1 2018-12-14T00:07:56  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  2 2018-12-14T00:09:11  *** promag has quit IRC
  3 2018-12-14T00:12:58  *** _cryptodesktop_i has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2018-12-14T00:17:50  <harding> lopp: under the default GitHub settings, anyone with commit access can push anything they want, so they could pull a PR into a private branch, modify it, merge it locally, and push it.  Some projects enable GitHub settings that prevent  direct pushes like that to the master branch, but I'm not sure whether Bitcoin Core uses them.  Alternatively, when you open a GitHub PR, a box is checked by default that allows people with commit
  5 2018-12-14T00:17:50  <harding> access to the target repository to push to the branch, which is another way comitters could modify the code.  What comitter Mallory can't do is change contributor Alice's commits without removing any PGP signature she put on them, so if you trust Alice's key (and if she always signs her commits), you can confirm she provided those commits.
  6 2018-12-14T00:18:53  *** miknotauro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  7 2018-12-14T00:21:03  <midnightmagic> code review would need to be compromised; and all the people who build it would have to miss it; and then following that the users upgrading would similarly have to miss it. wumpus does some weird things to double-check the merge process including comparing self-made branches with the PR results and so on.
  8 2018-12-14T00:23:01  <midnightmagic> lopp: anything not attached to an actual process including PR and discussion would be noticed (IMO) fairly rapidly and examined more closely.
  9 2018-12-14T00:23:55  <lopp> midnightmagic: it's mainly the "maintainer slips in a few lines to a PR" vector I'm trying to better understand
 10 2018-12-14T00:28:20  <midnightmagic> lopp: If I were a PR submitter, I would notice that. And the commits are tracked well, so even e.g. push -f could be easily forensically examined. Many of us keep full history immune to push -f tip disconnection.. A PR mod would be an obvious slip.
 11 2018-12-14T00:32:46  <midnightmagic> lopp: external verification of correct merging would likely be welcome though, if you have a script or something that you want to implement. Well. I mean I'd run it anyway.
 12 2018-12-14T00:35:11  <sipa> midnightmagic: i think a force push to the repo would be easily noticed yes
 13 2018-12-14T00:35:23  <sipa> i'm not so sure about a PR being modified by the maintained
 14 2018-12-14T00:36:08  <midnightmagic> Maybe that's just me then. But authorship would be contaminated at that point. I as a PR submitter would have noticed instantly if you guys committed something other than what I PR'd.
 15 2018-12-14T00:46:01  *** rh0nj has quit IRC
 16 2018-12-14T00:46:05  <promag_> midnightmagic: how?
 17 2018-12-14T00:46:29  *** promag_ is now known as promag
 18 2018-12-14T00:46:50  *** _cryptodesktop_i has quit IRC
 19 2018-12-14T00:47:08  *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 20 2018-12-14T00:47:28  *** _cryptosignal_me has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2018-12-14T00:50:56  <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: I'm fairly confident that almost no submitters would notice a subtly different version.
 22 2018-12-14T00:51:05  <gmaxwell> A grossly different version, sure.
 23 2018-12-14T00:51:27  <gmaxwell> Esp since we don't force PRs to be rebased by the submitter before merging them.
 24 2018-12-14T00:51:37  <midnightmagic> weird.
 25 2018-12-14T00:51:54  <gmaxwell> (I mean, they usually have to apply cleanly, but thats it)
 26 2018-12-14T00:52:09  *** spinza has quit IRC
 27 2018-12-14T00:52:21  <gmaxwell> many reviewers ack the specific merged commit, but that data is just lost in github land.
 28 2018-12-14T00:52:42  <promag> gmaxwell: never saw that (I think)
 29 2018-12-14T00:52:42  <gmaxwell> At least if the modified the change inside the merge commit, that would be apparent in the git history.
 30 2018-12-14T00:53:06  <midnightmagic> thus authorship contamination.
 31 2018-12-14T00:53:25  <sipa> no, changes in the merge commit wouldn't change the commit that comes from the author
 32 2018-12-14T00:53:43  <sipa> the commit id would be exactly the expected value
 33 2018-12-14T00:53:48  <gmaxwell> promag: never saw people ack specific commits? a lotof people do it consistently.  e.g. first merged commit of yours I clicked on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14885#issuecomment-445561532
 34 2018-12-14T00:54:15  <gmaxwell> sipa: right, but it would be apparent in the git history that the merge wasn't faithful, if anyone looked.
 35 2018-12-14T00:54:23  <gmaxwell> (I'm not saying that anyone looks)
 36 2018-12-14T00:54:24  <midnightmagic> the commit of the submitter could but the merge commit wouldn't.
 37 2018-12-14T00:54:32  <promag> gmaxwell: you said "many reviewers ack the specific merged commit"
 38 2018-12-14T00:54:56  <sipa> midnightmagic: i'm confused what you're referring to
 39 2018-12-14T00:54:58  <promag> I thought you meant the merge commit
 40 2018-12-14T00:55:11  <gmaxwell> promag: sorry, I didn't make the clear, no not the merge commit unfortunately that can't really happen logistically. :(
 41 2018-12-14T00:55:28  <gmaxwell> promag: but the commit that is eventually merged, not the merge commit itself.
 42 2018-12-14T00:55:30  <sipa> we actually could very reasonable verify that merge commits are faithful and conflictless
 43 2018-12-14T00:55:36  <sipa> but we don't have infrastructure for that
 44 2018-12-14T00:55:58  <sipa> it would be kinda pointless without also verifying e.g. that the author commit matches the value that was ACKed by reviewers etc
 45 2018-12-14T00:56:01  <gmaxwell> Someone could write automation that checks that merge commits are faithful, but I would WAG that not 100% of them are.
 46 2018-12-14T00:56:04  <midnightmagic> sipa: those commitids which are added to git history as a result of the merge would include a change by the maintainer, assuming we have a commit in the history which the PR submitter actually intended to be committed. Changes would be visible via git log and other historical examination
 47 2018-12-14T00:56:24  <gmaxwell> sipa: well the merge commit could copy existant acks from the github into the commit message.
 48 2018-12-14T00:56:47  <gmaxwell> The point I was trying to make and midnightmagic is making is that at least if it's the merge commit that screws it up there is a clear record.
 49 2018-12-14T00:56:51  <sipa> midnightmagic: yeah, it would be - i'm just doubtful that there is any infrasturcture or reviewer policy that would notice that
 50 2018-12-14T00:56:52  <promag> midnightmagic: do you periodically check history and merge commits?
 51 2018-12-14T00:57:00  <sipa> midnightmagic: because git doesn't tell you unless you go out of your way
 52 2018-12-14T00:57:10  <gmaxwell> vs editing the commit that gets merged itself, which would actually not leave a good record.
 53 2018-12-14T00:57:35  <promag> the same regarding merge os backports
 54 2018-12-14T00:57:38  <midnightmagic> sipa: I accept that. I'm just saying I would definitely notice contamination of any PR I submitted. And I think it's weird that other submitters don't verify. :(
 55 2018-12-14T00:57:40  <promag> s/os/of
 56 2018-12-14T00:57:51  <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: how would you even go check?
 57 2018-12-14T00:58:10  <gmaxwell> I guess do the merge yourself and compare the resulting trees?
 58 2018-12-14T00:58:27  <sipa> git show on the merge commit will show you the conflicts, i think
 59 2018-12-14T00:58:59  <sipa> (but it does depend on your local diff/conflict resolving strategy, which is a config setting)
 60 2018-12-14T00:59:10  <midnightmagic> git log, diffs, looking at the merge points and reverifying actual code committed. I don't really trust git either, after watching superior commercial systems screw up their merging in corner cases that wrecked large corp IP.
 61 2018-12-14T00:59:25  <gmaxwell> I'm no longer a commiter on bitcoin, I'd be interested in knowing how often commiters are manually resolving conflicts on master. I believe the answer is rarely but not never.
 62 2018-12-14T00:59:40  <sipa> gmaxwell: i think the answer is almost never
 63 2018-12-14T00:59:52  <gmaxwell> I think I recall doing so... but only like ... once.
 64 2018-12-14T00:59:58  <promag> gmaxwell: never noticed one in almost 2 years
 65 2018-12-14T01:00:13  <sipa> promag: how would you notice?
 66 2018-12-14T01:00:19  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2018-12-14T01:00:43  <gmaxwell> because our history is not linear there is virtually always conflict resolution, but it's automated.
 68 2018-12-14T01:00:44  <promag> right, I mean, it wasn't discuessed here at least XD
 69 2018-12-14T01:01:16  <gmaxwell> promag: yea, it wouldn't get discussed. like as a commiter I would have only done a manual resoution if it was utterly trivial and obvious, and otherwise I would have nagged someone to rebase.
