T19:46:50 <jtimon> wumpus: will check that out, does it contain lcov too? maybe we should consid
9722016-10-13T19:46:58 <gmaxwell> I haven't been too generally impressed with the utility of lcov on the bitcoin core codebase-- better than nothing I guess, but the branch coverage is full of BS unreachable branches due allocations in templaized container objects.
9732016-10-13T19:47:07 <jtimon> s//wumpus: will check that out
9742016-10-13T19:47:10 <wumpus> jtimon: no, it currently contains only a tool for doing per-function binary comparison of builds
9752016-10-13T19:47:52 <wumpus> jtimon: but I'm generally for sharing our tools more
9762016-10-13T19:48:15 <jtimon> gmaxwell: yeah, for a new testchain, take into account that we're still using globals and some hardcoding
9772016-10-13T19:48:49 <wumpus> jtimon: I have a lot of other ones, but need to clean up and disentangle them from other local stuff first before I can publish them
9782016-10-13T19:49:19 <wumpus> (for example for creating release notes)
9792016-10-13T19:49:30 <jtimon> things like https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8855 should help with new testchains
9802016-10-13T19:50:18 <gmaxwell> so... another topic, probably mostly for a future meeting.. sybil attacks.
9812016-10-13T19:50:20 <jtimon> wumpus: nice, we can incorporate those upstream little by little
9822016-10-13T19:50:21 <wumpus> anyhow let's end the meeting, seems we're not really on a topic anymore
9832016-10-13T19:50:34 <gmaxwell> I am now seeing 60+ connections within seconds of starting a node..
9842016-10-13T19:50:36 <wumpus> jtimon: I really prefer having meta-tools in a separate repo
9852016-10-13T19:51:17 <wumpus> jtimon: as they're not really on the same release cycle, and go through lots of changes that don't really need to go through the bitcoin core review process
9862016-10-13T19:51:22 <jtimon> wumpus: well I don't have a strong opinion, you can always document where those tools are somewhere
9872016-10-13T19:51:29 <wumpus> yes
9882016-10-13T19:51:36 <wumpus> #topic sybil attacks
9892016-10-13T19:51:42 <gmaxwell> Does anyone here have any back channels into amazon operations? I'd like to know why they are unresponsive to abuse conmplaints regarding this user.
9902016-10-13T19:52:18 *** sybil01 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9912016-10-13T19:52:44 <gmaxwell> So background: someone is mass connecting many times in parallel to all reachable ondes, pretending, poorly, to be a mix of different spv clients.
9922016-10-13T19:52:45 <wumpus> reminds me I should still file a complaint for that
9932016-10-13T19:53:01 <jtimon> suggested topic: libconsensus: verifyBlock vs processBlock (ie the latter takes care of reorgs, updates the utxo, etc)
9942016-10-13T19:53:18 <wumpus> sybil01: oh no :)
9952016-10-13T19:53:33 <gmaxwell> Because of the connection management stuff implemented a few versions ago, it doesn't disrupt the network much (these peers can get evicted). But I presume their motivation is to undermine user's privacy through observation.
9962016-10-13T19:54:04 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: i mean if we fix the privacy leak that makes it useful to do this, maybe they'll go away :)
9972016-10-13T19:54:23 <CodeShark> hi guys...traveling and can't catch entire meeting but will read thr scrollback :)
9982016-10-13T19:54:25 <wumpus> that must be the reason to do this, it would be an extremely ineffective DoS
9992016-10-13T19:54:29 <gmaxwell> Right now, connecting more times in parallel will leak more information and we can reduce that leackage further with already planned future relay improvements. ... which I've only not finished due to focusing on testing segwit and whatnot.
10002016-10-13T19:54:47 <gmaxwell> wumpus: it would be a potent DOS prior to 0.12-ish.
10012016-10-13T19:55:13 <gmaxwell> but yes, I presume they'll stop if we further reduce the privacy leaks. So thats the obvious thing to do.
10022016-10-13T19:55:18 <wumpus> gmaxwell: but it seems they open a fixed number of connections per node. A DoS would exhaust slots
10032016-10-13T19:55:27 <btcdrak> can we ban multiple connection from the same IP? that would be a start against this particular AWS spy.
10042016-10-13T19:55:34 <gmaxwell> presumably they were doing this before, and prior improvements killed the leaks unless they connected multiple times which made them visible.
10052016-10-13T19:55:48 <sipa> btcdrak: meh, they'll move to routing through different ips
10062016-10-13T19:56:01 <gmaxwell> btcdrak: it would be pretty harmful to do that network wide as there are many instutions and even a country where all connections come from one ip.
10072016-10-13T19:56:03 <wumpus> theyalready use multiple IPs, though they also do multiple connections per IP form some reason
10082016-10-13T19:56:17 <gmaxwell> and they do already use multiple IPs. and they changed them after people started circulating banlists.
10092016-10-13T19:56:46 *** sybil01 has quit IRC
10102016-10-13T19:56:53 <BlueMatt> several folks now ban aws nodes wholesale, which sucks because aws nodes are useful due to DDoS protection built-in
10112016-10-13T19:56:58 <wumpus> but yes IPs are cheap anyway, as long as there's profit to be made from this they'll not go away. THough I personally ban multiple connects from a single IP on my nodes.
10122016-10-13T19:56:59 <BlueMatt> (including some of my nodes)
10132016-10-13T19:57:06 <gmaxwell> I'd like to avoid hardcoding netblock specific rules "one connection per IP from amazon IP space" and whatnot. :)
10142016-10-13T19:57:19 <gmaxwell> so in any case, reducing the leakage is always a good move and we should do that.
10152016-10-13T19:57:23 <BlueMatt> yup
10162016-10-13T19:57:36 <sipa> i think we can make the relay delays use deterministic randomness based on netgroup, so nodes in the same range will see the same thing
10172016-10-13T19:57:57 <sipa> and many more ideas
10182016-10-13T19:58:02 <cfields> gmaxwell: for one in every X connections, we could proxy and route messages together for peer-pairs. Then they'd poison their own stats :p
10192016-10-13T19:58:02 <sipa> probably not for this meeting
10202016-10-13T19:58:23 <gmaxwell> cfields: That won't work for reasons I'd rather not say in public, unfortunately.
10212016-10-13T19:58:28 <btcdrak> 1 min 30 seconds to go
10222016-10-13T19:58:46 <wumpus> cfields: they don't actually ever send anything
10232016-10-13T19:58:51 <gmaxwell> well it would help. but not do quite what you think.. still could be useful.. many fun things to discuss.
10242016-10-13T19:59:24 <wumpus> cfields: they just negotiate the connection, answer pings, and listen. Though poisining the info sounds like fun.
10252016-10-13T20:00:01 <instagibbs> ding ding
10262016-10-13T20:00:01 <sipa> DANG
10272016-10-13T20:00:05 <btcdrak> dong
10282016-10-13T20:00:07 <wumpus> and yes, netblock specific rules are not an option, that'd be Hearnian
10292016-10-13T20:00:10 <wumpus> #endmeeting
10302016-10-13T20:00:10 <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Oct 13 20:00:10 2016 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
10312016-10-13T20:00:10 <lightningbot> Minutes: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-10-13-19.04.html
10322016-10-13T20:00:10 <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-10-13-19.04.txt
10332016-10-13T20:00:10 <lightningbot> Log: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-10-13-19.04.log.html
10342016-10-13T20:00:44 <gmaxwell> wumpus: it would potentially make sense to ship with a IP -> ASN map to make the same-netgroup logic more intelligent... though it would be a couple megabytes of data to ship, unfortunately.
10352016-10-13T20:01:12 * midnightmagic would love to cooperate to poison network spy data.
10362016-10-13T20:01:17 <gmaxwell> but I don't know that doing anything that depends on IPs as a limit resource is worth any time.
10372016-10-13T20:01:24 <musalbas> blocking multiple connections per IP would also have the added benefit of helping to prevent Eclipse attacks (per http://eprint.iacr.org/2015/263.pdf)
10382016-10-13T20:01:37 <gmaxwell> musalbas: no, it wouldn't.
10392016-10-13T20:02:07 <wumpus> musalbas: IPv4's are cheap, any attack that runs profit of any kind can use tons of them
10402016-10-13T20:02:13 <musalbas> true
10412016-10-13T20:02:18 <wumpus> ... not to speak about IPv6's :)
10422016-10-13T20:02:20 <gmaxwell> musalbas: multiple inbound connections per IP cannot really be used to perform eclipse attacks in bitcoin due to how the connection management works.
10432016-10-13T20:02:38 <gmaxwell> musalbas: if we run out of connections, we will start kicking off peers, and those dupes are among the first to go.
10442016-10-13T20:02:40 *** cryptapus has quit IRC
10452016-10-13T20:04:03 <instagibbs> due to metrics in AttemptToEvictConnection?
10462016-10-13T20:04:18 <musalbas> yeah i recall some countermeasures being implemented
10472016-10-13T20:04:22 <gmaxwell> musalbas: the logic is that when we fill and a new one comes in, we make a decision to potentially evict a connection (including the new one). The decision first protects a subset of peers based on them being "good" according to varrious different criteria, then it kicks the shortest uptime peer from the netgroup with the most inbound connections.
10482016-10-13T20:04:37 <instagibbs> if they're not serving data, and in same netgroup, only a small number may be protected from eviction
10492016-10-13T20:04:41 <musalbas> interesting
10502016-10-13T20:04:43 <wumpus> gmaxwell: yes IP to ASN map would be an idea
10512016-10-13T20:05:15 <instagibbs> musalbas, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/net.cpp#L873
10522016-10-13T20:06:53 <gmaxwell> the way this particular attacker works tends to exploit the longest uptime protection, unfortunately. Though we could easily strenghten that some.
10532016-10-13T20:07:15 <gmaxwell> I've hesitated adding narrow improvements that they could easily avoid, however.
10542016-10-13T20:07:39 <musalbas> out of curiosity are there any countermeasures to defend against the case where an attacker controls the user's network, forces them to only connect to their nodes and kills connections from the outside world, and starts giving them "secret" blocks?
10552016-10-13T20:07:56 <gmaxwell> musalbas: yes, proof of work.
10562016-10-13T20:08:10 <wumpus> gmaxwell: wonder if it woudl be possible to compress that map in a smart way, maybe approximate it, in a way that would be better than the current same-netgroup logic but fairly compact
10572016-10-13T20:08:25 <musalbas> gmaxwell, yes but assuming the adversary is well resourced but has less than 51% of hashing power they can still give a user secret blocks.
10582016-10-13T20:08:36 <gmaxwell> and the software knows about the identity of the 'real' chain, to enough extent that making a whole fake world is computationally hard, even if the node is interceptect from start.
10592016-10-13T20:09:11 <gmaxwell> musalbas: yup. There is no protection against that. One of the motiviations behind the proposed authenticated transport is so that nodes could add authenticated peers.
10602016-10-13T20:09:13 <musalbas> gmaxwell, but the difference would be that the blocks would be a lot less frequence *unless they are pre-computed before the attack* - which could be a way to detect
10612016-10-13T20:09:25 <musalbas> frequent*
10622016-10-13T20:09:54 <musalbas> gmaxwell, i see
10632016-10-13T20:10:19 <BlueMatt> musalbas: even if the attacker has 50% of hashrate its gonna generate blocks slower than the "real" network
10642016-10-13T20:10:19 <BlueMatt> (though, at that point, the attacker potentially is the "real" network)
10652016-10-13T20:11:01 <musalbas> BlueMatt, unless the attacker knows the block height that the client is on before connecting to the network, and pre-computes a bunch of blocks with certain timestamps a long time before the attack occurs
10662016-10-13T20:11:12 <gmaxwell> musalbas: the slower criteria doesn't generally work that well, if you work out the math for an acceptably fp rate, the attacker has to be awfully slow for it to reliably trigger there.
10672016-10-13T20:11:44 <musalbas> i see
10682016-10-13T20:11:59 <BlueMatt> musalbas: i mean as long as the chain's hashpower isnt going up too fast, the client can tell that its last block was X days ago, and too few blocks were generated for that time
10692016-10-13T20:12:20 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: luckily the math works out better over longer time horizons, like the attack musalbas is referencing :)
10702016-10-13T20:12:25 <musalbas> anyways, if the eclipse attack problem is solved for offline-networks, it could have some good applications for transparency overlays in threat models where the attacker owns the network
10712016-10-13T20:12:50 <BlueMatt> indeed, though you we also already have good tor support for this reason
10722016-10-13T20:13:21 <gmaxwell> musalbas: if it were actually solvable in a strong sense bitcoin wouldn't need mining.
10732016-10-13T20:14:21 <musalbas> gmaxwell, there are papers that suggest that bitcoin doesn't need mining if you collapse Bitcoin into Certificate Transparency-like system, but that assumes a level of trust in a set of distributed actors
10742016-10-13T20:15:00 <musalbas> however, if you can have trustless CT without blockchain then ... :)
10752016-10-13T20:15:33 <midnightmagic> -- then altcoin scams.
10762016-10-13T20:16:01 <musalbas> BlueMatt, yeah Tor could be good to prevent that, but it's not foolproof at you're transferring your trust to a set of distributed Tor directory authorities
10772016-10-13T20:16:53 <gmaxwell> musalbas: ultimately if you are not trusting a specified set, then what is to say that your isolating attacker _isn't_ the valid network.
10782016-10-13T20:17:03 <gmaxwell> So I think the problem you hope to solve is not well defined.
10792016-10-13T20:17:38 <gmaxwell> But having unforgable adjcencies with parties you know would protect from isolation attacks in practice, and requires no centeralized ttp.
10802016-10-13T20:20:18 <musalbas> gmaxwell, I would be curious to hear your opinion in the creator of Certificate Transparency's criticisms of Bitcoin, who argues that Bitcoin is not decentralized unless 51% of the world's processing power is doing Bitcoin hashing, and therefore you have to trust the people who set the checkpoints in the Bitcoin source code otherwise you can just rewrite the chain.
10812016-10-13T20:20:47 <instagibbs> hmm, test before evict didn't go anywhere. Wonder if that can get worked on.
10822016-10-13T20:20:55 <instagibbs> now that feeler is in
10832016-10-13T20:20:58 <musalbas> (http://www.links.org/files/decentralised-currencies.pdf)
10842016-10-13T20:21:01 <gmaxwell> musalbas: he's full of shit.
10852016-10-13T20:21:02 <gmaxwell> :)
10862016-10-13T20:21:09 <wumpus> the checkpoints are going to go
10872016-10-13T20:21:20 <gmaxwell> which I helpfully told him as soon as he wrote that, but alas, he didn't respond.
10882016-10-13T20:21:25 <gmaxwell> lemme give you my response.
10892016-10-13T20:22:40 <musalbas> yeah I agree - but I'm trying to making him come around by currently writing a paper for a way to make CT trustless but while keeping it scalable by enhancing it using the blockchain as a medium for partial transparency
10902016-10-13T20:23:06 <wumpus> only in the early blocks (when difficulty is very low) it'd be realistically possible to feed a client the wrong chain, and it may waste some time with that, and checkpoints are reasonably useful for avoiding that... but once it catches up it will notice anyhow that that's not the most-work chain
10912016-10-13T20:23:39 <gmaxwell> musalbas: http://0bin.net/paste/nyvikpO+-Q+R5ZsW#MmdECr9dkrXeLO0HKMp5LVvtgH377V-28cN9r1LSBGS keep in mind, I wrote that in 2011... I would probably say some different things now.
10922016-10-13T20:24:07 <musalbas> i'll read
10932016-10-13T20:25:46 <musalbas> (but bbl for now as i have to travel home)
10942016-10-13T20:26:30 <gmaxwell> as wumpus mentions, we're now going to remove checkpoints soon, they don't do anything much anymore. There are a couple DOS attacks that they help with, getting rid of them is important to avoid misunderstandings like Ben's.
10952016-10-13T20:27:44 <gmaxwell> and FWIW, the last checkpoint was set at block 295000 ... over two years ago.
10962016-10-13T20:39:49 *** whphhg has quit IRC
10972016-10-13T20:43:59 *** fengling has quit IRC
10982016-10-13T20:58:12 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
10992016-10-13T21:05:10 *** cryptapus_afk is now known as cryptapus
11002016-10-13T21:08:47 *** kanzure has quit IRC
11012016-10-13T21:08:58 *** kanzure has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11022016-10-13T21:09:44 *** Guyver2__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11032016-10-13T21:12:00 *** kanzure has quit IRC
11042016-10-13T21:12:01 *** kanzure has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11052016-10-13T21:12:45 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
11062016-10-13T21:12:48 *** Guyver2__ is now known as Guyver2
11072016-10-13T21:20:32 *** MarcoFalke has left #bitcoin-core-dev
11082016-10-13T21:40:37 <achow101> gmaxwell: (and whoever can publish alerts, wumpus?) what do you think: https://github.com/achow101/bitcoin.org/blob/prefinal-alert/_alerts/2016-10-14-alert-retirement.md
11092016-10-13T21:46:20 *** cryptapus is now known as cryptapus_afk
11102016-10-13T21:52:33 <wumpus> looking :)
11112016-10-13T21:54:21 <btcdrak> achow101: also one key means we have no idea how many people the key was shared with and who is in possession of the key.
11122016-10-13T21:54:33 *** cdecker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11132016-10-13T21:55:24 <btcdrak> and it seems like magicaltux also has the key and he was detained by police it seems reasonable that the key might be in many many people's possession by now
11142016-10-13T21:59:05 <wumpus> yes, we don't know who has the key at this point. It's a typical issue with only having one, shared, key. You don't know who was it that sent an alert, and you can't revert one person's key
11152016-10-13T22:00:44 <wumpus> "No Bitcoins are at risk and this warning may be safely ignored" yes, indeed. It's a no-op for most.
11162016-10-13T22:00:49 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
11172016-10-13T22:01:59 <gmaxwell> I like the text overall!
11182016-10-13T22:02:03 <wumpus> in the case of bitcoin core we have the bitcoin core announcement list now: https://bitcoincore.org/en/list/announcements/join/
11192016-10-13T22:02:17 <wumpus> me too
11202016-10-13T22:03:12 <wumpus> seems good to me
11212016-10-13T22:03:24 <kanzure> achow101: i suggest linking to at least https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-September/013104.html
11222016-10-13T22:03:38 <kanzure> and possibly earlier discussion too
11232016-10-13T22:04:00 <gmaxwell> I think the schedule should be: (1) that page goes up, (2) an email goes to varrious lists, warning about the prefinal alert. Then a day later, the prefinal alert goes out. (I don't see a reason to wait longer than a day, anyone who doesn't see it in a day won't see it anytime soon-- and the only reason to announce it in advance is just in case someone has automation that triggers a shutdown on
11242016-10-13T22:04:07 <gmaxwell> any alert)
11252016-10-13T22:05:00 <kanzure> not sure about an earlier link, any hints anyone?
11262016-10-13T22:05:23 <kanzure> i suppose there was https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6260 (remove alert system)
11272016-10-13T22:12:02 <achow101> kanzure: yeah, I'll link the email, the discussion here from a while back, and that pr
11282016-10-13T22:12:33 <gmaxwell> the announcement should point out what versions its deactivated in.
11292016-10-13T22:12:55 <achow101> ok
11302016-10-13T22:13:20 <gmaxwell> because some people might want to update to a newer version but not all the way or something.
11312016-10-13T22:14:11 <gmaxwell> if we're close to a releaes it might make sense to delay sending the alert itself, as that might cause a few people to upgrade... would be kinda lame to have them upgrading to a version which is outdated a week later.
11322016-10-13T22:14:58 <wumpus> 0.10.3 added the option to disable alerts (-alerts=0)
11332016-10-13T22:15:14 <sipa> wow, so long already
11342016-10-13T22:15:39 <achow101> which releases should I mention?
11352016-10-13T22:17:21 *** cdecker has quit IRC
11362016-10-13T22:17:26 <wumpus> alerts are disabled by default on the 0.11 branch, however, there has been no release after doing that
11372016-10-13T22:17:59 <wumpus> 0.12 removed alerts completely
11382016-10-13T22:18:31 <wumpus> (don't know which .x yet, looking)
11392016-10-13T22:18:57 <achow101> I thought only 0.13 had alerts actually removed
11402016-10-13T22:21:11 <gmaxwell> for the purpose of that message, disabled is probably the right milestone. Doesn't really matter to the user if the code is there but dead.
11412016-10-13T22:21:39 <wumpus> achow101: yes, you are right, had the 0.13 branch checkout out in my 0.12 repo for some reason, it is only disabled
11422016-10-13T22:22:16 <wumpus> but as gmaxwell says disabled is enough
11432016-10-13T22:22:29 <achow101> so 0.10.3, 0.11.x, and 0.12.x allows disabling with -alerts=0
11442016-10-13T22:22:52 <gmaxwell> question is where was it disabled by default first?
11452016-10-13T22:23:02 <wumpus> 0.10.3 and 0.11.* has it enabled by default but allows disabling
11462016-10-13T22:23:15 <wumpus> yes
11472016-10-13T22:24:02 <wumpus> 0.12.1 has it disabled by default
11482016-10-13T22:24:04 <wumpus> 0.12.0 hasn't
11492016-10-13T22:24:10 <gmaxwell> seqeunce < spelling
11502016-10-13T22:24:56 <gmaxwell> As far as the final alert, I think we'd actually do it shortly prior to 0.14's RC phase? so that we could hardcode it in to be given to older peers.
11512016-10-13T22:25:03 <achow101> Should I include other software that has removed alerts
11522016-10-13T22:26:17 <gmaxwell> What I would put is something stating that as far as we're aware all currently maintained implementations have removed alerts.
11532016-10-13T22:26:37 <wumpus> yes, 0.14.0 should hardcode the final alert
11542016-10-13T22:27:27 * luke-jr wonders if the final alert should mention the announce ML
11552016-10-13T22:27:40 <achow101> made changes, gtg
11562016-10-13T22:27:43 <wumpus> indeed - there may be some altcoins that have literally copied the alert key, but that's not releavant to this message
11572016-10-13T22:27:51 <achow101> i'll be back in ~1 hr
11582016-10-13T22:27:57 <wumpus> later achow101
11592016-10-13T22:28:46 <gmaxwell> wumpus: there were a few but IIRC I didn't find any that were non-dead... and I attempted to contact all the ones I found.
11602016-10-13T22:28:56 <gmaxwell> there were a LOT more that copied litecoin's key.
11612016-10-13T22:29:02 <gmaxwell> like hundreds of them
11622016-10-13T22:29:36 <petertodd> achow101: ACK
11632016-10-13T22:29:41 <wumpus> yes the non-dead altcoins I've looked at also have a different key, didn't compare against the litecoin one :)
11642016-10-13T22:31:34 <wumpus> but it sounds sensible to me, most altcoins descent from litecoin, or the 'PoS' coins after that, not bitcoin directly
11652016-10-13T22:33:50 <sipa> anyone tried a gothib search for the alert key?
11662016-10-13T22:33:53 <sipa> eh, github
11672016-10-13T22:33:56 <gmaxwell> yes
11682016-10-13T22:34:07 <sipa> how did i manage to get two typos in one word?
11692016-10-13T22:34:22 <wumpus> github search is pretty crappy, I'm amazed that worked :) I did a google search though.
11702016-10-13T22:34:52 <gmaxwell> sipa: jsmf ,ods;ohm,rmt.
11712016-10-13T22:35:07 <gmaxwell> I didn't say it was useful, I said I tried it.
11722016-10-13T22:35:08 <gmaxwell> :)
11732016-10-13T22:35:17 <gmaxwell> the openhub code search thing was more useful.
11742016-10-13T22:35:44 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11752016-10-13T22:36:53 <wumpus> in any case they *too* are better off with the key being phased out,and the final alert being sent
11762016-10-13T22:37:30 <wumpus> it makes no sense for us to be able to send alerts on random altcoin networks
11772016-10-13T22:37:47 <gmaxwell> I think it makes lots of sense.
11782016-10-13T22:37:49 <gmaxwell> muhahah.
11792016-10-13T22:37:52 *** whphhg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
11802016-10-13T22:38:15 <wumpus> yes :-)
11812016-10-13T22:38:51 <wumpus> <trollface>
11822016-10-13T22:40:37 *** murch has quit IRC
11832016-10-13T22:46:09 <musalbas> re: checkpointing - is there anything in Bitcoin consensus to prevent someone from going back 2048 blocks to a much lower difficulty, and then doing a 51% attack from there to get the longest chain? I think I must be missing a subtle consensus rule here
11842016-10-13T22:46:39 <gmaxwell> you are
11852016-10-13T22:46:57 <gmaxwell> Bitcoin's best chain selection is not 'most blocks', it's 'most work'.
11862016-10-13T22:47:05 <musalbas> ahh
11872016-10-13T22:47:19 <gmaxwell> though this was originally wrong, and it's wrong in the whitepaper, and there is no real way to update it-- so a lot of people aren't aware.
11882016-10-13T22:47:31 <gmaxwell> but it's been 'most work' since some time in 2010.
11892016-10-13T22:47:58 <musalbas> well that clears up many shower thoughts of mine.
11902016-10-13T22:48:39 *** jannes has quit IRC
11912016-10-13T22:48:40 <gmaxwell> (it was fixed around the same time that bitcoin first moved off the minimum difficulty)
11922016-10-13T22:53:04 <wumpus> maybe it would make sense to publish an 'errata' to the whitepaper
11932016-10-13T22:53:57 <sipa> wumpus: you'll get lynched...
11942016-10-13T22:54:00 <gmaxwell> lol
11952016-10-13T22:54:24 <musalbas> it will be like trying to modify the bible for many
11962016-10-13T22:54:40 <gmaxwell> so you might not be aware, but cobra proposed putting up an updated whitepaper on bitcoin.org with varrious errata and it started a week long lynchmob thing. OMG YOU CHALLENGED THE HOLY WORD.
11972016-10-13T22:55:23 <gmaxwell> nevermind that it's wrong in a few places, and we've learned _a lot_ about teaching people about Bitcoin since 2008.
11982016-10-13T22:56:58 <wumpus> oh I'd like to change the bible as well... </s>
11992016-10-13T22:57:40 <kanzure> all of them?
12002016-10-13T22:58:51 <wumpus> I think most oppositiion exists to changing the whitepaper, on the original URL, itself. Releaseing an updated version as long as it's clear that it's an updated version may run into less opposition. But I dunno, some people are pretty close to extremism
12012016-10-13T22:58:54 <musalbas> you can't update the bible. there are too many bible book nodes around the world, it's immutable
12022016-10-13T22:59:37 <wumpus> never mess with the satoshi cults...
12032016-10-13T22:59:37 *** davec_ has quit IRC
12042016-10-13T22:59:42 <kanzure> was there anyone offering to do the legwork on a bitcoin core whitepaper?
12052016-10-13T23:00:15 <sipa> i don't think it's a good topic for a whitepaper
12062016-10-13T23:00:24 <sipa> maybe some subsystems could use one
12072016-10-13T23:00:28 <kanzure> well maybe i have the color wrong
12082016-10-13T23:00:35 *** davec_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
12092016-10-13T23:00:42 <sipa> how about a black paper?
12102016-10-13T23:01:00 <wumpus> yes! much better
12112016-10-13T23:01:16 <musalbas> a black paper would waste lots of ink; you don't want critics to accuse bitcoin of using lots of energy as well as ink now
12122016-10-13T23:01:18 <wumpus> or a purplepaper
12132016-10-13T23:01:25 <sipa> we should check with dark coin
12142016-10-13T23:01:35 <sipa> maybe they have prior art
12152016-10-13T23:02:03 <wumpus> Amir's revenge?
12162016-10-13T23:02:59 <wumpus> darker than dark wallet
12172016-10-13T23:04:15 <musalbas> scientists have developed a new colour darker than black called 'super black', so it' spossible: http://newatlas.com/vantablack-super-black-material/33011/
12182016-10-13T23:04:30 <wumpus> infrablack
12192016-10-13T23:04:34 <gmaxwell> I have access to a high power pulsed laser so we can make superblack.
12202016-10-13T23:05:14 <gmaxwell> black on black won't be readable, but no one was going to read it anyways.
12212016-10-13T23:05:25 <wumpus> a hyperblock
12222016-10-13T23:06:19 <wumpus> yes, no matter how much energy would go into creating it, one would read it anyway
12232016-10-13T23:08:04 <sipa> so we are no longer restricted to a blockchain, but could use a blackchain?
12242016-10-13T23:08:15 <sipa> we need to combine that with rainbow tables
12252016-10-13T23:09:36 <wumpus> if we're no longer restricted to whitelisting, I'd prefer rainbowlisting
12262016-10-13T23:10:41 <gmaxwell> thats good because rainbows don't include black.
12272016-10-13T23:11:45 <petertodd> gmaxwell: additive color rainbows do
12282016-10-13T23:11:57 *** jtimon has quit IRC
12292016-10-13T23:12:03 <gmaxwell> sipa: back to work; is there any real reason that we couldn't just make all inbound connections one 'group' for the purpose of relay... it would slow relay down some, but really throughly kill that information leak.
12302016-10-13T23:14:03 <sipa> do you mean let all of them use the same timing for relay?
12312016-10-13T23:14:43 <gmaxwell> yes.
12322016-10-13T23:14:59 <gmaxwell> oh hmp. my own concern with that is it makes the traffic more bursty.
12332016-10-13T23:15:12 <sipa> it would worsen spikyness of relay memory
12342016-10-13T23:15:32 <sipa> right, and memory usage too
12352016-10-13T23:15:58 <gmaxwell> the memory usage should be trivial, the transactions are shared, so the usage is just pointers.
12362016-10-13T23:19:36 <sipa> it's a set of txids
12372016-10-13T23:19:46 <sipa> not shared_ptrs
12382016-10-13T23:20:01 <gmaxwell> pointer, txid, same difference. you're not on a 256 computer yet?
12392016-10-13T23:20:24 <gmaxwell> I suppose inbound could be assigned to 4 groups or 8 groups based on a hash of their netgroup. ... and that would give a lot of burst mitigation while bounding the attack upside.
12402016-10-13T23:21:26 <gmaxwell> (salted hash)
12412016-10-13T23:21:37 <sipa> i think we could turn them into weak_ptr's to CTransactions, thougg
12422016-10-13T23:22:22 <gmaxwell> well we could replace this datastructure per peer to a single queue, with a bitmap that has a bit per peer.
12432016-10-13T23:23:20 <gmaxwell> (or better, an efficiently encoded bitmap... I guess there is no STL container that works like a judy1.
12442016-10-13T23:23:23 <gmaxwell> )
12452016-10-13T23:27:49 <achow101> i'm back
12462016-10-13T23:30:26 <achow101> should I submit a PR for the alert or will someone with commit access to bitcoin.org sign and push the commit?
12472016-10-13T23:30:33 <GitHub184> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #8918: Qt: Add "Copy URI" to payment request context menu (master...gui_req_copy_uri) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8918
12482016-10-13T23:32:08 <gmaxwell> PR. none of us have commit access in any case, AFAIK-- and we wouldn't skip review. :)
12492016-10-13T23:32:12 <gmaxwell> a PR is fine.
12502016-10-13T23:32:43 <achow101> supposedly wumpus does: https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org#who-to-contact
12512016-10-13T23:33:06 <achow101> and the readme says "Note: the commit must be signed by one of the people in the Who to Contact section for site auto-building to work." which is why I asked
12522016-10-13T23:35:21 <achow101> done: https://github.com/bitcoin-dot-org/bitcoin.org/pull/1392
12532016-10-13T23:39:58 <wumpus> a PR is good, I have commit access to be able to do emergency bitcoin core releases
12542016-10-13T23:59:07 *** alpalp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev