1 2018-01-30T00:03:27  *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
  2 2018-01-30T00:05:40  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  3 2018-01-30T00:06:42  *** Randolf has quit IRC
  4 2018-01-30T00:12:05  *** capa66 has quit IRC
  5 2018-01-30T00:35:01  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #12299: Improve CWallet::IsFromMe for positive results (master...2018-01-isfromme) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12299
  6 2018-01-30T00:38:51  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  7 2018-01-30T00:41:05  *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
  8 2018-01-30T00:51:03  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
  9 2018-01-30T00:56:52  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2018-01-30T01:00:59  *** promag has quit IRC
 11 2018-01-30T01:07:54  *** belcher has quit IRC
 12 2018-01-30T01:09:01  *** Scrat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2018-01-30T01:15:18  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 14 2018-01-30T01:21:07  *** tryphe_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 15 2018-01-30T01:24:21  *** tryphe has quit IRC
 16 2018-01-30T01:26:33  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 17 2018-01-30T01:27:23  *** tryphe_ is now known as tryphe
 18 2018-01-30T01:31:33  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2018-01-30T01:33:39  *** Scrat has quit IRC
 20 2018-01-30T01:36:33  *** promag has quit IRC
 21 2018-01-30T01:38:04  *** esotericnonsense has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 22 2018-01-30T01:51:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jeffrade opened pull request #12300: [Tests] Adding --enable-mainnet configuration option for ChainParams (master...mainnet_chain_config) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12300
 23 2018-01-30T01:53:53  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 24 2018-01-30T02:20:40  *** Lynet has quit IRC
 25 2018-01-30T02:37:10  *** Murch has quit IRC
 26 2018-01-30T02:41:17  *** RubenSomsen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2018-01-30T02:42:56  *** bear_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 28 2018-01-30T02:50:10  *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
 29 2018-01-30T03:11:14  *** dx25 has quit IRC
 30 2018-01-30T03:16:15  *** dx25 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2018-01-30T03:16:44  *** achow101 has quit IRC
 32 2018-01-30T03:20:11  *** jeffrade has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 33 2018-01-30T03:22:46  *** flokie has quit IRC
 34 2018-01-30T03:23:34  *** flokie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 35 2018-01-30T03:30:53  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 36 2018-01-30T03:31:28  *** achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 37 2018-01-30T03:35:40  *** james has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 38 2018-01-30T03:36:03  *** james is now known as Guest16656
 39 2018-01-30T03:37:56  <jeffrade> fyi, for PR #12300 - will work on requested changes and push commit within 24 - 48 hours
 40 2018-01-30T03:37:58  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12300 | [Tests] Adding --enable-mainnet configuration option for ChainParams by jeffrade · Pull Request #12300 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 41 2018-01-30T03:38:28  *** jeffrade has quit IRC
 42 2018-01-30T03:41:07  *** tryphe has quit IRC
 43 2018-01-30T03:41:50  *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 44 2018-01-30T03:42:20  *** achow101 has quit IRC
 45 2018-01-30T03:44:49  *** tryphe_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 46 2018-01-30T03:45:23  *** booyah has quit IRC
 47 2018-01-30T03:46:13  *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 48 2018-01-30T03:47:27  *** tryphe has quit IRC
 49 2018-01-30T03:54:56  *** achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2018-01-30T04:08:58  *** tryphe_ is now known as tryphe
 51 2018-01-30T04:50:52  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 52 2018-01-30T04:51:23  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 53 2018-01-30T04:55:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 54 2018-01-30T04:57:49  *** bajohns has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 55 2018-01-30T05:09:54  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 56 2018-01-30T05:10:19  *** arbitrary_guy has quit IRC
 57 2018-01-30T05:15:50  *** Guest16656 has quit IRC
 58 2018-01-30T05:15:55  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 59 2018-01-30T05:16:15  *** jamesob has quit IRC
 60 2018-01-30T05:37:26  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 61 2018-01-30T05:39:38  *** mrannanay has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2018-01-30T05:44:51  *** To7 has quit IRC
 63 2018-01-30T05:46:23  *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 64 2018-01-30T05:47:45  *** indistylo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2018-01-30T05:49:21  *** Emcy has quit IRC
 66 2018-01-30T05:52:01  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2018-01-30T05:54:38  *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
 68 2018-01-30T06:12:17  *** jogi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 69 2018-01-30T06:13:20  *** jogi has quit IRC
 70 2018-01-30T06:25:56  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 71 2018-01-30T06:29:22  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 72 2018-01-30T06:33:15  *** checksauce has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2018-01-30T06:34:35  *** promag has quit IRC
 74 2018-01-30T06:35:57  *** Sentineo has quit IRC
 75 2018-01-30T06:48:48  *** flokie has quit IRC
 76 2018-01-30T06:49:30  *** Krellan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2018-01-30T06:53:48  *** Krellan_ has quit IRC
 78 2018-01-30T07:16:29  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 79 2018-01-30T07:42:17  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2018-01-30T07:51:47  *** d_t has quit IRC
 81 2018-01-30T07:54:15  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 82 2018-01-30T07:54:46  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 83 2018-01-30T07:55:12  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 84 2018-01-30T07:57:38  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 85 2018-01-30T07:59:51  *** promag has quit IRC
 86 2018-01-30T08:00:47  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 87 2018-01-30T08:02:10  *** booyah has quit IRC
 88 2018-01-30T08:03:20  *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 89 2018-01-30T08:06:25  *** indistylo has quit IRC
 90 2018-01-30T08:08:54  *** Murch has quit IRC
 91 2018-01-30T08:13:04  *** Sinclai__ has quit IRC
 92 2018-01-30T08:14:53  *** Sinclair6 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 93 2018-01-30T08:23:40  *** atroxes has quit IRC
 94 2018-01-30T08:25:09  *** atroxes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 95 2018-01-30T08:33:58  *** Pavle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 96 2018-01-30T08:38:19  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2018-01-30T08:57:25  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2018-01-30T08:58:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 4 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9d9c4185fada...7cf1aea5cfcc
 99 2018-01-30T08:58:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 336685e Randolf Richardson: [build] Add db4_cxx to bitcoin_find_bdb48.m4...
100 2018-01-30T08:58:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1944fa3 Randolf Richardson: [doc] Create build-netbsd.md
101 2018-01-30T08:58:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 11c5827 fanquake: [build] Add NETBSD leveldb target to configure.ac
102 2018-01-30T08:59:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12294: [Docs] Create NetBSD build instructions and fix compilation (master...netbsd-build-docs) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12294
103 2018-01-30T08:59:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7cf1aea5cfcc...288deacdbe08
104 2018-01-30T08:59:54  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ee11121 MeshCollider: Add special error for genesis coinbase to gettransaction
105 2018-01-30T08:59:55  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 288deac Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12278: Add special error for genesis coinbase to getrawtransaction...
106 2018-01-30T09:00:49  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12278: Add special error for genesis coinbase to getrawtransaction (master...201801_genesis_gettransaction_error) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12278
107 2018-01-30T09:14:30  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
108 2018-01-30T09:17:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/288deacdbe08...7936446268e2
109 2018-01-30T09:17:20  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 039425c João Barbosa: [wallet] Remove duplicate mapWallet lookups
110 2018-01-30T09:17:21  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7936446 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12276: Remove duplicate mapWallet lookups...
111 2018-01-30T09:18:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12276: Remove duplicate mapWallet lookups (master...2018-01-mapwallet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12276
112 2018-01-30T09:25:25  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
113 2018-01-30T09:25:58  *** indistylo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2018-01-30T09:30:38  *** aruns has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
115 2018-01-30T09:30:50  <promag> wumpus: be sure to check #12299
116 2018-01-30T09:30:52  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12299 | Improve CWallet::IsFromMe for positive results by promag · Pull Request #12299 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
117 2018-01-30T09:31:38  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
118 2018-01-30T09:31:45  *** indistylo has quit IRC
119 2018-01-30T09:34:47  *** checksau_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
120 2018-01-30T09:37:37  *** checksauce has quit IRC
121 2018-01-30T09:40:36  <gmaxwell> promag: does that actually make a measurable difference? I would assume very few transactions are fromme, so the early termination would never fire.
122 2018-01-30T09:40:55  <gmaxwell> I'd expect a lot bigger gain from things like hoisting the locking cs_wallet out of the inner loop or similar.
123 2018-01-30T09:43:47  <promag> GetDebit(tx) is called from a lot of places
124 2018-01-30T09:43:53  <promag> it also avoid unnecessary IsMine calls
125 2018-01-30T09:43:58  <promag> not saying it's a big performance improvement
126 2018-01-30T09:44:02  <promag> regarding locks, IMO only after 0.16 is branched
127 2018-01-30T09:44:23  <wumpus> we really need benchmarking for wallet things
128 2018-01-30T09:44:43  <wumpus> without that, these kind of changes are really hard to evaluate, whether it's worth complicating the code more
129 2018-01-30T09:45:30  <promag> anyway, in that case, I'd say it's a pretty obvious improvement
130 2018-01-30T09:46:34  <gmaxwell> I don't agree. It turns one line of simple code into five lines of less clear code. I don't think it's bad, but if its not actually faster for any realistic case, why would we want it?
131 2018-01-30T09:47:35  <gmaxwell> maybe it is-- e.g. perhaps we call IsFromMe on masses of wallet txn all the time, where its true on the first input... but I'm not aware of that.
132 2018-01-30T09:48:08  <gmaxwell> Certantly to the extent that the function is run on transactions in the chain the early termination won't make it faster-- I doubt it would make it slower either, but not faster.
133 2018-01-30T09:48:30  <promag> gmaxwell: I think the semantic of IsFromMe it better explained in that pr
134 2018-01-30T09:48:57  <promag> "if from me if at least one input is debit"
135 2018-01-30T09:49:05  <promag> s/if/is
136 2018-01-30T09:49:59  <gmaxwell> I know what the semantics of the functions are. But early termination is not a win for a function where 99.999% of the time it will never fire, it can even be a performance loss (though I am not saying I expect that here).
137 2018-01-30T09:50:02  <promag> also, for big wallets, with thousands of transactions, thousands of keys, avoiding IsMine is important
138 2018-01-30T09:50:43  <gmaxwell> I'm only commenting on the IsFromMe early termination.
139 2018-01-30T09:50:44  <promag> gmaxwell: sure, for the worst case the performance is the same (although it avoids summing)
140 2018-01-30T09:50:58  <promag> also not sure about the average case
141 2018-01-30T09:51:22  <gmaxwell> And, as far as I know, for the average case. If not, we're probably calling it where we shouldn't be at all.
142 2018-01-30T09:52:26  *** Pavle has quit IRC
143 2018-01-30T09:52:27  <promag> gmaxwell: I'll try to measure it
144 2018-01-30T09:52:40  <promag> gmaxwell: care to see #12297
145 2018-01-30T09:52:41  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12297 | Improve CWallet::IsAllFromMe for false results by promag · Pull Request #12297 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
146 2018-01-30T09:56:22  <promag> brb
147 2018-01-30T09:56:59  <gmaxwell> (at least off the top of my head I only know that function being called on all blockchain/relay txn, where it'll return false almost all the time for even the largest users.  I think we also call it on some unconfirmed stuff.)
148 2018-01-30T09:57:03  <gmaxwell> ha
149 2018-01-30T09:57:15  <gmaxwell> see this is silly, for example:
150 2018-01-30T09:57:16  <gmaxwell>             int nDepth = pcoin->GetDepthInMainChain();
151 2018-01-30T09:57:16  <gmaxwell>             if (nDepth < (pcoin->IsFromMe(ISMINE_ALL) ? 0 : 1))
152 2018-01-30T09:57:16  <gmaxwell>                 continue;
153 2018-01-30T09:58:43  *** promag has quit IRC
154 2018-01-30T09:59:28  <gmaxwell> so it looks like there are a couple other places it's called, but none strike me as that interesting at a glance, though some could be optimized.
155 2018-01-30T10:00:42  <gmaxwell> (actually that code looks redundant with the efficient IsTrusted check above)
156 2018-01-30T10:04:53  <gmaxwell> but don't listen to me, I should be asleep. :)
157 2018-01-30T10:15:41  *** Krellan has quit IRC
158 2018-01-30T10:18:15  *** aruns has quit IRC
159 2018-01-30T10:18:40  *** aruns has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
160 2018-01-30T10:20:41  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
161 2018-01-30T10:24:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
162 2018-01-30T10:25:42  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
163 2018-01-30T10:30:08  *** Krellan has quit IRC
164 2018-01-30T10:30:43  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
165 2018-01-30T10:32:48  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
166 2018-01-30T10:33:23  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
167 2018-01-30T10:33:48  *** Sentineo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
168 2018-01-30T10:34:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
169 2018-01-30T10:35:44  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
170 2018-01-30T10:38:59  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
171 2018-01-30T10:39:57  *** Krellan has quit IRC
172 2018-01-30T10:40:45  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
173 2018-01-30T10:44:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
174 2018-01-30T10:45:45  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
175 2018-01-30T10:45:46  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
176 2018-01-30T10:54:55  *** jtimon has quit IRC
177 2018-01-30T10:55:16  <wumpus> need review for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12266   https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12274
178 2018-01-30T10:55:25  <wumpus> otherhwise I'm going to branch off 0.16 without them
179 2018-01-30T10:58:03  *** dx25 has quit IRC
180 2018-01-30T11:00:23  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
181 2018-01-30T11:00:59  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
182 2018-01-30T11:02:41  *** dx25 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
183 2018-01-30T11:05:15  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
184 2018-01-30T11:08:54  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
185 2018-01-30T11:11:08  <meshcollider> I'd like to review the fd one to help but its beyond my skill level I'm afraid
186 2018-01-30T11:12:18  <wumpus> you're not alone in that
187 2018-01-30T11:12:21  <wumpus> I'm confused by it too
188 2018-01-30T11:12:46  <wumpus> please do review BlueMatt's though
189 2018-01-30T11:13:02  <wumpus> that one is not so hard to grasp as I thought initially
190 2018-01-30T11:13:27  <wumpus> oh you did!
191 2018-01-30T11:13:28  <wumpus> thanks
192 2018-01-30T11:19:23  <gmaxwell> ut-sleepy-ACK from me, I'll try to setup some kind of shutdown loop to test it.
193 2018-01-30T11:20:08  <gmaxwell> I'd bias toward including since we have known easily triggered shutdown deadlock, if users report that on rc1 without this we learn nothing, if they report it or a shutdown crash on an rc1 with this we learn something.
194 2018-01-30T11:21:07  <wumpus> yes I'd also vote for including #12266, but I think it's quite harmless to hold up on #12274 for now
195 2018-01-30T11:21:09  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12266 | Move scheduler/threadGroup into common-init instead of per-app by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #12266 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
196 2018-01-30T11:21:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12274 | http: avoid fd exhaustion by theuni · Pull Request #12274 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
197 2018-01-30T11:21:37  <wumpus> it's a lot of logic to work around an upstream issue, and according to test reports there it doesn't even fully solve the issue yet
198 2018-01-30T11:21:51  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
199 2018-01-30T11:22:06  <wumpus> also it's regression in 0.15 and it only comes up under rare conditions
200 2018-01-30T11:22:36  <gmaxwell> when I looked at the limiter I had questions about concurrency of the limiter function and didn't know where to start looking.
201 2018-01-30T11:22:38  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202 2018-01-30T11:22:38  <wumpus> sorry I mean it's *not* regression in 0.16
203 2018-01-30T11:23:18  <wumpus> it's an issue that has existed since we started using libevent for http, and very hard to trigger
204 2018-01-30T11:23:56  <wumpus> I don't mean it should not be solved, but I wonder if we shouldn't take a higher level approach and try to fix upstream, instead of hack on hack on hack :(
205 2018-01-30T11:23:57  <gmaxwell> right. we could also cut down our FD usage in some other way to give it more safty margin, I suppose?
206 2018-01-30T11:25:04  <gmaxwell> e.g. raise MIN_CORE_FILEDESCRIPTORS
207 2018-01-30T11:25:11  <wumpus> right - maybe the accounting of fds (how much is reserved for what) is also incorrect
208 2018-01-30T11:25:30  <wumpus> anyhow I think this is a post-0.16 issue
209 2018-01-30T11:28:58  *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
210 2018-01-30T11:31:14  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
211 2018-01-30T11:34:40  <wumpus> milestone 0.16.1 has the fd changes now: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/34
212 2018-01-30T11:45:39  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
213 2018-01-30T12:03:42  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
214 2018-01-30T12:04:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7936446268e2...3448907a68e0
215 2018-01-30T12:04:58  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 082a61c Matt Corallo: Move scheduler/threadGroup into common-init instead of per-app...
216 2018-01-30T12:04:58  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3448907 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12266: Move scheduler/threadGroup into common-init instead of per-app...
217 2018-01-30T12:05:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12266: Move scheduler/threadGroup into common-init instead of per-app (master...2018-01-common-init) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12266
218 2018-01-30T12:06:10  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
219 2018-01-30T12:12:39  *** checksau_ has quit IRC
220 2018-01-30T12:13:50  <meshcollider> wumpus: so branch and tag 0.16 now then?
221 2018-01-30T12:13:56  <meshcollider> Is there anything else left to do
222 2018-01-30T12:15:08  <meshcollider> Oh, have you done the manpages update thing
223 2018-01-30T12:15:34  *** capa66 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2018-01-30T12:21:54  <wumpus> meshcollider: that needs to be done after the branch, after bumping version, before tagging
225 2018-01-30T12:23:13  <wumpus> but yes I intend to branch now
226 2018-01-30T12:23:37  <meshcollider> ooh ok yep
227 2018-01-30T12:23:40  <meshcollider> \o/
228 2018-01-30T12:25:37  *** aruns__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
229 2018-01-30T12:27:33  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
230 2018-01-30T12:28:28  *** aruns has quit IRC
231 2018-01-30T12:44:34  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/10847fe2d82bd4ffe5be499fd9ad64b6fee78a33
232 2018-01-30T12:44:34  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 10847fe Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: Periodic translations update...
233 2018-01-30T12:49:37  *** xabbix has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2018-01-30T12:51:20  <xabbix> Can someone please explain how the mempool is filled for a new node and relayed? If I just finished syncing up my node, is it possible that I'll get a tx into my mempool that was sent a week ago (and still haven't confirmed)? Does my node request the mempool from the 8 peers it is connected to? Or does it just start collecting what is relayed to it from the point it was launched?
235 2018-01-30T12:52:37  <gmaxwell> xabbix: the last thing.
236 2018-01-30T12:53:49  <xabbix> gmaxwell: thanks, are there cases that a new node will get an 'old' transaction? what are those cases?
237 2018-01-30T12:54:01  <wumpus> it will start collecting transactuins once it leaves initial sync. Normally these are new transactions, though there's nothing preventing people from re-relaying old transactions.
238 2018-01-30T12:54:05  <gmaxwell> someone relays it.
239 2018-01-30T12:54:21  <gmaxwell> the sender and reciever of the txn will rebroadcast every once in a while, normally...
240 2018-01-30T12:54:47  <gmaxwell> and random other people might do so for whatever reasons they feel like.
241 2018-01-30T12:54:53  <xabbix> gmaxwell, wumpus: ok, that makes a lot more sense now. thanks.
242 2018-01-30T12:55:07  <gmaxwell> it won't cross peers that already have it, however.
243 2018-01-30T12:56:19  *** promag has quit IRC
244 2018-01-30T12:57:32  <xabbix> As I understand from an answer that jnewbery wrote to me a few days ago, the `time` value in the mempool is saved and relayed by other nodes, so even though my node is 'new' I can get txs with `time` values of before I ever started my node, but the `height` value is not stored and therefore not very reliable. Is there an easy way of calculating what the block height was at a certain time?
245 2018-01-30T12:58:24  <gmaxwell> it's not relayed.
246 2018-01-30T12:58:47  <xabbix> it's = height?
247 2018-01-30T12:58:52  <wumpus> transactions generated by modern wallets will usually be time-locked to the current (or current-1) block
248 2018-01-30T12:59:49  <gmaxwell> xabbix: no time value is relayed.
249 2018-01-30T13:00:13  <wumpus> if you really want to compute the height at a certain time there's no efficient way to do that because block times are not strictly increasing and also not accurate
250 2018-01-30T13:01:00  <wumpus> (the latter making it impossible to know for sure)
251 2018-01-30T13:03:05  <gmaxwell> xabbix: if you were asking about why you had times before your startup time, that would be because the mempool and its timestamps are saved across restarts.
252 2018-01-30T13:03:11  <gmaxwell> The heights (IIRC) are not.
253 2018-01-30T13:04:00  *** intcat has quit IRC
254 2018-01-30T13:04:17  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/10847fe2d82b...8d573198638e
255 2018-01-30T13:04:17  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 125f4a4 Anthony Towns: [tests] Require all tests to follow naming convention
256 2018-01-30T13:04:18  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8d57319 MarcoFalke: Merge #12252: Require all tests to follow naming convention...
257 2018-01-30T13:04:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12252: Require all tests to follow naming convention (master...rename_tests_no_leeway) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12252
258 2018-01-30T13:05:24  <xabbix> gmaxwell: that means that I should not at any circumstances have a `time` value of two weeks ago if I installed bitcoin-core today?
259 2018-01-30T13:05:42  <xabbix> given my machine clock is set correctly :)
260 2018-01-30T13:06:57  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
261 2018-01-30T13:07:04  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262 2018-01-30T13:07:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj created 0.16 (+2 new commits): https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5c242b211eda^...66bc647e8c65
263 2018-01-30T13:07:59  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.16 5c242b2 Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: bump version to 0.16.0...
264 2018-01-30T13:08:00  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.16 66bc647 Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Update manpages to 0.16.0...
265 2018-01-30T13:08:27  <gmaxwell> xabbix: why do you think it was two weeks ago?
266 2018-01-30T13:09:10  <xabbix> I think that I saw a `time` value when I queried getmempoolentry that is before I created the machine I was running on.
267 2018-01-30T13:09:21  <xabbix> I'm not 100% sure just trying to figure out if that's possible.
268 2018-01-30T13:09:31  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/4602dc704ae83bd08d0d6e835b760cc9ab8fea37
269 2018-01-30T13:09:32  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4602dc7 Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: Bump version to 0.16.99...
270 2018-01-30T13:10:03  <wumpus> I guess that should not be possible, at least if you didn't install a mempool.dat somehow
271 2018-01-30T13:11:11  <gmaxwell> I don't think it's possible, the only places in the code that is set is with the output of GetTime() (gets the current time) and when reading it from the mempool.dat file.
272 2018-01-30T13:11:27  <gmaxwell> if you had an older mempool.dat or something then that would do it.
273 2018-01-30T13:12:48  <wumpus> is it perhaps an ARM board without realtime clock? I've seen times all over the place with those, if they fail the ntpdate at startup
274 2018-01-30T13:13:32  *** Krellan has quit IRC
275 2018-01-30T13:14:00  *** xabbix has quit IRC
276 2018-01-30T13:16:20  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
277 2018-01-30T13:20:38  *** Krellan has quit IRC
278 2018-01-30T13:21:21  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
279 2018-01-30T13:23:55  *** To7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
280 2018-01-30T13:25:38  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/9cb2309050880c2887b4b5f7a7231e4fc6dc3f47
281 2018-01-30T13:25:39  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9cb2309 Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Update manpages to 0.16.99...
282 2018-01-30T13:25:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
283 2018-01-30T13:29:03  <wumpus> going to tag 0.16.0rc1 in a bit on the 0.16 branch
284 2018-01-30T13:29:29  *** indistylo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
285 2018-01-30T13:30:37  *** indistylo has quit IRC
286 2018-01-30T13:30:41  *** aruns__ has quit IRC
287 2018-01-30T13:31:06  *** aruns__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
288 2018-01-30T13:31:23  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
289 2018-01-30T13:34:47  <wumpus>  * [new tag]         v0.16.0rc1 -> v0.16.0rc1
290 2018-01-30T13:35:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
291 2018-01-30T13:36:25  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292 2018-01-30T13:37:20  *** indistylo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
293 2018-01-30T13:40:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
294 2018-01-30T13:41:26  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
295 2018-01-30T13:45:07  <jnewbery> \o/
296 2018-01-30T13:45:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
297 2018-01-30T13:46:26  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
298 2018-01-30T13:50:42  *** Krellan has quit IRC
299 2018-01-30T13:51:28  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
300 2018-01-30T13:51:45  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
301 2018-01-30T13:52:37  *** bajohns has quit IRC
302 2018-01-30T13:54:21  *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
303 2018-01-30T13:55:43  *** Emcy has quit IRC
304 2018-01-30T13:55:59  <jnewbery> xabbix: not sure how you interpreted "Both are set by your own node" as time is relayed by peers! Time is set by your own node when it receives the tx, and is saved in mempool.dat on shutdown/loaded on startup.
305 2018-01-30T13:57:37  <jnewbery> you'll want to look at the AcceptToMemoryPoolWithTime() function in validation.cpp and the places where it's called
306 2018-01-30T13:58:36  *** james has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
307 2018-01-30T13:59:00  *** james is now known as Guest66433
308 2018-01-30T14:04:04  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
309 2018-01-30T14:04:18  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
310 2018-01-30T14:05:14  <promag> \o/
311 2018-01-30T14:05:35  <wumpus> the release notes still need work, if anyone feels like improving them please do so on the wiki, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11054  https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/0.16.0-Release-notes
312 2018-01-30T14:10:38  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
313 2018-01-30T14:18:00  *** jojeyh has quit IRC
314 2018-01-30T14:20:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
315 2018-01-30T14:31:47  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
316 2018-01-30T14:40:27  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
317 2018-01-30T15:06:45  *** mandric has quit IRC
318 2018-01-30T15:09:14  *** mandric has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
319 2018-01-30T15:17:31  *** flokie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
320 2018-01-30T15:18:57  *** Carolina35Keeble has quit IRC
321 2018-01-30T15:25:23  <achow101> yay!
322 2018-01-30T15:34:42  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
323 2018-01-30T15:35:32  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
324 2018-01-30T15:36:06  <wumpus> I've added changelog and author information to https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/0.16.0-Release-notes
325 2018-01-30T15:37:44  *** indistylo has quit IRC
326 2018-01-30T15:38:09  *** aruns__ has quit IRC
327 2018-01-30T15:38:54  *** wraithm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
328 2018-01-30T15:44:31  <wumpus> please help check for duplicate authors and such
329 2018-01-30T15:52:03  <instagibbs> wumpus, Donal OConnor and donaloconnor
330 2018-01-30T15:52:45  <wumpus> instagibbs: it's a wiki, you can edit it :)
331 2018-01-30T15:59:23  *** Trevor18Ritchie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332 2018-01-30T16:01:05  *** Krellan has quit IRC
333 2018-01-30T16:02:30  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
334 2018-01-30T16:06:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
335 2018-01-30T16:07:32  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
336 2018-01-30T16:12:10  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
337 2018-01-30T16:14:25  *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
338 2018-01-30T16:17:44  *** intcat has quit IRC
339 2018-01-30T16:18:30  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
340 2018-01-30T16:20:19  <luke-jr> sdaftuar: I don't understand this question: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/639#issuecomment-361642505
341 2018-01-30T16:21:17  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: I'm trying to restore a document I authored to its original text.  I don't know why this needs a discussion on bitcoin-dev?
342 2018-01-30T16:22:15  *** Randolf has quit IRC
343 2018-01-30T16:23:04  <luke-jr> sdaftuar: the Layer field was added by BIP 123; the only reason BIP 90 was a BIP at all, is because it was a hardfork..
344 2018-01-30T16:23:13  <sdaftuar> BIP 123 came after BIP 90
345 2018-01-30T16:23:21  <sdaftuar> it was applied to that doc without my approval!
346 2018-01-30T16:23:49  <sdaftuar> doesn't the author have the final say on changes?
347 2018-01-30T16:24:25  <luke-jr> nobody objected before BIP 123 became activate..?
348 2018-01-30T16:25:00  <sdaftuar> no one tagged me to let me know my document was being changed either
349 2018-01-30T16:25:31  <luke-jr> the document wasn't really changed, just the headers, which was based on the content
350 2018-01-30T16:26:49  <wumpus> the author is supposed to be asked in case of changes
351 2018-01-30T16:26:57  <luke-jr> maybe I don't understand the problem - all it does is describe the BIP
352 2018-01-30T16:27:04  <luke-jr> wumpus: to the BIP itself, yes
353 2018-01-30T16:27:15  <wumpus> yes, I don't know the details
354 2018-01-30T16:27:34  <sdaftuar> the point of the BIP is to explain why merely labeling things as "sfot forks" or "hard forks" is deficient
355 2018-01-30T16:28:09  <sdaftuar> so applying BIP 123's labels to it doesn't make sense
356 2018-01-30T16:28:22  <luke-jr> the point of the BIP was that changes were being made in Core that were objectively a hardfork, and as such should be documented as a hardfork
357 2018-01-30T16:28:27  <sdaftuar> no
358 2018-01-30T16:30:03  <sdaftuar> i'm at a loss as to what the process here is.  i wrote a document, you changed it, and you seem to think i can't change it back without... what exactly?
359 2018-01-30T16:30:16  <luke-jr> the headers aren't part of the document
360 2018-01-30T16:30:25  <sdaftuar> ah.  we should move them out then
361 2018-01-30T16:30:49  <luke-jr> having them in separate files would just be needlessly confusing to readers IMO
362 2018-01-30T16:32:14  <sdaftuar> so i don't have editorial rights to the headers?
363 2018-01-30T16:33:58  <luke-jr> "The BIP editors monitor BIP changes, and update BIP headers as appropriate."
364 2018-01-30T16:34:25  <luke-jr> I don't see why you would want to make the headers inaccurate anyway
365 2018-01-30T16:34:35  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
366 2018-01-30T16:34:43  <sdaftuar> i think bip 123 is misguided, in its naive labeling of consensus changes as soft forks or hard forks
367 2018-01-30T16:34:58  <sdaftuar> bip 90 demonstrates this
368 2018-01-30T16:35:11  <sdaftuar> did you not see the quote i pasted from bip 123's author?
369 2018-01-30T16:35:19  <sdaftuar> i think that quote reflects a view held by many
370 2018-01-30T16:35:23  *** ProfMac has quit IRC
371 2018-01-30T16:35:24  <luke-jr> this is a complaint that should have been brought up before BIP 123 was activated, or a new Process BIP to revise/change it
372 2018-01-30T16:35:40  <luke-jr> bbiab
373 2018-01-30T16:37:12  <provoostenator> I see it's Gitian o'clock?
374 2018-01-30T16:39:47  <achow101> hmm, did I screw up my gitian build? The files produced are 0.15.99 not 0.16
375 2018-01-30T16:40:16  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: it seems to me that BIP123's activation should have required agreement from the BIP-authors that it was applied to
376 2018-01-30T16:40:33  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
377 2018-01-30T16:41:35  *** promag has quit IRC
378 2018-01-30T16:43:23  <BlueMatt> has anyone ever seen a case when compiling qt where flags arent being passed through when compiling the qt stuff properly?
379 2018-01-30T16:44:02  <BlueMatt> eg I get "No such slot" on all the slots that are inside #ifdef ENABLE_WALLET in bitcoingui.h, and some icons/images arent being compiled in (eg QImage::scaled: Image is a null image) properly
380 2018-01-30T16:44:18  <BlueMatt> obviously wiped ccache/git clean'd
381 2018-01-30T16:44:51  <BlueMatt> maybe cfields has some autotools-debug tips?
382 2018-01-30T16:45:18  <cfields> BlueMatt: you forget the include, maybe?
383 2018-01-30T16:46:00  <cfields> (config/bitcoin-config.h)
384 2018-01-30T16:46:07  <BlueMatt> this is 0.15.1, no modifications
385 2018-01-30T16:47:20  <cfields> BlueMatt: i'm not sure what you mean. You get "no such slot" at runtime, or build time?
386 2018-01-30T16:47:37  <BlueMatt> runtime
387 2018-01-30T16:48:02  <BlueMatt> and like cant click the top tabs to switch views cause of missing slot
388 2018-01-30T16:49:06  <provoostenator> The Debian installer link in the instructions is broken, beacuse there's no more iso-cd path. Which one should I use? http://cdimage.debian.org/mirror/cdimage/archive/8.9.0/amd64/
389 2018-01-30T16:49:13  <cfields> BlueMatt: sounds like --disable-wallet :)
390 2018-01-30T16:49:28  <BlueMatt> nope, not --disable-wallet, and configure output lists wallet enabled
391 2018-01-30T16:49:41  <BlueMatt> i mean also the image on the splash screen somehow didnt get compiled in so the background is blank
392 2018-01-30T16:50:31  <cfields> BlueMatt: no clue. Sounds like maybe something didn't get regenerated when you switched tags/branches ?
393 2018-01-30T16:50:51  <cfields> nm, i see you cleaned
394 2018-01-30T16:51:15  <BlueMatt> full git directory wipe, re-autogen/configure, even wiped ccache
395 2018-01-30T16:51:24  <BlueMatt> its even in a vm that just got rebooted
396 2018-01-30T16:51:28  <BlueMatt> sooooo....wat
397 2018-01-30T16:51:43  <cfields> achow101: bitcoin-0.16.0-osx-unsigned.dmg
398 2018-01-30T16:51:44  <provoostenator> Looks like they got rid of iso images for the 8.9.0 release. 9.2.1 still has them. I'll try if that produces the same build and make a PR.
399 2018-01-30T16:51:59  <achow101> cfields: I fucked up
400 2018-01-30T16:52:47  <cfields> BlueMatt: you've verified that the ENABLE_WALLET stuff is actually being built?
401 2018-01-30T16:53:12  <BlueMatt> it loads the wallet, lists transactions, shows a balance, etc
402 2018-01-30T16:53:14  <BlueMatt> sooo...yes?
403 2018-01-30T16:53:16  <cfields> BlueMatt: oh (prepare for possible red herring), kinda sounds like a define is missing when the forms are built
404 2018-01-30T16:54:02  <BlueMatt> thats what I'm thinking, kinda, but i know almost nothing about qt/autotools
405 2018-01-30T16:54:27  <BlueMatt> so I have a #ifndef ENABLE_WALLET #error in bitcoingui.h, but I dont know if its being compiled or if qt is doing some C++ parsing?
406 2018-01-30T16:54:41  <BlueMatt> only change was upgrading packages....is it possible qt is now mis-parsing the .h?
407 2018-01-30T16:55:51  <cfields> was qt itself updated?
408 2018-01-30T16:56:13  <BlueMatt> i believe so, yes
409 2018-01-30T16:56:18  <provoostenator> I wasnt' the first ot notice: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/docs/pull/6
410 2018-01-30T16:56:19  <cfields> BlueMatt: all qt-generated files are bound to the versions that created them
411 2018-01-30T16:56:56  <cfields> so moc 1.2.3 will create headers meant to be linked against qt headers/libs v1.2.3
412 2018-01-30T16:57:00  <BlueMatt> git clean -f -x -d'd :p
413 2018-01-30T16:57:36  <cfields> provoostenator: thanks :)
414 2018-01-30T16:57:39  <BlueMatt> uh huh, yes, so moc-qt5 is now broken for us - in normal compile the #ifdef ENABLE_WALLETs are being ignored, if I remove the ifdefs things work (eg gotoOverviewPage will or wont show up in moc_bitcoingui.cpp)
415 2018-01-30T16:58:18  <cfields> BlueMatt: the defines are passed along. Somehow for you they're not...
416 2018-01-30T16:58:20  <achow101> provoostenator: the OS you build on doesn't really matter since the actual build happens within another vm/container
417 2018-01-30T16:58:39  <achow101> that vm/container will be the same OS for everyone
418 2018-01-30T16:58:48  *** Trevor18Ritchie has quit IRC
419 2018-01-30T16:58:57  <cfields> BlueMatt: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/Makefile.qt.include#L455
420 2018-01-30T16:59:53  <achow101> cfields: my gitian build has this error: https://0bin.net/paste/S+squMjJftoksqm-#HEzfaPoLdoUUf4qz5ZxzMrrbHtdelDjzCYaVCCDHKQs
421 2018-01-30T17:00:04  <provoostenator> achow101 someone needs to draw a picture of that inception / VM (Virtual Matroesjka) situation
422 2018-01-30T17:00:18  <BlueMatt> cfields: -DHAVE_CONFIG_H is passed to moc-qt5 (make claims it is, at least), and if I put an ENABLE_WALLET inside the if defined(HAVE_CONFIG_H) it works fine, but somehow bitcoin-config.h isnt getting included
423 2018-01-30T17:01:14  <cfields> BlueMatt: i wonder if you somehow got messed up by the #include "foo.h" -> #include <foo.h>
424 2018-01-30T17:01:30  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
425 2018-01-30T17:01:43  <cfields> BlueMatt: out-of-tree ?
426 2018-01-30T17:01:55  <cfields> ooh, i bet that's it...
427 2018-01-30T17:01:57  <BlueMatt> in tree
428 2018-01-30T17:02:01  <BlueMatt> and this is 0.15.1
429 2018-01-30T17:02:04  <BlueMatt> so pre <foo.h>
430 2018-01-30T17:02:28  <cfields> BlueMatt: got a stale bitcoin-config.h around somewhere?
431 2018-01-30T17:02:29  <BlueMatt> i mean clearly qt broke our build, question is if we need to work around it or what
432 2018-01-30T17:02:31  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
433 2018-01-30T17:02:34  <BlueMatt> git clean -f -x -d :p
434 2018-01-30T17:03:12  <cfields> damn, right, i was banking on you saying "out-of-tree"
435 2018-01-30T17:03:42  <cfields> achow101: I'm betting you just ran out of mem
436 2018-01-30T17:03:57  *** mandric has quit IRC
437 2018-01-30T17:04:05  <cfields> achow101: I haven't built linux yet though
438 2018-01-30T17:04:06  <achow101> cfields: probably. I forgot to allocate more memory to kvm when I did this build
439 2018-01-30T17:04:56  *** Krellan has quit IRC
440 2018-01-30T17:05:15  <cfields> BlueMatt: i'm not sure what to tell you. Can you give it a shot with 0.16 so we can start there?
441 2018-01-30T17:05:32  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
442 2018-01-30T17:06:25  <BlueMatt> yea, I still had the test_bitcoin-qt failure on 16 so i figured bug was the same but didnt actually try to run it
443 2018-01-30T17:06:26  *** mandric has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
444 2018-01-30T17:09:05  <BlueMatt> yes, same bug
445 2018-01-30T17:09:18  <BlueMatt> gotoOverviewPage (etc) doesn't show up in src/qt/moc_bitcoingui.cpp post-build
446 2018-01-30T17:09:42  <cfields> ok
447 2018-01-30T17:09:48  <cfields> got a list of updated packages?
448 2018-01-30T17:09:48  *** Krellan has quit IRC
449 2018-01-30T17:10:20  <BlueMatt> errr....probably, sec
450 2018-01-30T17:10:33  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
451 2018-01-30T17:11:55  *** twistedline_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452 2018-01-30T17:12:05  *** twistedline has quit IRC
453 2018-01-30T17:13:41  <BlueMatt> cfields: (roughly, there's a few extras there) http://termbin.com/3zh4
454 2018-01-30T17:13:58  <BlueMatt> i mean essentially all the things...gcc/boost/qt/etc
455 2018-01-30T17:14:19  <cfields> BlueMatt: thanks. What distro/version?
456 2018-01-30T17:14:26  <cfields> I already have a hunch
457 2018-01-30T17:14:34  <BlueMatt> its an arch vm
458 2018-01-30T17:14:38  <BlueMatt> so...all rolling release crap
459 2018-01-30T17:15:08  <cfields> ok
460 2018-01-30T17:15:26  <cfields> https://github.com/qt/qtbase/commit/abcf558e49d5e8c20eda14badc30e93e2e9cba32#diff-7680dae0477922e25856c03d1058d2b7
461 2018-01-30T17:15:58  <cfields> so they've recently switched up their option parsing. I'm wondering if they broke -D somehow
462 2018-01-30T17:16:20  <cfields> (i realize you said it was parsed, but maybe include handling after that is busted)
463 2018-01-30T17:16:56  <BlueMatt> no, because BITCOIN_CONFIG_H is clearly being used
464 2018-01-30T17:17:05  <BlueMatt> so it has to be some include option blowing up
465 2018-01-30T17:17:24  <BlueMatt> yea
466 2018-01-30T17:20:13  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
467 2018-01-30T17:24:54  *** Krellan has quit IRC
468 2018-01-30T17:25:31  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
469 2018-01-30T17:26:01  <BlueMatt> cfields: did you find anything in qt git?
470 2018-01-30T17:26:27  <cfields> BlueMatt: still looking, nothing obvious
471 2018-01-30T17:26:35  <cfields> BlueMatt: can you try a depends build just for a control?
472 2018-01-30T17:26:41  <BlueMatt> ugh
473 2018-01-30T17:26:52  <BlueMatt> I mean I can revert to the older vm image and see what happens
474 2018-01-30T17:27:37  <cfields> well sure, but it'd be helpful to have good/bad moc side-by-side
475 2018-01-30T17:29:58  *** Krellan has quit IRC
476 2018-01-30T17:30:33  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
477 2018-01-30T17:33:25  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
478 2018-01-30T17:35:45  *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
479 2018-01-30T17:35:54  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
480 2018-01-30T17:37:56  <wumpus> I don't get it, feature_uacomment.py is failing on travis, but I can't reproduce it locally
481 2018-01-30T17:37:58  <wumpus> https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/335143070
482 2018-01-30T17:38:57  <wumpus> "Error: Total length of network version string (285) exceeds maximum length (256). Reduce the number or size of uacomments."
483 2018-01-30T17:40:44  <sdaftuar> looks like the test is expecting a slightly different error string (286 instead of 285), and that is why the test is failing
484 2018-01-30T17:40:51  <cfields> heh, 285 != 286
485 2018-01-30T17:40:56  <cfields> yep
486 2018-01-30T17:41:02  <wumpus> but I don't understand where that comes from
487 2018-01-30T17:41:20  <sdaftuar> yeah me either
488 2018-01-30T17:41:38  <wumpus> oh maybe 0.16.0 i.s.o 0.16.99
489 2018-01-30T17:41:43  <wumpus> what a dumb test in that case
490 2018-01-30T17:41:47  <provoostenator> The guide is very clear until after the Setup Gitian section. After that there's too many options.  https://github.com/bitcoin-core/docs/blob/master/gitian-building.md#getting-and-building-the-inputs
491 2018-01-30T17:42:16  <sdaftuar> wumpus: ouch
492 2018-01-30T17:42:17  <provoostenator> " run it with the --setup command" should have a specific example, e.g. assuming Debian. I remember that confused me for hours half a year ago
493 2018-01-30T17:43:13  <wumpus> sdaftuar: cfields: yep that's it, I'm going to remove the check for a specific number
494 2018-01-30T17:43:15  <provoostenator> I'll take a snapshot of my VM before doing that...
495 2018-01-30T17:43:35  <wumpus> can reproduce it locally now, too, I was testing with master
496 2018-01-30T17:44:00  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
497 2018-01-30T17:44:15  <cfields> wumpus: makes sense. I vaguely remember a conversation about using exit codes rather than testing strings. Guess that didn't pan out.
498 2018-01-30T17:44:39  <wumpus> well it makes sense that it checks the error message, it just doesn't have to be so specific
499 2018-01-30T17:49:02  <cfields> BlueMatt: i'm not seeing anything obvious :\
500 2018-01-30T17:50:36  *** xabbix has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
501 2018-01-30T17:58:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #12302: test: Make ua_comment test pass on 0.16.0 (master...2017_01_uacomment_test_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12302
502 2018-01-30T17:59:23  *** Cecelia13Shanaha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
503 2018-01-30T18:00:51  *** Randolf has quit IRC
504 2018-01-30T18:01:57  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
505 2018-01-30T18:14:08  *** promag has quit IRC
506 2018-01-30T18:18:10  *** neha has quit IRC
507 2018-01-30T18:18:48  *** Lynet has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
508 2018-01-30T18:18:54  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
509 2018-01-30T18:19:58  *** neha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
510 2018-01-30T18:20:11  *** Krellan has quit IRC
511 2018-01-30T18:20:45  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512 2018-01-30T18:25:57  *** DrFeelGood has quit IRC
513 2018-01-30T18:27:21  *** Krellan has quit IRC
514 2018-01-30T18:27:49  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
515 2018-01-30T18:32:18  *** Krellan has quit IRC
516 2018-01-30T18:33:29  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
517 2018-01-30T18:36:49  *** neha has quit IRC
518 2018-01-30T18:36:53  <arubi> daemon stopped, I mkdir 'wallet/' in datadir, moved all my wallet .dats in there, added a new 'wallet=30_01_28_btc_segwit.dat' line in bitcoin.conf, started the daemon, and the new wallet file with this name was created in the datadir root.  somewhat surprising, I'm able to getwalletinfo for both this new wallet and old wallets that are now in wallet/ using the -rpcwallet= set
519 2018-01-30T18:37:03  <arubi> oh this is re. 0.16.0rc1
520 2018-01-30T18:38:55  <arubi> ohh it says 'wallets' in th release notes, but 'wallet/' in the rpc call help.  my bad.  it just created a bunch of new wallets :)
521 2018-01-30T18:38:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12302: test: Make ua_comment test pass on 0.16.0 (master...2017_01_uacomment_test_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12302
522 2018-01-30T18:39:52  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
523 2018-01-30T18:43:00  *** neha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
524 2018-01-30T18:43:25  <jnewbery> wumpus: I'm happy to open a new PR if you think that's better, but I'm also happy for you to just force push the one-line fix in your PR
525 2018-01-30T18:43:32  <jnewbery> whichever you prefer
526 2018-01-30T18:43:47  <wumpus> I'm just tired of this, wanted to quickly fix the test then everyone wants to push their own solution
527 2018-01-30T18:44:12  *** jb55 has quit IRC
528 2018-01-30T18:44:18  *** Krellan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
529 2018-01-30T18:44:24  *** Krellan has quit IRC
530 2018-01-30T18:44:52  <wumpus> I think a regexp is a good idea for message matching, and could be useful in other cases too in the future where there's data embedded in the message we want to ignore
531 2018-01-30T18:45:43  <wumpus> but I really don't feel like eternally arguing even about things like this, of course you can solve it in 20 different ways too
532 2018-01-30T18:45:48  <jnewbery> seems over-engineered for fixing a single case. I think here it just makes sense to match on the substring
533 2018-01-30T18:45:53  *** SopaXorzTaker is now known as ^s
534 2018-01-30T18:46:09  <jnewbery> Sorry - I seem to have touched a raw nerve
535 2018-01-30T18:46:40  <jnewbery> It wasn't a NACK, I just think it's neater to update the individual case than change the util function for this one case
536 2018-01-30T18:46:54  <jnewbery> but if you prefer your way, that obviously also achieves the same
537 2018-01-30T18:46:58  <wumpus> no, I don't think matching a partial message only is better than ignoring the few characters we don't care about
538 2018-01-30T18:47:42  <jnewbery> ok, in that case re-open the PR
539 2018-01-30T18:47:51  <wumpus> I thought about that too but thought this would cover it better
540 2018-01-30T18:48:02  <sdaftuar> let's merge it and move on... 0.16.0 awais
541 2018-01-30T18:48:04  <sdaftuar> awaits*
542 2018-01-30T18:48:32  <jnewbery> many of the test cases match on substring. I agree that regex matching would be better in the general case
543 2018-01-30T18:48:33  <wumpus> 0.16.0 is not blocked on this, we already tagged rc1
544 2018-01-30T18:49:36  *** Krellan_ has quit IRC
545 2018-01-30T18:50:56  *** flokie has quit IRC
546 2018-01-30T18:52:27  <sdaftuar> fair, but even if we're not immediately blocked on it, i think we make our lives easier by quickly closing out these kinds of minor issues when we can
547 2018-01-30T18:54:23  <jnewbery> I agree. I'd argue that implementing a minimal fix that only fixes the broken test case is more appropriate than trying to expand the functionality of the test framework, but really either fix is fine.
548 2018-01-30T18:54:24  <wumpus> yes, sorry for overreacting
549 2018-01-30T18:59:13  <wumpus> though I don't think it was unreasonable to try to expand the test framework to do something more than it does
550 2018-01-30T18:59:39  <wumpus> I understand the consensus code for bitcoin is set in stone, but surely the interface for the test framework isn't
551 2018-01-30T19:04:10  *** Randolf has quit IRC
552 2018-01-30T19:06:09  *** Cecelia13Shanaha has quit IRC
553 2018-01-30T19:06:36  <jnewbery> I agree that the framework can be improved, but I think that can be done in a separate PR from a quick fix to get the tests running again
554 2018-01-30T19:06:56  <jnewbery> But we don't need to make this a big thing. I can ACK your PR :)
555 2018-01-30T19:08:12  *** Tennis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
556 2018-01-30T19:10:15  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
557 2018-01-30T19:17:30  <provoostenator> "lxc-execute: start.c: lxc_spawn: 1079 Failed to find gateway addresses"
558 2018-01-30T19:18:25  <provoostenator> Pretty sure I followed this to the T: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/docs/blob/master/gitian-building/gitian-building-setup-gitian-debian.md
559 2018-01-30T19:20:36  <provoostenator> Ah wait, I shouldn't copy paste those example IP addresses probably. Vaguely remember making that mistake last time.
560 2018-01-30T19:21:04  <wumpus> oh great now that I pushed something else I cannot reopen the PR anymore
561 2018-01-30T19:21:24  <wumpus> crap github
562 2018-01-30T19:22:03  *** owowo has quit IRC
563 2018-01-30T19:22:16  <jnewbery> reset to the old commit, push, open PR, reset to the new commit, force push
564 2018-01-30T19:23:01  <wumpus> some other time
565 2018-01-30T19:23:04  *** flokie has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
566 2018-01-30T19:25:39  *** arbitrary_guy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
567 2018-01-30T19:27:39  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
568 2018-01-30T19:29:37  *** Tennis has quit IRC
569 2018-01-30T19:34:20  <provoostenator> I can't remember where to get the correct values for GITIAN_HOST_IP (the IP of the Debian virtual box?) and LXC_GUEST_IP.
570 2018-01-30T19:35:10  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
571 2018-01-30T19:35:23  *** schmidty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
572 2018-01-30T19:35:41  <provoostenator> https://botbot.me/freenode/bitcoin-core-dev/2017-02-21/?msg=81301776&page=1
573 2018-01-30T19:37:41  *** dcousens has quit IRC
574 2018-01-30T19:37:47  *** wraithm_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
575 2018-01-30T19:38:03  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
576 2018-01-30T19:38:35  *** wraithm_ has quit IRC
577 2018-01-30T19:38:49  *** owowo has quit IRC
578 2018-01-30T19:39:08  *** wraithm_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
579 2018-01-30T19:39:24  *** wraithm has quit IRC
580 2018-01-30T19:39:25  *** wraithm_ has quit IRC
581 2018-01-30T19:39:40  *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
582 2018-01-30T19:40:12  *** wraithm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
583 2018-01-30T19:40:44  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
584 2018-01-30T19:41:03  *** wraithm has quit IRC
585 2018-01-30T19:41:26  *** mandric has quit IRC
586 2018-01-30T19:41:48  *** wraithm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
587 2018-01-30T19:42:40  *** wraithm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
588 2018-01-30T19:44:20  *** mandric has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
589 2018-01-30T19:45:05  *** Krellan has quit IRC
590 2018-01-30T19:45:08  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
591 2018-01-30T19:45:53  *** wraithm_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
592 2018-01-30T19:46:05  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
593 2018-01-30T19:46:38  *** wraithm_ has quit IRC
594 2018-01-30T19:46:38  *** Krellan has quit IRC
595 2018-01-30T19:46:48  *** wraithm has quit IRC
596 2018-01-30T19:47:07  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
597 2018-01-30T19:47:35  *** PaulCape_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
598 2018-01-30T19:53:45  <provoostenator> Ah wait, it's more subtle. These instructions use "ifconfig" which isn't installed on Debian by default: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/docs/blob/master/gitian-building/gitian-building-setup-gitian-debian.md#setting-up-debian-for-gitian-building
599 2018-01-30T19:54:14  <provoostenator> And of course, Linux being Linux, it just silently fails and let the user shoot themselves in the foot
600 2018-01-30T19:54:54  *** wraithm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
601 2018-01-30T19:54:56  <goatpig> does Core use zeromq?
602 2018-01-30T19:55:08  <achow101> goatpig: yes
603 2018-01-30T19:55:22  <goatpig> isn't Core under the MIT license?
604 2018-01-30T19:56:54  <luke-jr> Core *offers* a zeromq service, but "using" it is ill-defined in this case
605 2018-01-30T19:57:01  <luke-jr> goatpig: yes, and?
606 2018-01-30T19:57:20  <goatpig> isn't LGPL3 (zmq) incompatible with MIT?
607 2018-01-30T19:57:35  *** dcousens has quit IRC
608 2018-01-30T19:57:37  <gmaxwell> No, not at all.
609 2018-01-30T19:57:59  <luke-jr> goatpig: LGPL is Lesser GPL. It specifically allows non-GPL stuff to use it.
610 2018-01-30T19:58:01  <goatpig> with version of GPL is incompatible with MIT then? AGPL?
611 2018-01-30T19:58:10  *** arbitrary_guy has quit IRC
612 2018-01-30T19:58:12  <goatpig> ah that's what got me confused I guess
613 2018-01-30T19:58:14  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
614 2018-01-30T19:58:20  <luke-jr> GPL and AGPL are incompatible with non-free software, but still compatible with MIT
615 2018-01-30T19:58:23  <gmaxwell> Nothing is incompatible with MIT, some things are more restrictive and we prefer to not use them.
616 2018-01-30T19:58:30  <luke-jr> they're NOT compatible with OpenSSL, however, which is another dependency of ours..
617 2018-01-30T19:59:01  <gmaxwell> (luke's They is GPL and AGPL)
618 2018-01-30T19:59:15  <goatpig> so a MIT project can make use a LGPL dependency just fine?
619 2018-01-30T19:59:24  *** Ron62Deckow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
620 2018-01-30T19:59:27  <gmaxwell> Yes.
621 2018-01-30T19:59:33  <goatpig> ok thanks
622 2018-01-30T19:59:52  <luke-jr> only thing to keep in mind is, you still need to release source for the dependency per the terms
623 2018-01-30T20:00:08  *** schmidty has quit IRC
624 2018-01-30T20:00:48  <goatpig> due noted
625 2018-01-30T20:02:23  <cfields> yes. We could pull in a gplv3 lib and we'd be fine to distribute it as usual. Problem is that some companies would want to modify that code without publishing it, so it's unlikely that we'd add any dependencies like that
626 2018-01-30T20:02:38  <cfields> jonasschnelli: ping
627 2018-01-30T20:03:13  <luke-jr> cfields: well, I think as long as we depend on OpenSSL, the conflict would prevent distribution
628 2018-01-30T20:03:25  <provoostenator> Still not seeing the br0 interface though.
629 2018-01-30T20:03:36  <cfields> hmm?
630 2018-01-30T20:05:46  <gmaxwell> cfields: openssl has a GPL incompatible license (it's advertising clause bsd)
631 2018-01-30T20:06:18  *** dcousens has quit IRC
632 2018-01-30T20:07:22  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
633 2018-01-30T20:08:52  <cfields> huh
634 2018-01-30T20:09:26  <achow101> in the test framework, how can I make it so that all of the nodes in a test are connected to each other and stay synced together without having to use sync_all?
635 2018-01-30T20:10:02  <achow101> sync_all is very slow and it would be better if they were properly connected over the p2p network and sending data between themselves
636 2018-01-30T20:12:47  <provoostenator> Made some progress: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/docs/issues/15
637 2018-01-30T20:13:33  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
638 2018-01-30T20:15:52  <instagibbs> achow101, they should be connected, sync_all just makes sure that you can order evens from the frame of reference of all the nodes
639 2018-01-30T20:17:06  *** d_t has quit IRC
640 2018-01-30T20:18:36  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
641 2018-01-30T20:18:53  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj reopened pull request #12302: test: Make ua_comment test pass on 0.16.0 (master...2017_01_uacomment_test_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12302
642 2018-01-30T20:21:36  *** ^s is now known as SopaXorzTaker
643 2018-01-30T20:31:46  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
644 2018-01-30T20:34:21  *** blueOcean has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
645 2018-01-30T20:41:30  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
646 2018-01-30T20:42:01  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
647 2018-01-30T20:45:07  *** blueOcean has quit IRC
648 2018-01-30T20:47:50  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
649 2018-01-30T20:49:10  <provoostenator> lxc-execute: conf.c: setup_rootfs: 1279 failed to mount rootfs
650 2018-01-30T20:55:38  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
651 2018-01-30T20:56:26  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9cb230905088...f0295becbf3e
652 2018-01-30T20:56:26  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master aac6bce Wladimir J. van der Laan: test: Make ua_comment test pass on 0.16.0...
653 2018-01-30T20:56:27  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f0295be MarcoFalke: Merge #12302: test: Make ua_comment test pass on 0.16.0...
654 2018-01-30T20:57:18  *** LumberCartel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
655 2018-01-30T20:57:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12302: test: Make ua_comment test pass on 0.16.0 (master...2017_01_uacomment_test_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12302
656 2018-01-30T20:58:44  <provoostenator> I ended up deleting the file /home/debian/gitian-builder/target-trusty-amd64 and replacing it with a directory, including /proc and /sys subdirs. That at least got me to the next error...
657 2018-01-30T20:59:55  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
658 2018-01-30T20:59:57  <provoostenator> lxc-execute: conf.c: setup_pts: 1407 No such file or directory - failed to create '/dev/pts'
659 2018-01-30T21:00:15  *** Randolf has quit IRC
660 2018-01-30T21:00:17  <provoostenator> These are different issues than I ran into half a year ago. I opened some issues on the docs repo. Will try again later.
661 2018-01-30T21:00:24  *** jb55 has quit IRC
662 2018-01-30T21:01:02  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
663 2018-01-30T21:01:54  *** LumberCartel has quit IRC
664 2018-01-30T21:04:27  <wumpus> you definitely shouldn't have to replace target-something with a directory
665 2018-01-30T21:04:47  <wumpus> that file should be auto-generated
666 2018-01-30T21:05:55  <wumpus> as I understand base-trusty-amd64 is the file that will be created by installing gitian / building the initial image, target-trusty-amd64 should be re-generated on every run of gitian when building something, it's a working copy of the base image
667 2018-01-30T21:10:31  *** _203458034582340 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
668 2018-01-30T21:11:05  *** _203458034582340 has quit IRC
669 2018-01-30T21:11:49  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
670 2018-01-30T21:12:27  *** Randolf has quit IRC
671 2018-01-30T21:12:32  *** cloaks has quit IRC
672 2018-01-30T21:15:23  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
673 2018-01-30T21:15:44  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
674 2018-01-30T21:15:58  <provoostenator> Mmm, so maybe something silently failed when creating the base image?
675 2018-01-30T21:16:23  <provoostenator> Ah I see, that's why it mounting that file.
676 2018-01-30T21:18:50  *** cloaks has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
677 2018-01-30T21:19:08  <provoostenator> I deleted that directory again. Now it seems to be doing a bit more. But I get frequent "init.lxc: failed to mount /dev/shm" error, as well as "sudo: unable to resolve host gitian".
678 2018-01-30T21:20:46  <wumpus> the sudo resolve warning is harmless
679 2018-01-30T21:22:19  <provoostenator> Yeah, I think it's actually building now. Hooray!
680 2018-01-30T21:28:50  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
681 2018-01-30T21:34:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #12304: Backport 12302 (0.16...backport_12302) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12304
682 2018-01-30T21:40:40  *** arbitrary_guy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
683 2018-01-30T21:46:22  <michagogo> Hrm
684 2018-01-30T21:46:27  <michagogo> http://paste.ubuntu.com/26491672/
685 2018-01-30T21:46:34  <MarcoFalke> Anyone with block bit want to kick the markov chain generator https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11771#issuecomment-361742013
686 2018-01-30T21:46:39  *** Ron62Deckow has quit IRC
687 2018-01-30T21:46:43  <michagogo> Got a segfault while building
688 2018-01-30T21:46:48  *** cloaks has quit IRC
689 2018-01-30T21:46:58  <MarcoFalke> WalterBoles
690 2018-01-30T21:47:09  *** cloaks has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
691 2018-01-30T21:48:23  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692 2018-01-30T21:51:34  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: ^
693 2018-01-30T21:52:05  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: looking
694 2018-01-30T21:53:48  *** jb55 has quit IRC
695 2018-01-30T21:55:43  *** cloaks has quit IRC
696 2018-01-30T21:58:17  <michagogo> provoostenator: iirc my past experience has been that Ubuntu is much smoother as a host compared to Debian
697 2018-01-30T21:58:46  <michagogo> I pretty much just followed the gitian readme
698 2018-01-30T22:00:00  <michagogo> I think at some point I set up a working gitian environment from scratch in a clean VM and put out a video (and ova)
699 2018-01-30T22:01:24  *** Neil13Bradtke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
700 2018-01-30T22:02:28  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
701 2018-01-30T22:05:19  *** larafale has quit IRC
702 2018-01-30T22:05:26  <michagogo> WTF? Now it failed somewhere in the Qt build
703 2018-01-30T22:06:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.16: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/6c2788c7c8d45ac8f38e998c8a9739efdd0b6d18
704 2018-01-30T22:06:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.16 6c2788c Wladimir J. van der Laan: test: Make ua_comment test pass on 0.16.0...
705 2018-01-30T22:08:02  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
706 2018-01-30T22:08:44  *** jb55 has quit IRC
707 2018-01-30T22:09:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jamesob opened pull request #12305: Clarify -conf help message to mention datadir path prefix (master...jamesob/conf-flag-path-help) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12305
708 2018-01-30T22:13:18  *** neha has quit IRC
709 2018-01-30T22:15:16  *** neha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
710 2018-01-30T22:15:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12304: [qa] 0.16: Backport 12302 (0.16...backport_12302) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12304
711 2018-01-30T22:15:42  <jamesob> wumpus: worth clarifying other path-accepting configuration option help messages, or should I just close the PR?
712 2018-01-30T22:16:15  <wumpus> jamesob: I don't know, we might want to document it somewhere in one place instead of for each argument separately
713 2018-01-30T22:16:58  <wumpus> for things like that it helps to at least try to be consistent
714 2018-01-30T22:17:48  <wumpus> no arguments to bitcoind are relative to the current directory
715 2018-01-30T22:20:33  <jamesob> yeah, agree. worth a paragraph between Usage and Options, or maybe there's some other place this is already documented?
716 2018-01-30T22:21:42  <wumpus> I don't think it's documented anywhere, agree that it should be
717 2018-01-30T22:22:13  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
718 2018-01-30T22:24:33  *** Neil13Bradtke has quit IRC
719 2018-01-30T22:34:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] axvr opened pull request #12306: Docs: Improvements to UNIX documentation (master...fix-docs) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12306
720 2018-01-30T22:40:20  *** cloaks has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
721 2018-01-30T22:41:18  *** jb55 has quit IRC
722 2018-01-30T22:44:26  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
723 2018-01-30T22:47:28  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
724 2018-01-30T22:49:26  <sdaftuar> luke-jr: could you explain your "+1" on evoskuil's last comment?  i think i've spent quite a bit of time now on that PR explaining why i find the "soft fork"/"hard fork" language deficient.
725 2018-01-30T22:49:42  <sdaftuar> is there something you still don't understand about my view?
726 2018-01-30T22:50:13  <jamesob> paths like "./bitcoin.conf" are interpreted as being relative to datadir as well; is this behavior we want to retain?
727 2018-01-30T22:54:48  *** denis2342 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
728 2018-01-30T22:55:11  <denis2342> hi
729 2018-01-30T22:55:50  <denis2342> I just tested bitcoin 0.16.0rc1 on freebsd and it runs fine so far
730 2018-01-30T22:59:10  *** ula has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
731 2018-01-30T22:59:24  *** Eleanora26Kemmer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
732 2018-01-30T23:04:01  *** Eleanora26Kemmer has quit IRC
733 2018-01-30T23:04:36  <promag> ryanofsky: regarding https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12287/files#r164570542
734 2018-01-30T23:04:56  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
735 2018-01-30T23:05:19  <promag> so if a block is in the active chain, nChainTx is final?
736 2018-01-30T23:06:40  <ryanofsky> i think so because if it's been in the active chain, then it's been validated, and nChainTx should be set
737 2018-01-30T23:06:57  *** d_t has quit IRC
738 2018-01-30T23:08:15  <promag> you say "and remove an existing lock"
739 2018-01-30T23:08:18  <promag> which one?
740 2018-01-30T23:08:55  <promag> my point is that cs_main is already held in all callers expect ClientModel::getVerificationProgress
741 2018-01-30T23:09:07  <promag> and that jonas adds
742 2018-01-30T23:10:01  <ryanofsky> the lock here could be removed: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12287/files#diff-b2bb174788c7409b671c46ccc86034bdR1681
743 2018-01-30T23:10:03  <promag> but I agree that less locks is better
744 2018-01-30T23:10:14  <gmaxwell> Correct software is better. :)
745 2018-01-30T23:11:39  *** Lynet_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
746 2018-01-30T23:12:18  *** Lynet has quit IRC
747 2018-01-30T23:12:21  <promag> right, in this case only comment per se doesn't prevent problems
748 2018-01-30T23:13:05  *** Guest66433 has quit IRC
749 2018-01-30T23:13:37  *** jamesob has quit IRC
750 2018-01-30T23:13:38  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
751 2018-01-30T23:13:45  <promag> for instance, in that case ryanofsky, I would lock from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12287/files#diff-b2bb174788c7409b671c46ccc86034bdR1678 to L1690
752 2018-01-30T23:14:21  <promag> ah sorry maybe that's not possible, because of ShowProgress
753 2018-01-30T23:14:38  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
754 2018-01-30T23:15:35  <ryanofsky> actually seems like there is another unnecessary lock below that
755 2018-01-30T23:17:32  <promag> how about avoid duplicate calls to GuessVerificationProgress(chainParams.TxData(), pindex) ?
756 2018-01-30T23:17:51  <promag> just do it once where the lock exists and use that value?
757 2018-01-30T23:18:22  <promag> right after pindex = chainActive.Next(pindex); on the loop end
758 2018-01-30T23:18:28  <promag> and also before the loop starts
759 2018-01-30T23:20:00  <ryanofsky> probably something like that is fine. the whole function is a mess, there's a bunch of unnecessary nesting and immediate unlocking/relocking
760 2018-01-30T23:20:40  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
761 2018-01-30T23:21:40  <Dizzle> sipa
762 2018-01-30T23:22:05  <Dizzle> Sorry, miss-typed.
763 2018-01-30T23:22:08  <luke-jr> sdaftuar: deficient or not, it's the language currently used for the Layer header..
764 2018-01-30T23:22:48  <gmaxwell> Then the layer header should be removed.
765 2018-01-30T23:23:17  <gmaxwell> It has very little value at best, and clearly is just resulting in needless arguments.
766 2018-01-30T23:23:27  <luke-jr> I don't agree that it's deficient. It is working fine in this case as well.
767 2018-01-30T23:23:54  <luke-jr> I don't understand why people are desperate to deny the reality that BIP 90 is a hardfork.
768 2018-01-30T23:24:27  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: you're acting inappropriately, your ability to update documents shouldn't be used as a lever to advance arguments you want to make.
769 2018-01-30T23:24:42  <luke-jr> …
770 2018-01-30T23:25:06  <gmaxwell> So you disagree about some description stuff, fine. But editing the documents to fit your world view when other people, particularly the authors of the document disagree isn't kosher.
771 2018-01-30T23:25:19  *** Emcy has quit IRC
772 2018-01-30T23:25:44  <luke-jr> it's a change proposed nearly 2 years ago and implemented at least many months ago, without any dispute until this week, not used to advance any arguments at all, and in any case completely objective
773 2018-01-30T23:25:55  <gmaxwell> The end result will only be that other people will simply walk away from the mechenism.
774 2018-01-30T23:26:19  <gmaxwell> It's clearly not completely objective, because the decription doesn't fit the conventional definition of a hardfork.
775 2018-01-30T23:26:21  <luke-jr> the documents are not edited, only the preamble header
776 2018-01-30T23:26:25  <luke-jr> it does
777 2018-01-30T23:26:55  <gmaxwell> You can argue that, but not via special privledges to edit the repository.
778 2018-01-30T23:27:01  <luke-jr> unless you're trying to push a redefinition of hardfork, which is not the fault of a change made a long time ago
779 2018-01-30T23:27:55  <gmaxwell> I didn't notice that you stuck a hardfork label on BIP 90 until today.
780 2018-01-30T23:28:38  <gmaxwell> Had I noticed it I would have disagreed at any point, and you should have known that because voskuil tried arguing that on the mailing list previously and almost everyone disagreed with him.
781 2018-01-30T23:28:57  <luke-jr> the whole reason it was made a BIP at all, was because it was a hardfork..
782 2018-01-30T23:29:29  <gmaxwell> That is not true.
783 2018-01-30T23:29:35  <luke-jr> then why would there be a BIP?
784 2018-01-30T23:29:59  <gmaxwell> because there is a BIP for any protocol change with potential interoperability implications... even just documentary ones.
785 2018-01-30T23:30:18  <luke-jr> if it is a protocol change, it is a hardfork by definition
786 2018-01-30T23:30:22  <gmaxwell> And there has never been a hardfork performed via a BIP.
787 2018-01-30T23:30:26  <luke-jr> the only way to argue it isn't a hardfork, is to argue that it isn't a protocol change
788 2018-01-30T23:30:55  <gmaxwell> you are now arguing that all changes to the protocol are hardforks?
789 2018-01-30T23:31:00  <luke-jr> no
790 2018-01-30T23:31:02  <gmaxwell> so segwit is a hardfork? p2sh is a hardfork?
791 2018-01-30T23:31:10  <gmaxwell> Fee filter.. hardfork?
792 2018-01-30T23:31:19  <gmaxwell> compact blocks hardfork
793 2018-01-30T23:31:20  <luke-jr> Segwit and P2SH constrain the protocol, they don't loosen it
794 2018-01-30T23:31:24  <gmaxwell> BIP32 ... totally hardfork there.
795 2018-01-30T23:31:28  <luke-jr> Fee filter and compact blocks aren't protocol changes at all
796 2018-01-30T23:31:41  <gmaxwell> 15:28:57 < luke-jr> the whole reason it was made a BIP at all, was because it  was a hardfork..
797 2018-01-30T23:31:44  <gmaxwell> 15:29:35 < luke-jr> then why would there be a BIP?
798 2018-01-30T23:32:36  <luke-jr> as a protocol change, BIP 90 loosens the rules, and is therefore a hardfork. if it is not a protocol change, then it is an implementation detail that doesn't need standardization
799 2018-01-30T23:33:03  <luke-jr> there is no reason for standardization of this kind of change, except if we see it as a protocol change
800 2018-01-30T23:33:39  <gmaxwell> BIP 90 doesn't losen the rules.  It changes implementation details about things burried in the past, what in the past is in the past. If there were some other chain they would possibly accept that something else would reject then there would be a distinction there. But there isn't.
801 2018-01-30T23:33:55  <gmaxwell> it's like arguing that jtimon's changes to not validate the genesis block were a hardfork.
802 2018-01-30T23:34:21  <luke-jr> if it's an implementation detail, then there's nothing to standardize
803 2018-01-30T23:34:29  <gmaxwell> it turns "hardfork" into some jibberish technical defintion that doesn't map usefully to system behavior,  which serves no productive goal other than making it so that only you can decide what is and isn't one.
804 2018-01-30T23:35:14  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: Things aren't so black and white, most of BIP90 had been done for something like a year before the BIP was written. But it's better to communicate more instead of less.
805 2018-01-30T23:35:41  <luke-jr> where's the grey? I don't see it in this case.
806 2018-01-30T23:35:44  <gmaxwell> Writing documentation doesn't turn something into a hardfork that had existed for a long time.
807 2018-01-30T23:35:57  *** denis2342 has quit IRC
808 2018-01-30T23:36:15  <gmaxwell> luke-jr: BIP90 can't fork off nodes in any plausable situation; thats not even grey: it's not a hardfork in any meaningful sense.
809 2018-01-30T23:36:57  <luke-jr> maybe the Layer header should just be deleted for BIP 90 (seeing as it's optional and not always applicable)
810 2018-01-30T23:37:17  <gmaxwell> That would be an okay way to handle a dispute, I think.
811 2018-01-30T23:37:31  <gmaxwell> The BIP describes itself, I think accurately and in detail.
812 2018-01-30T23:37:47  <luke-jr> well, the description in the BIP is clearly a hardfork, IMO
813 2018-01-30T23:38:29  <gmaxwell> Lets not create bad incentives for people to describe things using anything less than the most conservative language.
814 2018-01-30T23:39:06  <luke-jr> it's a header. there is no incentive..
815 2018-01-30T23:39:09  <gmaxwell> esp since bips can pretty much say whatever nonsense they want already.
816 2018-01-30T23:39:33  *** Tennis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
817 2018-01-30T23:39:47  <gmaxwell> Sure there is, it's an incentive to not be as conservative (e.g. spelling out any possible way anyone could call it a hardfork, and als possible risks) if its going to result in a misleading header.
818 2018-01-30T23:39:57  <BlueMatt> can we just define a new term here
819 2018-01-30T23:39:59  <luke-jr> is there some context I'm missing? to me, it looks like someone just up and randomly decided to whine about the layer header
820 2018-01-30T23:40:00  <BlueMatt> call it "Buried Fork"
821 2018-01-30T23:40:02  <BlueMatt> or something
822 2018-01-30T23:40:07  <BlueMatt> then no one has to be upset
823 2018-01-30T23:40:11  *** denis2342 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
824 2018-01-30T23:40:36  <gmaxwell>   The word fork should probably not be used, because there is no fork.
825 2018-01-30T23:40:47  <gmaxwell> there is no split in consensus state.
826 2018-01-30T23:41:04  <gmaxwell> "Silver spoon" :P
827 2018-01-30T23:42:15  <luke-jr> it's essentially the same thing as adding/removing checkpoints
828 2018-01-30T23:42:34  <gmaxwell> I think I agree with that, which we also never have BIPed.
829 2018-01-30T23:42:36  <BlueMatt> "Buried Spoon"
830 2018-01-30T23:42:55  <BlueMatt> that seems appropriate
831 2018-01-30T23:43:03  <gmaxwell> we talked about this when the bip was written and thought there was technically no need to BIP it, but more documentation is better than less.
832 2018-01-30T23:44:42  <gmaxwell> I think thats a good practice, but this showing up as some "hardfork enforce by core devs" crap would be a profound disincentive to ever do that again.
833 2018-01-30T23:44:57  <contrapumpkin> (a BIP on the need for the layer header in BIPs?)
834 2018-01-30T23:45:33  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
835 2018-01-30T23:48:10  <jtimon> luke-jr: of course it's good to make bip90 or sdaftuar's pr whether they're hfs, sfs or none of that. I honestly don't care if bip90 is a hf or not, it's still a good thing and should  be documented in a bip. I don't think it's good to edit bips without the author's permission unless it's for typos or tiny things
836 2018-01-30T23:48:45  <jtimon> BlueMatt: I like more "Buried deployment", but bikeshedding...
837 2018-01-30T23:48:48  <contrapumpkin> jtimon: it seems he got disconnected
838 2018-01-30T23:49:02  <gmaxwell> Buried deployment sounds okay to me.
839 2018-01-30T23:49:02  <jtimon> ops, yeah
840 2018-01-30T23:49:04  *** mrannanay has quit IRC
841 2018-01-30T23:49:18  <promag> ryanofsky https://github.com/promag/bitcoin/commit/74022f56f733cf0ce3c156e9432e275413dff96c
842 2018-01-30T23:49:30  <gmaxwell> well I think a general editoral principle is that you can be liberal with changes that no one complaints about, and conservative with things that cause a fuss.
843 2018-01-30T23:50:24  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
844 2018-01-30T23:50:45  <promag> sorry ryanofsky, force push https://github.com/promag/bitcoin/commit/6e36821823b498c307787543ad59b9e9ccffcc63
845 2018-01-30T23:51:26  *** wraithm has quit IRC
846 2018-01-30T23:54:58  <jtimon> yeah, nobody will ever complain for a typo being corrected
847 2018-01-30T23:55:18  <luke-jr> if we're looking at BIP90-like changes as implementation details, then it should probably go in a Core-specific doc repo rather than BIPs since it isn't a coordinated thing
848 2018-01-30T23:55:24  <luke-jr> (I read the IRC log to catch up)
849 2018-01-30T23:55:32  <luke-jr> having a Core-specific place for implementation detail documentation would encourage more documentation of Core-specific stuff too
850 2018-01-30T23:55:48  <luke-jr> ?
851 2018-01-30T23:56:11  <jtimon> luke-jr: it's not core specific, everybody is welcomed to do bip90 too
852 2018-01-30T23:57:18  <gmaxwell> you can look at as as we did the analysis to determine that this was an okay thing to do and are publishing the details.
853 2018-01-30T23:58:54  <jtimon> was bip39 whatever-wallet-implemented-it-first-specific?
854 2018-01-30T23:59:32  *** Allison19Schinne has joined #bitcoin-core-dev