 70 2018-12-14T01:01:23  <sipa> i personally would always ask for rebasing instead of merging something with conflicts, but i'm not using my merge power frequently
 71 2018-12-14T01:01:35  <sipa> and if that doesn't happen, submit a PR myself with the rebase
 72 2018-12-14T01:01:42  <gmaxwell> sipa: even if the PR author had been gone for two months ?
 73 2018-12-14T01:01:46  <gmaxwell> okay fair enough.
 74 2018-12-14T01:02:10  <sipa> i think in backport branches maintainer changes may be more common, but i shouldn't speak for others
 75 2018-12-14T01:02:19  * midnightmagic discovers taking something for granted.
 76 2018-12-14T01:02:22  <gmaxwell> Actually I think I've seen you do exactly that, open a rebase basically right before something gets merged.
 77 2018-12-14T01:02:26  *** _cryptosignal_me has quit IRC
 78 2018-12-14T01:02:41  <gmaxwell> sipa: yea, backports are a mess of manual resolution, thats why I was specific about master.
 79 2018-12-14T01:03:48  <gmaxwell> In any case, I expect we could pretty easily have a 'no manual resolution in merges' standard, but its kinda pointless without validation.
 80 2018-12-14T01:04:07  <gmaxwell> and I wouldn't be surprised if validation might be complicated by git version differences. :(
 81 2018-12-14T01:04:49  <promag> I think backports are more attractive to tamper, are on the verge of release
 82 2018-12-14T01:05:16  <gmaxwell> maybe. but they inherently get a lot less attention in a lot of regards.
 83 2018-12-14T01:06:47  <gmaxwell> Tampering in general is not the most attractive attack vector because its conspicuous. I think in general when we think about process improvements, it's best to think in terms of beneficial changes that make tampering harder as a side effect, rather than targeted changes against tampering.
 84 2018-12-14T01:23:22  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 85 2018-12-14T01:23:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MeshCollider pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a5aea9654f36...7a30e0f6c544
 86 2018-12-14T01:23:23  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0e75f44 Pieter Wuille: Replace CAffectedKeysVisitor with descriptor based logic
 87 2018-12-14T01:23:24  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7a30e0f MeshCollider: Merge #14821: Replace CAffectedKeysVisitor with descriptor based logic...
 88 2018-12-14T01:23:24  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 89 2018-12-14T01:24:02  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 90 2018-12-14T01:24:02  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MeshCollider closed pull request #14821: Replace CAffectedKeysVisitor with descriptor based logic (master...201810_die_caffectedkeysvisitor_die) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14821
 91 2018-12-14T01:24:02  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 92 2018-12-14T01:25:53  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 93 2018-12-14T01:26:10  <midnightmagic> lopp: check the merge commits. unclean commits result in diffs of the merging commit and the topmost merge point; clean merges result in a pure list of commits between the branchpoint of the PR branch and the topmost commit. Alternatively, for a forced merge commit (like what github does) you can diff the base of the merge and the commitid of the merging commit and the results should be
 94 2018-12-14T01:26:17  <midnightmagic> identical. example;
 95 2018-12-14T01:26:43  <midnightmagic> er..  example:  git diff 4b4e9486af..86eddd466e, vs. git diff 4b4e9486af..4ad560dba9b3362b6639e1a1c7898ea9ca946af5
 96 2018-12-14T01:27:05  <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: there are no clean commits.
 97 2018-12-14T01:27:09  <gmaxwell> or almost none.
 98 2018-12-14T01:27:10  *** Murch has quit IRC
 99 2018-12-14T01:27:19  <midnightmagic> good then. they're harder to detect.
100 2018-12-14T01:27:41  <gmaxwell> the only time the merge does nothing is if the history was linear... which it usually isn't except for quick fixes.
101 2018-12-14T01:28:13  <gmaxwell> like #14953 probably was merged clean, but few things are because there is just too much activity.
102 2018-12-14T01:28:15  <midnightmagic> corner case.  So github doesn't force a merge commit?
103 2018-12-14T01:28:16  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14953 | test: Make g_insecure_rand_ctx thread_local by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #14953 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
104 2018-12-14T01:28:31  <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: there is always a merge commit, nothing goes in without a merge commit.
105 2018-12-14T01:29:19  <midnightmagic> You mean in github?
106 2018-12-14T01:29:43  <gmaxwell> In the bitcoin project. We never commit directly to master. (I believe that no adays that is an absolute never)
107 2018-12-14T01:29:52  <sipa> gmaxwell: indeed
108 2018-12-14T01:29:58  <midnightmagic> Ah -- yes, good then.
109 2018-12-14T01:29:59  <gmaxwell> For master there is always a PR and a merge.
110 2018-12-14T01:29:59  <sipa> verify-commits would fail if you didn't
111 2018-12-14T01:30:12  <sipa> so that's not just policy, it's actually enforced by CI
112 2018-12-14T01:31:12  <promag> is this used contrib/devtools/github-merge.py ?
113 2018-12-14T01:31:29  <meshcollider> I'm not sure thats true, I think wumpus sometimes pushes release note changes directly without a PR?
114 2018-12-14T01:31:48  <gmaxwell> meshcollider: not on master, AFAIK
115 2018-12-14T01:32:08  <sipa> promag: yes, all merges are done through that script
116 2018-12-14T01:32:20  <meshcollider> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/825f779dc715f0f006ce0f196dc834355d2e0a5a
117 2018-12-14T01:32:30  <meshcollider> for example ^
118 2018-12-14T01:33:03  <sipa> midnightmagic: still a merge commit above it; 024816d6cfc719c7109cf5f1aa02d41056df848d
119 2018-12-14T01:33:11  <sipa> no?
120 2018-12-14T01:33:18  <sipa> oh no
121 2018-12-14T01:33:27  <aj> contrib/verify-commits.py has code to check merge commits are clean... there's an explicit list of non-clean merge commits as well (contrib/verify-commits/allow-unclean-merge-commits)
122 2018-12-14T01:33:29  <sipa> you're right; hmm
123 2018-12-14T01:33:39  <meshcollider> historical release notes are the only time I've seen a direct push to master IIRC
124 2018-12-14T01:33:51  <sipa> ah, yes, there can be direct commits in masters, but they need to be signed by a maintainer
125 2018-12-14T01:33:58  <sipa> and merge commits, which also need to be signed
126 2018-12-14T01:34:14  <gmaxwell> aside, github output on the commit is weird, look what PR it attributes it to
127 2018-12-14T01:34:18  <sipa> and merge commits cannot merge more than 2 branches
128 2018-12-14T01:34:30  <gmaxwell> no octopus merges? aww
129 2018-12-14T01:34:47  <midnightmagic> :-o
130 2018-12-14T01:35:06  <meshcollider> yep thats enforced by verify-commits
131 2018-12-14T01:35:55  <gmaxwell> I wonder if we shouldn't just have the verify also disallow direct commits on master. It doesn't much matter one way or another, since by norm they're not used (except for trivial things).
132 2018-12-14T01:36:10  <gmaxwell> also not terribly important one way or another, I guess.
133 2018-12-14T01:36:29  <gmaxwell> but the fact that sipa and I thought they weren't allowed maybe suggests that they shouldn't be.
134 2018-12-14T01:36:34  <midnightmagic> "you man. don't eat those."
135 2018-12-14T01:37:02  <meshcollider> its exactly the same as opening a PR and then merging it straight away, I don't think there is any security difference
136 2018-12-14T01:37:17  <meshcollider> both will be alerted on IRC by the commit bot for example
137 2018-12-14T01:39:34  <gmaxwell> meshcollider: indeed, but in terms of process flow, it's one fewer things to watch out for.
138 2018-12-14T01:39:42  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
139 2018-12-14T01:39:57  <gmaxwell> ::shrugs:: I don't have a strong opinion, but given that we almost never do it, it might be better to never do it.
140 2018-12-14T01:40:51  <gmaxwell> If nothing else, it helps draw a stronger line between our practices and common but bad practices (lots of cryptocurrency projects commit everything directly to their repo with no review or oppturnity for review at all)
141 2018-12-14T01:41:01  <gmaxwell> obviously its up to the people who do it. :)
142 2018-12-14T01:42:19  <sipa> yeah, it's easy to discuss policies when you're not the person affected by them :)
143 2018-12-14T01:43:47  <gmaxwell> Well, I am affected by them, at least in theory. I give at least a glance over look at _every_ commit in a release.  If I were doing that by going through the list on github, then I'd miss some.
144 2018-12-14T01:43:58  <gmaxwell> In actuality, I do it via git, so I wouldn't ... but I could have been! :P
145 2018-12-14T01:44:10  <midnightmagic> ha
146 2018-12-14T01:44:30  <gmaxwell> (looking at changes on github is kind of a lost cause because of the automatic file hiding, among other things)
147 2018-12-14T01:44:55  <meshcollider> gmaxwell: do you mean the list of PRs merged, or the list of commits itself
148 2018-12-14T01:45:03  <meshcollider> because of course direct commits to master will be in the latter
149 2018-12-14T01:45:28  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
150 2018-12-14T01:45:35  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
151 2018-12-14T01:45:44  <gmaxwell> meshcollider: If I had moved to doing the review via github, I would have been doing it on PRs.
152 2018-12-14T01:45:58  <meshcollider> fair enough
153 2018-12-14T01:45:58  <gmaxwell> also with the mistaken impression that there was a Pr for everything.
154 2018-12-14T01:46:04  <meshcollider> because you can still look at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master
155 2018-12-14T01:46:15  <gmaxwell> Indeed.
156 2018-12-14T01:46:17  <aj> if nothing else, doing everything via a PR provides an easy place to capture comments on commits
157 2018-12-14T01:46:32  <gmaxwell> aj: right thats why I would use PRs if I were doing it via the web.
158 2018-12-14T01:46:38  <gmaxwell> In reality, I prefer to not see the comments.
159 2018-12-14T01:46:56  <gmaxwell> because they can be misleading.
160 2018-12-14T01:47:25  <gmaxwell> (A lesson I learned on this project a couple years back...)
161 2018-12-14T01:47:30  <aj> gmaxwell: comments are helpful if you're looking at code that was merged a while ago, and want to understand some of the choices. in theory, anyway...
162 2018-12-14T01:47:53  <gmaxwell> aj: what I like to do is look just at git, and then if I can't understand it, go look at the PR.
163 2018-12-14T01:48:00  <aj> gmaxwell: yeah, exactly
164 2018-12-14T01:48:14  <gmaxwell> less loading of expectations.
165 2018-12-14T01:48:18  <aj> gmaxwell: (then find i can't understand it after reading the PR, then ask on irc :)
166 2018-12-14T01:48:47  <gmaxwell> I couple times I've caught bugs by reading the change instead of the PR that I'm confident that I wouldn't have caught if I read the PR first.
167 2018-12-14T01:49:39  <gmaxwell> (though for unmerged things I still end up always reading the PR first, ... lazy oh well)
168 2018-12-14T01:53:49  <luke-jr> (#11082 is rebased btw)
169 2018-12-14T01:53:53  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11082 | Add new bitcoin_rw.conf file that is used for settings modified by this software itself by luke-jr · Pull Request #11082 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
170 2018-12-14T01:54:03  <luke-jr> (if someone wants to add it to the high-prio list..)
171 2018-12-14T01:54:47  <meshcollider> luke-jr: done
172 2018-12-14T01:58:47  *** Tralfaz has quit IRC
173 2018-12-14T02:02:53  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
174 2018-12-14T02:04:30  *** Murch has quit IRC
175 2018-12-14T02:08:49  <lopp> sipa: so is it accurate to say that maintainers can't alter commits that they merge because it would cause the verify-commits script to fail?
176 2018-12-14T02:10:48  <promag> lopp: what if they change verify commits or related?
177 2018-12-14T02:11:06  <gmaxwell> lopp: no that isn't the case at all.
178 2018-12-14T02:11:30  <gmaxwell> lopp: they can change the commits they merge, but it won't agree with the commit ids that people ack on PRs.  Nothing automated checks this.
179 2018-12-14T02:11:47  <gmaxwell> lopp: parties other than the maintainers (e.g. github) can't do that though, because merge commits are signed and verify commits checks the signatures.
180 2018-12-14T02:12:42  <gmaxwell> promag: instructions on verify commits has you use it in a way where you fetch changes and then verify them before merging into your local tree.
181 2018-12-14T02:12:46  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
182 2018-12-14T02:12:51  <lopp> gotcha; I know there is a trust issue with the verify-commits script itself though I'm not familiar with how the CI runs it... hopefully it doesn't run whatever version is at HEAD
183 2018-12-14T02:13:50  <gmaxwell> see the readme on verify commits "Using verify-commits.py safely"
184 2018-12-14T02:17:29  <promag> gmaxwell: still don't understand.. a merge commit could remove/skip the check in travis right?
185 2018-12-14T02:18:40  <gmaxwell> I have no idea what travis does. verify-commits is run by users (and should be run by you too), and if run like the readme says, no commit can defeat it.
186 2018-12-14T02:19:25  <sipa> promag: if you mean that someone can modify the verify-commits script to be neutered... sure, but i'm sure that would be noticed by review
187 2018-12-14T02:19:52  <promag> gmaxwell: thanks, will do!
188 2018-12-14T02:20:22  <promag> meh, trust in maintainers \o/
189 2018-12-14T02:21:56  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
190 2018-12-14T02:22:17  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
191 2018-12-14T02:24:37  <sipa> promag: s/maintainers/reviewers/
192 2018-12-14T02:28:14  <luke-jr> lopp: don't trust CI
193 2018-12-14T02:30:42  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
194 2018-12-14T02:34:50  *** otoburb has quit IRC
195 2018-12-14T02:45:52  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
196 2018-12-14T02:58:52  <meshcollider> sipa: in #14565 is there a reason you moved pubkey_map and privkey_map outside of import_data
197 2018-12-14T02:58:56  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14565 | Overhaul importmulti logic by sipa · Pull Request #14565 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
198 2018-12-14T02:59:28  <sipa> meshcollider: yes, ryanofsky asked for it
199 2018-12-14T02:59:41  <sipa> :)
200 2018-12-14T02:59:50  <meshcollider> oh
201 2018-12-14T03:00:03  <sipa> after noticing that the recursive function doesn't use them, it felt cleaner to have it out of it
202 2018-12-14T03:00:04  <meshcollider> its making my rebase more annoying :)
203 2018-12-14T03:00:10  <meshcollider> all good
204 2018-12-14T03:03:13  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
205 2018-12-14T03:03:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #14955: Switch all RNG code to the built-in PRNG (master...201812_generic_rand) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14955
206 2018-12-14T03:03:13  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
207 2018-12-14T03:05:33  *** jhfrontz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
208 2018-12-14T03:09:08  <gmaxwell> sipa: re 14955 on the strenghtening in the scheduler, do you hold exclusive access the whole time, or do you get randomness, strenghten and then mix back?
209 2018-12-14T03:10:17  <sipa> gmaxwell: nope!
210 2018-12-14T03:10:20  <sipa> only at the end
211 2018-12-14T03:10:59  <sipa> the process is [gather entropy externally] [get entropy from local RNG] [strengthen] [feed back into local RNG]
212 2018-12-14T03:11:52  <gmaxwell> but it isn't holding any locks during strengthen? right?
213 2018-12-14T03:12:42  <gmaxwell> lol maybe you should use sha256d64 as the strengthening function. :P
214 2018-12-14T03:13:09  <gmaxwell> lot more strenghtening per unit time to do 4-parallel sha256d64. :)
215 2018-12-14T03:13:24  <sipa> gmaxwell: no, just when reading the local RNG, and when mixing back in
216 2018-12-14T03:13:44  <sipa> gmaxwell: perhaps!
217 2018-12-14T03:14:50  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
218 2018-12-14T03:16:50  <gmaxwell> sipa: is there any way to arrange things so that no strong randomness will get gotten until one strengthening pass has happened?
219 2018-12-14T03:17:28  <sipa> gmaxwell: yes, already done
220 2018-12-14T03:17:40  <gmaxwell> sweet.
221 2018-12-14T03:17:46  <sipa> the first invocation will run with 'startup' seed level, which includes everything else
222 2018-12-14T03:18:40  <gmaxwell> we should like serialize out a random number on stop, and read it back in on start. (is there an existing dat file we could abuse for this, like peers or mempool :P ) so as to conserve our strenghtening efforts.
223 2018-12-14T03:46:07  *** rh0nj has quit IRC
224 2018-12-14T03:48:27  *** miknotauro has quit IRC
225 2018-12-14T03:48:50  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
226 2018-12-14T03:50:42  *** dviola has quit IRC
227 2018-12-14T03:54:08  *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
228 2018-12-14T04:00:36  *** profmac has quit IRC
229 2018-12-14T04:13:23  *** miknotauro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
230 2018-12-14T04:13:25  *** profmac has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
231 2018-12-14T04:32:34  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
232 2018-12-14T04:33:55  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
233 2018-12-14T04:59:20  <gmaxwell> Anyone heard any feedback on 0.17.1rc1?
234 2018-12-14T04:59:52  <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: ^ have you tested it to make sure it's all happy on ubuntu?
235 2018-12-14T05:00:01  *** SirPNut19 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
236 2018-12-14T05:00:04  <gmaxwell> warren: ^ have you tested it to make sure its all happy on the latest fedora?
237 2018-12-14T05:00:11  *** SirPNut19 has quit IRC
238 2018-12-14T05:06:25  *** grubles has quit IRC
239 2018-12-14T05:12:34  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
240 2018-12-14T05:12:34  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] bpay opened pull request #14956: [qt] Ensure tx send error highlight is visible (master...show-highlighted-field) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14956
241 2018-12-14T05:12:34  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
242 2018-12-14T05:20:07  *** grubles has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
243 2018-12-14T05:29:00  <fanquake> gmaxwell trying to collect test feedback in #14902
244 2018-12-14T05:29:02  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14902 | v0.17.1 testing · Issue #14902 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
245 2018-12-14T06:27:32  <kallewoof> Now that GetType() is gone in the source code, I'm not sure how to detect whether a serialization op is a hash operation or not. I need this for the block header in signet. Is there a new way to determine operation type somehow?
246 2018-12-14T06:34:49  <sipa> kallewoof: i don't see what you need it for
247 2018-12-14T06:35:19  <sipa> the hash should generally be the same as the network serialization
248 2018-12-14T06:35:42  <kallewoof> sipa: I include the signature when (de)serializing, but not when getting the hash. The signature is a payload of the block header, by necessity
249 2018-12-14T06:36:31  <kallewoof> I may be able to exclude the signature part when doing the actual sig check though. *checks*
250 2018-12-14T06:36:41  <sipa> kallewoof: that seems ugly
251 2018-12-14T06:36:53  <sipa> you can use a flag like the ones used for witness serialization
252 2018-12-14T06:37:01  <sipa> actually, you can use exactly the same flag
253 2018-12-14T06:37:09  <kallewoof> Oh!
254 2018-12-14T06:51:02  *** Zenton has quit IRC
255 2018-12-14T06:54:05  *** aelxsam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
256 2018-12-14T07:19:42  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
257 2018-12-14T07:22:18  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2018-12-14T07:22:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Empact opened pull request #14957: wallet: Initialize stop_block to nullptr in CWallet::ScanForWalletTransactions (master...stop-block-null) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14957
259 2018-12-14T07:22:18  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
260 2018-12-14T07:55:01  *** rh0nj has quit IRC
261 2018-12-14T07:56:07  *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262 2018-12-14T08:00:48  *** chenpo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
263 2018-12-14T08:09:08  <fanquake> Is anyone able to successfully compile on macOS with --with-sanitizers=thread ?
264 2018-12-14T08:11:52  <fanquake> Seeing issues when compiling libbitcoinconsensus.la, output here: https://gist.github.com/fanquake/79a9a12286d3cd2e4cb961c32a32dee3
265 2018-12-14T08:13:40  <fanquake> Also sipa, the new RNG changes build on macOS, but are failing on the thread sanitizer travis job: https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/467863069
266 2018-12-14T08:13:45  *** TheCharlatan has quit IRC
267 2018-12-14T08:14:40  *** TheCharlatan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
268 2018-12-14T08:19:06  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
269 2018-12-14T08:20:00  *** jungly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
270 2018-12-14T08:22:22  *** TheCharlatan has quit IRC
271 2018-12-14T08:22:51  *** TheCharlatan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272 2018-12-14T08:23:56  <gwillen> fanquake: I ran into something like this, it's hard to recall the details but I think they may be in scrollback here
273 2018-12-14T08:24:44  <gwillen> IIRC, the resolution in my case is that OS X libtool is somewhat elderly and was stripping linker flags it didn't recognize, inappropraitely
274 2018-12-14T08:27:05  *** bitcoinjunior has quit IRC
275 2018-12-14T08:27:08  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
276 2018-12-14T08:27:51  <gwillen> you can force libtool to pass through a flag by changing "-fblahblah" to "-XCClinker -fblahblah", or something to that effect
277 2018-12-14T08:27:58  <gwillen> (see https://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/Link-mode.html)
278 2018-12-14T08:28:14  <gwillen> I think you have to do that with -fsanitizer, assuming you're hitting the same issue I was
279 2018-12-14T08:28:47  <gwillen> which I faintly suspect you are because it's awfully similar
280 2018-12-14T08:29:29  <wumpus> so the reason that historical release notes are committed directly is that it is part of a long list of steps around a release, and other steps rely on it, for example creating a release on github has a link to the historical release notes in git which then need to have been committed; it's also simply a copy operation
281 2018-12-14T08:29:44  <fanquake> gwillen thanks, I'll check it out this arvo
282 2018-12-14T08:30:06  <gwillen> np, good lfuck
283 2018-12-14T08:30:11  <gwillen> er... luck*
284 2018-12-14T08:30:18  *** ppisati has quit IRC
285 2018-12-14T08:30:24  <wumpus> doesn't seem very useful to create a PR then as there's nothing to review, it's simply more work
286 2018-12-14T08:34:29  *** JackH has quit IRC
287 2018-12-14T08:37:46  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
288 2018-12-14T08:37:47  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof closed pull request #13430: use IsBlockPruned() where appropriate (master...use-isblockpruned) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13430
289 2018-12-14T08:37:47  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
290 2018-12-14T08:38:19  *** ppisati has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
291 2018-12-14T08:38:44  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
292 2018-12-14T08:41:49  *** miknotauro has quit IRC
293 2018-12-14T08:42:10  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
294 2018-12-14T08:42:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof closed pull request #14774: interface/wallet: get rid of missing initializer warnings (master...suppwarn-empty-constructor) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14774
295 2018-12-14T08:42:11  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
296 2018-12-14T08:42:43  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
297 2018-12-14T08:44:16  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
298 2018-12-14T08:50:39  *** belcher has quit IRC
299 2018-12-14T08:51:53  *** Murch has quit IRC
300 2018-12-14T08:53:27  *** rockhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
301 2018-12-14T08:53:28  *** victorSN has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302 2018-12-14T09:00:41  *** chenpo has quit IRC
303 2018-12-14T09:03:40  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
304 2018-12-14T09:07:45  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
305 2018-12-14T09:07:45  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj reopened pull request #14919: test: Prevent "Duplicate-wallet filename specified" (master...confirm_unloadwallet_done) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14919
306 2018-12-14T09:07:45  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
307 2018-12-14T09:09:07  *** promag has quit IRC
308 2018-12-14T09:10:56  *** booyah has quit IRC
309 2018-12-14T09:11:40  *** belcher has quit IRC
310 2018-12-14T09:19:39  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
311 2018-12-14T09:30:40  *** spinza has quit IRC
312 2018-12-14T09:33:34  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
313 2018-12-14T09:34:26  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
314 2018-12-14T09:34:49  *** aelxsam has quit IRC
315 2018-12-14T09:35:32  *** Zenton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
316 2018-12-14T09:35:37  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
317 2018-12-14T09:37:47  *** booyah has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
318 2018-12-14T09:41:08  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
319 2018-12-14T09:47:01  *** miknotauro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
320 2018-12-14T09:58:09  <fanquake> wumpus I've used GH's new (beta) issue "pinning" feature to pin #14902 & #14438 to the top of the issues page. Let me know if you object/can think of a third issue to add.
321 2018-12-14T09:58:11  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14902 | v0.17.1 testing · Issue #14902 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
322 2018-12-14T09:58:12  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14438 | Release schedule for 0.18.0 · Issue #14438 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
323 2018-12-14T09:58:43  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
324 2018-12-14T09:58:59  <fanquake> I feel having the current testing issue, and release schedule pinned at the top can makes sense
325 2018-12-14T09:59:49  <fanquake> If anything maybe it'll draw more attention to testing rc1
326 2018-12-14T10:05:05  *** ChA1NsAw has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
327 2018-12-14T10:12:12  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
328 2018-12-14T10:13:19  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
329 2018-12-14T10:15:27  *** spinza has quit IRC
330 2018-12-14T10:21:00  *** ChA1NsAw has quit IRC
331 2018-12-14T10:23:35  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332 2018-12-14T10:24:24  <wumpus> fanquake: makes sense, I think this is enough
333 2018-12-14T10:24:55  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
334 2018-12-14T10:36:54  *** CodeBlue1776 has quit IRC
335 2018-12-14T10:37:25  *** CodeBlue1776 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
336 2018-12-14T10:44:21  *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
337 2018-12-14T10:45:03  *** wxss has quit IRC
338 2018-12-14T10:47:12  <wumpus> so effectively (#14948), the unit tests can only run now with a filesystem locale that supports fancy unicode characters, which is not the default on BSD; this wa already the case for the Python tests
339 2018-12-14T10:47:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14948 | Error when running gmake check on NetBSD 8.0 · Issue #14948 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
340 2018-12-14T10:49:34  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
341 2018-12-14T10:49:49  <wumpus> it's somewhat annoying but also understandable, I don't think anyone *intends* to run a pure ASCII locale and only support ASCII filenames on the other hand the assumption that the locale always matches UTF-8 might be incorrect
342 2018-12-14T10:52:06  <wumpus> (or is always able to represent all unicode characters)
343 2018-12-14T10:55:51  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
344 2018-12-14T10:59:11  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
345 2018-12-14T11:04:13  <fanquake> wumpus got to have wallet names/dirs full of emojis
346 2018-12-14T11:08:10  <wumpus> U+1F45B.dat
347 2018-12-14T11:08:44  <fanquake> heh
348 2018-12-14T11:08:46  <wumpus> that makes me wonder, though, how does git handle filenames with emojis, would it refuse to check out the tree on those platforms?
349 2018-12-14T11:11:07  <wumpus> or what about programs such as firefox? is "ignore the filesystem locale and assume it's always UTF-8" valid behavior for modern software?
350 2018-12-14T11:14:09  <fanquake> wumpus we shall know shortly https://github.com/fanquake/fictional-giggle
351 2018-12-14T11:16:04  <promag> nice wallet fanquake
352 2018-12-14T11:17:38  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
353 2018-12-14T11:17:39  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] AkioNak closed pull request #14919: test: Prevent "Duplicate-wallet filename specified" (master...confirm_unloadwallet_done) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14919
354 2018-12-14T11:17:39  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
355 2018-12-14T11:17:56  <fanquake> promag thanks
356 2018-12-14T11:18:05  <fanquake> wumpus this is the result of a clone https://gist.github.com/fanquake/4bcd4c3b09958d1a709f97084fbda329
357 2018-12-14T11:18:24  *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
358 2018-12-14T11:18:43  <promag> not so pretty now
359 2018-12-14T11:19:56  *** wxss has quit IRC
360 2018-12-14T11:36:38  <wumpus> it changes the unknown unicode character to literal '????' oh my
361 2018-12-14T11:38:43  <wumpus> at least that's different from boost's handling which is to fail the conversion, not sure what's better...
362 2018-12-14T11:48:32  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
363 2018-12-14T11:51:18  <promag> disallow that madness?
364 2018-12-14T11:52:20  <wumpus> like what? reject non-utf locales at startup?
365 2018-12-14T11:53:14  <wumpus> I mean, I guess ASCII file system locale simply works as long as you don't try to use non-ASCII characters in filenames
366 2018-12-14T11:53:31  <wumpus> which might be fine for English/US people
367 2018-12-14T11:54:33  <promag> I don't know, but it's a headache having wallet names from the filename
368 2018-12-14T11:55:15  <wumpus> that's why I wondered how other software handles this, but replacing iwht ???? doesn't seem that useful either...
369 2018-12-14T11:57:01  *** rh0nj has quit IRC
370 2018-12-14T11:58:04  <promag> yeah, comes from "what the heck???? are you mad?"
371 2018-12-14T11:58:07  *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372 2018-12-14T12:01:42  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
373 2018-12-14T12:01:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #14958: qa: Remove race between conneting and shutdown on separate connections (master...2018-12-improve-shutdown-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14958
374 2018-12-14T12:01:42  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
375 2018-12-14T12:05:26  <wumpus> seems the options are https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14948#issuecomment-447305576
376 2018-12-14T12:14:51  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
377 2018-12-14T12:22:07  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
378 2018-12-14T12:46:38  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
379 2018-12-14T12:50:59  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
380 2018-12-14T13:04:26  *** promag has quit IRC
381 2018-12-14T13:10:55  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
382 2018-12-14T13:20:05  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
383 2018-12-14T13:20:09  *** ChA1NsAw has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
384 2018-12-14T13:52:05  *** CodeBlue1776 has quit IRC
385 2018-12-14T13:52:38  *** CodeBlue1776 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
386 2018-12-14T14:02:24  *** riemann_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
387 2018-12-14T14:05:38  *** riemann has quit IRC
388 2018-12-14T14:23:53  *** bralyclow2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
389 2018-12-14T14:23:53  *** bralyclow2 has quit IRC
390 2018-12-14T14:24:47  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
391 2018-12-14T14:27:28  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392 2018-12-14T14:29:34  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
393 2018-12-14T14:57:57  *** TheRec has quit IRC
394 2018-12-14T14:58:23  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
395 2018-12-14T15:00:02  *** fanquake has quit IRC
396 2018-12-14T15:01:24  *** Tralfaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
397 2018-12-14T15:06:37  *** TheRec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
398 2018-12-14T15:06:38  *** TheRec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
399 2018-12-14T15:07:48  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
400 2018-12-14T15:13:07  *** TheRec has quit IRC
401 2018-12-14T15:24:03  *** schmidty_ has quit IRC
402 2018-12-14T15:24:54  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
403 2018-12-14T15:40:46  *** TheRec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
404 2018-12-14T15:40:46  *** TheRec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
405 2018-12-14T15:44:57  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
406 2018-12-14T15:44:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #14960: lint/format-strings: Correctly exclude escaped percent symbols (master...bugfix_lint_fmtstr) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14960
407 2018-12-14T15:44:57  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
408 2018-12-14T15:47:19  *** shesek has quit IRC
409 2018-12-14T15:47:36  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
410 2018-12-14T15:47:36  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
411 2018-12-14T15:53:35  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
412 2018-12-14T15:54:23  <jnewbery> luke-jr: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/745 is ready for merge
413 2018-12-14T15:59:01  *** rh0nj has quit IRC
414 2018-12-14T16:00:08  *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
415 2018-12-14T16:03:48  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
416 2018-12-14T16:12:03  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
417 2018-12-14T16:13:21  *** TX1683 has quit IRC
418 2018-12-14T16:18:01  *** TX1683 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
419 2018-12-14T16:26:14  *** reardencode has quit IRC
420 2018-12-14T16:28:28  *** JackH has quit IRC
421 2018-12-14T16:40:17  *** reardencode has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
422 2018-12-14T16:46:00  *** promag has quit IRC
423 2018-12-14T17:08:53  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
424 2018-12-14T17:12:08  <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: I will do that today, that is a good point
425 2018-12-14T17:14:16  <BlueMatt> errr, or make ryanofsky do it
426 2018-12-14T17:14:47  *** Zenton has quit IRC
427 2018-12-14T17:16:57  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
428 2018-12-14T17:16:58  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ch4ot1c closed pull request #14601: [rpc] Descriptions: Consistent arg labels for types 'object', 'array', 'boolean', and 'string' (master...fix/rpc-arg-types) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14601
429 2018-12-14T17:16:58  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
430 2018-12-14T17:25:53  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
431 2018-12-14T17:30:26  *** promag has quit IRC
432 2018-12-14T17:35:28  *** riemann_ has quit IRC
433 2018-12-14T17:46:34  *** riemann_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
434 2018-12-14T17:52:26  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
435 2018-12-14T17:59:02  *** TX1683_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
436 2018-12-14T18:01:15  *** TX1683 has quit IRC
437 2018-12-14T18:01:16  *** TX1683_ is now known as TX1683
438 2018-12-14T18:01:16  *** Eagle[TM] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
439 2018-12-14T18:02:58  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
440 2018-12-14T18:03:12  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
441 2018-12-14T18:03:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7a30e0f6c544...b53573e5c6c7
442 2018-12-14T18:03:13  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master faa8311 MarcoFalke: Revert "tests: Support calling add_nodes more than once"...
443 2018-12-14T18:03:14  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa4b8c9 MarcoFalke: test: add_nodes can only be called once after set_test_params
444 2018-12-14T18:03:14  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b53573e MarcoFalke: Merge #14951: Revert "tests: Support calling add_nodes more than once"...
445 2018-12-14T18:03:15  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
446 2018-12-14T18:03:57  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
447 2018-12-14T18:03:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #14951: Revert "tests: Support calling add_nodes more than once" (master...Mf1812-TestrevertAddNodes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14951
448 2018-12-14T18:03:57  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
449 2018-12-14T18:06:22  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
450 2018-12-14T18:07:32  *** Eagle[TM] has quit IRC
451 2018-12-14T18:14:05  *** jungly has quit IRC
452 2018-12-14T18:31:35  *** spinza has quit IRC
453 2018-12-14T18:32:21  *** Murch has quit IRC
454 2018-12-14T18:34:33  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
455 2018-12-14T18:45:44  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
456 2018-12-14T18:48:04  *** Murch has quit IRC
457 2018-12-14T18:48:57  *** bitcoinjunior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
458 2018-12-14T18:48:59  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
459 2018-12-14T18:50:24  *** bitcoinsushi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
460 2018-12-14T18:53:15  *** bitcoinjunior has quit IRC
461 2018-12-14T18:54:00  <jnewbery> is today a wallet meeting day?
462 2018-12-14T18:54:43  <instagibbs> yes
463 2018-12-14T18:54:50  <sipa> yes
464 2018-12-14T18:56:19  <provoostenator> Indeed, it's that time of the fortnight.
465 2018-12-14T18:57:25  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
466 2018-12-14T18:58:08  <jnewbery> you're right, it has been fourteen nights since the last wallet meeting
467 2018-12-14T18:59:04  <sipa> might i add that in fact 336 hours have passed since our last colloquium on these matters
468 2018-12-14T18:59:15  <meshcollider> lol
469 2018-12-14T19:01:01  <meshcollider> sipa: want to host it? Or shall I
470 2018-12-14T19:01:31  <gwillen> wait wait... is "fortnight" from "fourteen"
471 2018-12-14T19:01:36  <gwillen> this feels obvious now but I had no idea
472 2018-12-14T19:01:36  <sipa> meshcollider: go ahead
473 2018-12-14T19:01:42  <meshcollider> #startmeeting
474 2018-12-14T19:01:42  <lightningbot> Meeting started Fri Dec 14 19:01:42 2018 UTC.  The chair is meshcollider. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
475 2018-12-14T19:01:42  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
476 2018-12-14T19:01:49  <sipa> gwillen: i always assumed that it did
477 2018-12-14T19:02:02  <jnewbery> feowertyne niht
478 2018-12-14T19:02:04  <meshcollider> #bitcoin-core-dev Wallet Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator aj Chris_Stewart_5 dongcarl gwillen jamesob ken281221 ryanofsky gleb
479 2018-12-14T19:02:29  <meshcollider> Ok topics?
480 2018-12-14T19:02:49  <kanzure> hi.
481 2018-12-14T19:02:58  <jnewbery> high priority for review?
482 2018-12-14T19:02:59  <sipa> yay, some stuff got merged
483 2018-12-14T19:03:07  <instagibbs> yes yay
484 2018-12-14T19:03:13  <provoostenator> Probably topics:
485 2018-12-14T19:03:18  <jnewbery> #14565 is wallety
486 2018-12-14T19:03:19  <provoostenator> 1. progress towards descriptor wallets
487 2018-12-14T19:03:23  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14565 | Overhaul importmulti logic by sipa · Pull Request #14565 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
488 2018-12-14T19:03:26  <provoostenator> 2. progrress towards hardware wallets
489 2018-12-14T19:03:46  <jnewbery> #11082 isn't wallety, but is blocking provoostenator's wallety PRs
490 2018-12-14T19:03:49  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11082 | Add new bitcoin_rw.conf file that is used for settings modified by this software itself by luke-jr · Pull Request #11082 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
491 2018-12-14T19:04:07  <achow101> hi
492 2018-12-14T19:04:30  <meshcollider> #topic high priority
493 2018-12-14T19:04:30  <provoostenator> jnewbery: it's blocking my future walety PR's (once I start on the GUI side of hardware wallets)
494 2018-12-14T19:05:18  <meshcollider> jnewbery: they are both already on the list right
495 2018-12-14T19:05:36  <provoostenator> Correct
496 2018-12-14T19:05:37  <jnewbery> 14565 looks good. It was missing tests, but now looks pretty well covered (thanks sipa!)
497 2018-12-14T19:05:47  <jnewbery> yes, both there already: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
498 2018-12-14T19:06:10  <provoostenator> Once that's in, I would say #14491 become priority.
499 2018-12-14T19:06:13  <meshcollider> Yes 14565 is very nearly ready I think
500 2018-12-14T19:06:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14491 | Allow descriptor imports with importmulti by MeshCollider · Pull Request #14491 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
501 2018-12-14T19:06:36  <jnewbery> reminder that 14565 blocks PRs from meshcollider and achow101, so it'd be nice to move it towards merge
502 2018-12-14T19:07:59  <meshcollider> Yes
503 2018-12-14T19:08:08  <meshcollider> I had one last little question on there
504 2018-12-14T19:09:23  <meshcollider> Is there anything else wallet related that should go onto high priority list now?
505 2018-12-14T19:10:08  <meshcollider> #topic progress towards descriptor wallets (provoostenator)
506 2018-12-14T19:10:33  * provoostenator looks as sipa
507 2018-12-14T19:10:39  <provoostenator> *at
508 2018-12-14T19:10:53  * sipa stares back
509 2018-12-14T19:11:21  <instagibbs> various descriptor support, like in listunspent?
510 2018-12-14T19:11:22  <meshcollider> sipa: have you thought more about it recently or been mostly focused on the PRNG stuff
511 2018-12-14T19:11:43  *** riemann_ has quit IRC
512 2018-12-14T19:11:53  <sipa> meshcollider: no, sorry - i've been busy with a few other projects
513 2018-12-14T19:12:36  <meshcollider> that's fine of course :) I guess that is your update provoostenator
514 2018-12-14T19:12:51  <meshcollider> There was an issue tracking which RPCs to add descriptor support to iirc
515 2018-12-14T19:12:53  <provoostenator> Well, I'd like to know what's next, but we do have enough review work already I guess.
516 2018-12-14T19:13:00  <sipa> next step is moving IsMine and related functions to be part of the wallet or some other abstraction, rather than free functions
517 2018-12-14T19:13:14  <sipa> so they can later be extended to be descriptor based
518 2018-12-14T19:13:20  <provoostenator> Ok
519 2018-12-14T19:13:27  <provoostenator> Anything about the Keypool we can improve?
520 2018-12-14T19:13:58  <meshcollider> I can take a stab at the ismine stuff
521 2018-12-14T19:14:01  <sipa> that needs to be part of the same interface, i expect
522 2018-12-14T19:14:05  <provoostenator> For example I'm a bit worried about #14075 interacting with the keypool from RPC code.
523 2018-12-14T19:14:08  <sipa> but maybe a later step
524 2018-12-14T19:14:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14075 | Import watch only pubkeys to the keypool if private keys are disabled by achow101 · Pull Request #14075 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
525 2018-12-14T19:14:39  <sipa> that looks like it may interact, indeed
526 2018-12-14T19:14:57  <provoostenator> Though it can be refactored after that, it's nice if we at least have an idea of what the final thing needs to look like.
527 2018-12-14T19:15:11  <meshcollider> So instead of the keypool being generated by a single descriptor, it will have imports in it too
528 2018-12-14T19:15:48  <provoostenator> Right now the keypool, when it expands itself, makes strong assumptions about the wallet and just uses the HD structure.
529 2018-12-14T19:16:14  <provoostenator> Whereas what we want probably is for the keypool (or something like it) to expand a specific descriptor.
530 2018-12-14T19:16:27  <sipa> well there won't be a keypool anymore
531 2018-12-14T19:16:43  <sipa> it's just a descriptor, which some entries cached, and some not (yet)
532 2018-12-14T19:17:04  <sipa> the hard part is integrating the existing logic into such a structure
533 2018-12-14T19:17:15  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
534 2018-12-14T19:17:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/b53573e5c6c7...6723d8e3a694
535 2018-12-14T19:17:16  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa30a0e MarcoFalke: test: mempool_persist: Verify prioritization is dumped correctly
536 2018-12-14T19:17:17  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6723d8e MarcoFalke: Merge #14931: test: mempool_persist: Verify prioritization is dumped correctly...
537 2018-12-14T19:17:17  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
538 2018-12-14T19:17:52  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
539 2018-12-14T19:17:52  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #14931: test: mempool_persist: Verify prioritization is dumped correctly (master...Mf1812-testMempoolPrio) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14931
540 2018-12-14T19:17:52  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
541 2018-12-14T19:18:12  <provoostenator> Any prose or pseudo-code describing how such integration would work is most welcome (in a Github issue).
542 2018-12-14T19:18:36  <sipa> i think we'll want to see the existing keypool/keys/... as a special "legacy" descriptor that doesn't really have a text representation
543 2018-12-14T19:19:00  <meshcollider> sipa: to cache them, would you expand() them with the cache function during the existin topup function
544 2018-12-14T19:19:20  <sipa> meshcollider: right, exactly
545 2018-12-14T19:19:43  <provoostenator> Why wouldn't it have a text representation?
546 2018-12-14T19:20:10  <sipa> provoostenator: well the text representation is the entire set of keys, pubkeys, scripts, hdpaths, ... that are currently stored in the wallet :)
547 2018-12-14T19:20:26  <sipa> i guess you could dump it in hex or something
548 2018-12-14T19:20:58  <provoostenator> A migration wizard should be able to, at least for standard wallets, turn that into a series of regular descriptors no?
549 2018-12-14T19:21:15  <sipa> that may be possible, but i don't think that's the priority now
550 2018-12-14T19:21:50  <meshcollider> It'd be quicker and safer to just move-only the code type of thing into legacy functions
551 2018-12-14T19:21:56  <sipa> (because then you have to worry about all existing RPCs, and their effect on those descriptors)
552 2018-12-14T19:22:11  <provoostenator> Right, just depends on what's easier in practice. Personally I suspect it'll be easier to make the wallet _only_ have descriptors, just from a writing tests point of view.
553 2018-12-14T19:22:22  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
554 2018-12-14T19:22:23  <sipa> i think it's not too much work to just have a legacy subsystem, and a new system - and a wallet can contain just one of them, or both
555 2018-12-14T19:22:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/6723d8e3a694...9133227298ad
556 2018-12-14T19:22:24  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c84c2b8 practicalswift: tests: Test for expected return values when calling functions returning a success code
557 2018-12-14T19:22:24  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9133227 MarcoFalke: Merge #14935: tests: Test for expected return values when calling functions returning a success code...
558 2018-12-14T19:22:25  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
559 2018-12-14T19:22:33  <provoostenator> But the RPC thing could be a pain yes.
560 2018-12-14T19:22:34  <sipa> maybe we even want to forbid mixing them in one wallet
561 2018-12-14T19:23:06  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562 2018-12-14T19:23:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #14935: tests: Test for expected return values when calling functions returning a success code (master...test-return-values) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14935
563 2018-12-14T19:23:06  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
564 2018-12-14T19:23:07  <sipa> but forced migration may getting it accepted much harder
565 2018-12-14T19:23:10  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
566 2018-12-14T19:23:58  <sipa> so my idea is that every record is a descriptor + some metadata (like gap limit, whether it's change or no), plus some cached keys... and there can be a special "legacy" record that's just all the existing keypool/ismine logic
567 2018-12-14T19:24:00  <phantomcircuit> the rw config is mostly because the qt stuff writes to random places for settings right?
568 2018-12-14T19:24:14  <provoostenator> So then you might end up with two seperate wallet systems and a migration tool, where the old system only gets maintenance updates to be able to read from it.
569 2018-12-14T19:24:24  <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: random? not really; just different from bitcoind
570 2018-12-14T19:24:27  <sipa> provoostenator: maybe
571 2018-12-14T19:24:40  <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, i mean it writes to reg on windows
572 2018-12-14T19:24:45  <phantomcircuit> which is super annoying to change
573 2018-12-14T19:24:52  <sipa> phantomcircuit: please stick to topic
574 2018-12-14T19:24:55  <meshcollider> phantomcircuit: we are in a wallet meeting btw :)
575 2018-12-14T19:26:04  <meshcollider> We could open an issue to discuss the alternative approaches, or just discuss which is easier as we start actually writing the code
576 2018-12-14T19:26:09  <provoostenator> A new wallet subsystem might also let us cleanly long-term deprecate some wallet RPC methods and replace them with clean ones, that happen to support descriptors?
577 2018-12-14T19:26:18  <sipa> provoostenator: yup
578 2018-12-14T19:26:19  <provoostenator> And maybe move to Sqlite3 at the same time.
579 2018-12-14T19:26:36  <sipa> i think that's completely orthogonal
580 2018-12-14T19:26:49  <provoostenator> Could be, yes.
581 2018-12-14T19:27:11  <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: I answered in #bitcoin fyi
582 2018-12-14T19:28:05  <provoostenator> Anyway, we have some next actions now to continue progress, maybe next topic?
583 2018-12-14T19:28:37  <meshcollider> #topic progress towards hardware wallets (provoostenator)
584 2018-12-14T19:28:46  <jnewbery> IsMine moved from wallet to common here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a25a4f5b04c3e045557e9e7e807b2af74ad75128 . Was that just because of the way the multisig and P2SH tests are constructed (ie could those tests just be rewritten)?
585 2018-12-14T19:28:54  <provoostenator> Now that #14491 has been rebased, the `hww` branch I'm building off should also soon be rebased.
586 2018-12-14T19:28:57  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14491 | Allow descriptor imports with importmulti by MeshCollider · Pull Request #14491 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
587 2018-12-14T19:29:02  <provoostenator> #14912
588 2018-12-14T19:29:04  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14912 | [WIP] External signer support (e.g. hardware wallet) by Sjors · Pull Request #14912 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
589 2018-12-14T19:29:27  <provoostenator> I'll do some cleaning up of my ugly string concatenation descriptor code after rebase.
590 2018-12-14T19:29:54  <provoostenator> People can already test it though. It compiles and actually works (at your own risk, so use testnet).
591 2018-12-14T19:30:14  <meshcollider> jnewbery: looks like it?
592 2018-12-14T19:30:47  <provoostenator> As in, you can create a new wallet, put read-only keys in it, show address on the device and spend coins. Using achow101's HWI library to talk to the device.
593 2018-12-14T19:31:28  <provoostenator> So the idea is that users would download that library seperately and just launch bitcoind -signer=../HWI/hwi.py (or some other tool). That way we don't ahve to review individual hardware wallet code.
594 2018-12-14T19:31:49  <meshcollider> provoostenator: cool \o/
595 2018-12-14T19:32:30  <provoostenator> With very little code changes this could also work against a gRPC server, but there's some security trade-offs compared to calling commands. We talked about that a few weeks ago.
596 2018-12-14T19:33:11  <provoostenator> I am trying to keep it generic enough to keep that possible, so e.g. the -signer= command could later also be a URL. But for now, it just executes a command and parses the JSON that command spits out to stdout.
597 2018-12-14T19:34:01  <provoostenator> Next step for me is to work on GUI support for this. But there's already a pile of prerequisite stuff to review, so don't worry too much about that :-)
598 2018-12-14T19:34:21  <provoostenator> I personally just like to see the big picture in action.
599 2018-12-14T19:34:27  <meshcollider> Yes let's not stack too many PRs at once again ;)
600 2018-12-14T19:35:47  <provoostenator> For GUI proof of concept I'd just like to nag promag about #13100, which we want anyway.
601 2018-12-14T19:35:50  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13100 | gui: Add dynamic wallets support by promag · Pull Request #13100 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
602 2018-12-14T19:36:22  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
603 2018-12-14T19:36:24  <provoostenator> (that's all I have)
604 2018-12-14T19:37:52  <MarcoFalke> wget https://bitcointools.jonasschnelli.ch/data/builds/914/    ... failed: Connection refused
605 2018-12-14T19:37:53  <meshcollider> that PR hasn't been rebased for 2 months, perhaps you'd like to take it up and rebased it yourself?
606 2018-12-14T19:37:55  <MarcoFalke> ^ jonasschnelli
607 2018-12-14T19:38:06  <provoostenator> He actually said he's working on it soon.
608 2018-12-14T19:38:14  <meshcollider> Oh ok
609 2018-12-14T19:38:48  <provoostenator> I think he needs this to go in first #14573, that's almost mergeable.
610 2018-12-14T19:38:49  <meshcollider> I'm happy to review it as soon as its ready, its already tagged for 0.18
611 2018-12-14T19:38:50  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14573 | qt: Add Window menu by promag · Pull Request #14573 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
612 2018-12-14T19:39:44  <meshcollider> Are there any other topics?
613 2018-12-14T19:40:04  <provoostenator> luke-jr phantomcircuit did you want to discuss rw_config stuff?
614 2018-12-14T19:40:31  <provoostenator> I noticed the rabase, so I'll rebase my Settings migration stuff as well.
615 2018-12-14T19:40:47  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
616 2018-12-14T19:40:47  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ch4ot1c opened pull request #14961: [docs] Root readme improvements (master...improvements/readme) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14961
617 2018-12-14T19:40:47  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
618 2018-12-14T19:40:56  <provoostenator> But it's not very wallety.
619 2018-12-14T19:41:36  <meshcollider> Looks like that might be it for today
620 2018-12-14T19:41:43  <meshcollider> Thanks provoostenator :)
621 2018-12-14T19:41:51  <meshcollider> #endmeeting
622 2018-12-14T19:41:51  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Fri Dec 14 19:41:51 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
623 2018-12-14T19:41:51  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-12-14-19.01.html
624 2018-12-14T19:41:51  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-12-14-19.01.txt
625 2018-12-14T19:41:51  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-12-14-19.01.log.html
626 2018-12-14T19:42:35  <jnewbery> good colloquium!
627 2018-12-14T19:43:02  <provoostenator> By the way, it would be nice if bitcoincore.org and such sites could link to the IRC logs. Many places now point to BotBot and Google can't find these other URLs either.
628 2018-12-14T19:43:13  <provoostenator> jnewbery: splendit!
629 2018-12-14T19:43:22  <jnewbery> I expect some/most people won't be around for the next scheduled one (Dec 28th)
630 2018-12-14T19:43:39  <provoostenator> 35C3
631 2018-12-14T19:43:48  <jnewbery> I almost certainly won't be online for it
632 2018-12-14T19:44:02  <provoostenator> Maybe bump that, and thus the whole schedule, by one week?
633 2018-12-14T19:44:03  <luke-jr> might make sense to cancel meetings during Christmas
634 2018-12-14T19:44:06  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
635 2018-12-14T19:44:39  <sipa> provoostenator: will you be at 35c3?
636 2018-12-14T19:45:42  <jnewbery> provoostenator: aj was looking at uploading the IRC logs onto bitcoincore.org every week. Not sure what the progress is on that.
637 2018-12-14T19:45:42  <provoostenator> That also moves closer to new moon.
638 2018-12-14T19:45:56  <provoostenator> sipa: I can neither confirm nor deny that :-)
639 2018-12-14T19:53:06  *** timothy has quit IRC
640 2018-12-14T19:53:22  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
641 2018-12-14T19:54:26  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642 2018-12-14T19:54:51  *** shesek has quit IRC
643 2018-12-14T19:55:14  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
644 2018-12-14T19:56:55  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
645 2018-12-14T19:57:52  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
646 2018-12-14T19:59:35  *** riemann_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
647 2018-12-14T20:00:03  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
648 2018-12-14T20:01:02  *** rh0nj has quit IRC
649 2018-12-14T20:01:03  *** shesek has quit IRC
650 2018-12-14T20:01:25  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
651 2018-12-14T20:02:07  *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652 2018-12-14T20:02:51  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
653 2018-12-14T20:03:05  *** bitcoinsushi has quit IRC
654 2018-12-14T20:09:46  *** shesek has quit IRC
655 2018-12-14T20:11:24  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
656 2018-12-14T20:11:24  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
657 2018-12-14T20:11:57  *** shesek has quit IRC
658 2018-12-14T20:13:01  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
659 2018-12-14T20:13:57  *** riemann_ has quit IRC
660 2018-12-14T20:16:58  *** shesek has quit IRC
661 2018-12-14T20:17:21  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662 2018-12-14T20:21:09  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
663 2018-12-14T20:22:40  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
664 2018-12-14T20:22:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #13200: Process logs in a separate thread (master...2018-05-asynclog) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13200
665 2018-12-14T20:22:40  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
666 2018-12-14T20:23:56  *** michaels_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
667 2018-12-14T20:28:15  *** michaels_ has quit IRC
668 2018-12-14T20:29:35  *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
669 2018-12-14T20:30:56  *** shesek has quit IRC
670 2018-12-14T20:32:27  *** wxss has quit IRC
671 2018-12-14T20:32:58  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672 2018-12-14T20:32:58  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
673 2018-12-14T20:49:29  *** chenpo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
674 2018-12-14T20:50:38  <instagibbs> how are subtrees updated? The linter logic is looking for a template of a commit style, I presume generated by a script?
675 2018-12-14T20:50:55  <instagibbs> Can't find resource in contributor docs
676 2018-12-14T20:52:32  <sipa> git subtree update :p
677 2018-12-14T20:53:33  <sipa> git subtree merge --squash, actually
678 2018-12-14T20:54:04  *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
679 2018-12-14T20:56:48  <instagibbs> after a few hours of course I find the answer as soon as I ask via google :)
680 2018-12-14T20:56:56  <instagibbs> need CSV on my irc questions
681 2018-12-14T20:57:53  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
682 2018-12-14T20:57:55  *** bitcoinjunior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
683 2018-12-14T21:00:26  *** bitcoinsushi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
684 2018-12-14T21:02:07  *** bitcoinjunior has quit IRC
685 2018-12-14T21:05:22  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
686 2018-12-14T21:12:36  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
687 2018-12-14T21:25:39  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
688 2018-12-14T21:27:06  *** shesek has quit IRC
689 2018-12-14T21:27:58  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
690 2018-12-14T21:27:58  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
691 2018-12-14T21:29:47  *** promag has quit IRC
692 2018-12-14T21:33:12  <sipa> anyone know why https://ci.appveyor.com/project/DrahtBot/bitcoin/builds/21022194 (#14955) is failing?
693 2018-12-14T21:33:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14955 | Switch all RNG code to the built-in PRNG by sipa · Pull Request #14955 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
694 2018-12-14T21:34:09  <sipa> (i've restarted it 3 times, same error each time)
695 2018-12-14T21:35:33  *** chenpo has quit IRC
696 2018-12-14T21:50:23  *** Zenton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
697 2018-12-14T21:58:40  *** bitcoinsushi has quit IRC
698 2018-12-14T21:59:43  <sipa> gmaxwell: using sha256d4 (or even simple sha256) in the rng code would require the sha256 to auto-initialize on first use rather than using a dedicated initialize function
699 2018-12-14T22:01:22  <sipa> that doesn't seem too hard (c++11 has std::call_once for exactly that purpose), but maybe more than we want in one PR
700 2018-12-14T22:02:32  <gmaxwell> oh damn, we need some init crap to sniff hardware support.
701 2018-12-14T22:02:48  <gmaxwell> sipa: Well it could directly call the C version if not initilized.
702 2018-12-14T22:06:56  <sipa> it's not hard to do
703 2018-12-14T22:07:23  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
704 2018-12-14T22:07:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #14963: doc: Add comment to cs_main and mempool::cs (master...Mf1812-docValLocks) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14963
705 2018-12-14T22:07:23  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
706 2018-12-14T22:07:55  *** fasefwef has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
707 2018-12-14T22:10:45  <sipa> std::call_once seems to take 2ns here
708 2018-12-14T22:11:06  *** fasefwef has quit IRC
709 2018-12-14T22:11:38  <sipa> that seems acceptable as an overhead to the SHA256 functions (it's equivalent to adding less than a byte of input on average)
710 2018-12-14T22:11:51  <gmaxwell> well if we care about 2ns we could make the rng state hasher sha256, reduce the chained state size a little and get that time back, ...
711 2018-12-14T22:12:35  <sipa> no, i don't mean for the RNG
712 2018-12-14T22:12:46  <sipa> this would be overhead added to every invocation of SHA256 functions
713 2018-12-14T22:13:31  <gmaxwell> oh. I was thinking you'd just put the call once in the rng functions ahead of the sha256d64 use.
714 2018-12-14T22:13:49  <gmaxwell> but right okay, only half paying attention.
715 2018-12-14T22:13:57  <sipa> that would... probably work
716 2018-12-14T22:14:23  <sipa> an alternative is making sure no global constructors use the RNG
717 2018-12-14T22:14:37  <sipa> that would have no overhead at all, but is pretty inconvenient for some things
718 2018-12-14T22:14:58  <gmaxwell> it's also unfortunate that we couldn't make that compile-time fail.
719 2018-12-14T22:15:10  <sipa> yes
720 2018-12-14T22:16:13  <sipa> for the RNG itself, currently it's SHA512(new_entropy || previous_state), which is split into rng_output and next_state
721 2018-12-14T22:16:44  <sipa> which means it's reducing to 256 bits of entropy after every extraction, for no go reason
722 2018-12-14T22:17:13  <gmaxwell> well I like not keeping around the randomness we just output, it's a liability in memory.
723 2018-12-14T22:17:25  <sipa> obviously
724 2018-12-14T22:18:09  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
725 2018-12-14T22:19:48  *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
726 2018-12-14T22:21:02  <gmaxwell> it seems kinda odd to me that we could end up with with two strenghteners going at once, but I think completely harmless.
727 2018-12-14T22:21:03  *** bralyclow2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
728 2018-12-14T22:21:37  *** spinza has quit IRC
729 2018-12-14T22:22:11  *** bralyclow2 has quit IRC
730 2018-12-14T22:23:14  *** bralyclow2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
731 2018-12-14T22:23:39  *** bralyclow2 has quit IRC
732 2018-12-14T22:30:58  *** ChA1NsAw has quit IRC
733 2018-12-14T22:34:44  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
734 2018-12-14T22:34:55  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
735 2018-12-14T22:41:47  *** thoreg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
736 2018-12-14T22:42:20  *** thoreg has quit IRC
737 2018-12-14T23:07:29  *** bbq has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
738 2018-12-14T23:08:13  *** bbq has left #bitcoin-core-dev
739 2018-12-14T23:14:30  *** fabianfabian has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
740 2018-12-14T23:14:51  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
741 2018-12-14T23:14:51  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #14964: test: Fix race in mempool_accept (master...Mf1812-testRaceMempoolAccept) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14964
742 2018-12-14T23:14:51  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
743 2018-12-14T23:23:13  *** kmels has quit IRC
744 2018-12-14T23:27:01  *** bralyclow has quit IRC
745 2018-12-14T23:33:58  *** bitcoinjunior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
746 2018-12-14T23:34:59  *** bitcoinsushi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
747 2018-12-14T23:38:31  *** bitcoinjunior has quit IRC
748 2018-12-14T23:39:07  *** bitcoinsushi has quit IRC
749 2018-12-14T23:45:15  *** Tralfaz has quit IRC
750 2018-12-14T23:46:12  *** Tralfaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
751 2018-12-14T23:48:42  *** jarthur has quit IRC
752 2018-12-14T23:51:21  *** Tralfaz has quit IRC
753 2018-12-14T23:55:57  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev