12019-04-02T00:01:58 *** StopAndDecrypt_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22019-04-02T00:02:51 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
32019-04-02T00:04:43 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
42019-04-02T00:05:43 *** spinza has quit IRC
52019-04-02T00:12:40 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62019-04-02T00:15:14 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
72019-04-02T00:39:10 *** MrPaz has quit IRC
82019-04-02T00:43:19 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
92019-04-02T01:07:53 *** promag has quit IRC
102019-04-02T01:08:25 *** MrPaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112019-04-02T01:35:46 *** jhfrontz has quit IRC
122019-04-02T02:01:50 *** MrPaz has quit IRC
132019-04-02T02:08:34 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142019-04-02T02:12:58 *** promag has quit IRC
152019-04-02T03:03:02 *** Krellan has quit IRC
162019-04-02T03:20:04 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172019-04-02T03:53:03 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
182019-04-02T03:54:33 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
192019-04-02T04:49:26 *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202019-04-02T05:14:54 *** dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212019-04-02T05:17:10 *** dviola has left #bitcoin-core-dev
222019-04-02T05:24:53 *** rex4539 has quit IRC
232019-04-02T05:25:32 *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242019-04-02T05:26:32 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
252019-04-02T05:27:03 *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262019-04-02T05:49:34 *** _Sam-- has quit IRC
272019-04-02T05:57:11 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282019-04-02T06:01:36 *** Krellan has quit IRC
292019-04-02T06:04:39 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302019-04-02T06:09:04 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312019-04-02T06:09:12 *** Krellan has quit IRC
322019-04-02T06:11:51 *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332019-04-02T06:14:03 *** promag has quit IRC
342019-04-02T06:15:47 *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
352019-04-02T06:37:46 *** droark has quit IRC
362019-04-02T07:04:15 *** lnostdal has quit IRC
372019-04-02T07:05:58 *** dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
382019-04-02T07:17:43 *** dermoth has quit IRC
392019-04-02T07:18:08 *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402019-04-02T07:18:52 *** ghost43 has quit IRC
412019-04-02T07:20:10 *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
422019-04-02T07:22:49 *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
432019-04-02T07:39:55 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
442019-04-02T07:39:55 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #15714: tests: Volkswagen (master...1904-testsVolkswagen) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15714
452019-04-02T07:39:56 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
462019-04-02T07:51:54 *** shtirlic has quit IRC
472019-04-02T07:59:16 *** rex4539 has quit IRC
482019-04-02T07:59:17 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
492019-04-02T08:02:33 *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
502019-04-02T08:03:36 *** Krellan has quit IRC
512019-04-02T08:05:25 *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522019-04-02T08:14:23 *** shtirlic has quit IRC
532019-04-02T08:15:20 *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542019-04-02T08:18:46 *** mn94958858 has quit IRC
552019-04-02T08:18:46 *** mn949588 has quit IRC
562019-04-02T08:18:46 *** mn94958862 has quit IRC
572019-04-02T08:19:03 *** mn9495885 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
582019-04-02T08:19:04 *** mn94958863 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
592019-04-02T08:19:04 *** mn949588 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602019-04-02T08:24:24 *** StopAndDecrypt_ has quit IRC
612019-04-02T08:30:51 *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622019-04-02T08:55:37 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
632019-04-02T09:23:17 *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642019-04-02T09:31:38 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652019-04-02T10:02:12 *** spinza has quit IRC
662019-04-02T10:18:46 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672019-04-02T10:28:16 *** shtirlic has quit IRC
682019-04-02T10:29:45 *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692019-04-02T10:59:29 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
702019-04-02T11:04:50 *** ossifrage has quit IRC
712019-04-02T11:14:39 *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
722019-04-02T11:34:23 *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
732019-04-02T11:35:09 <fanquake> sipa / wumpus could you block Stivovo from GH. They are spamming nonsense in multiple threads.
742019-04-02T11:36:40 *** Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW
752019-04-02T11:38:37 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
762019-04-02T11:38:37 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] scravy closed pull request #15715: Better support for mainframes and EBCDIC users in general (master...cater-mainframes-and-ebcdic-users) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15715
772019-04-02T11:38:42 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
782019-04-02T11:38:47 <wumpus> fanquake: yes, probably for the best
792019-04-02T11:38:52 *** elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
802019-04-02T11:40:44 <fanquake> missed some discussion last week, but must be close to an rc3 post #15691.
812019-04-02T11:40:46 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15691 | 0.18: rc3 backports by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #15691 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
822019-04-02T11:41:24 <wumpus> yes, looking at that one
832019-04-02T11:42:56 <wumpus> I think you're right
842019-04-02T11:43:12 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
852019-04-02T11:49:01 *** dviola has quit IRC
862019-04-02T12:03:39 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
872019-04-02T12:03:41 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 9 commits to 0.18: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7bcf90cb01aa...32ec90085044
882019-04-02T12:03:41 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.18 6355214 Pieter Wuille: Simplify orphan processing in preparation for interruptibility
892019-04-02T12:03:42 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.18 bb60121 Pieter Wuille: [MOVEONLY] Move processing of orphan queue to ProcessOrphanTx
902019-04-02T12:03:43 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.18 50c56f2 Pieter Wuille: Interrupt orphan processing after every transaction
912019-04-02T12:03:45 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
922019-04-02T12:03:59 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
932019-04-02T12:03:59 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #15691: 0.18: rc3 backports (0.18...1904-18B) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15691
942019-04-02T12:04:04 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
952019-04-02T12:04:17 <wumpus> going to tag rc3 in a bit
962019-04-02T12:06:31 <fanquake> \o/
972019-04-02T12:06:36 *** spinza has quit IRC
982019-04-02T12:09:22 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
992019-04-02T12:16:33 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002019-04-02T12:21:17 *** rex4539 has quit IRC
1012019-04-02T12:26:20 *** spaced0ut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022019-04-02T12:38:39 *** shtirlic has quit IRC
1032019-04-02T12:39:06 *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042019-04-02T12:46:22 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1052019-04-02T12:46:22 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed tag v0.18.0rc3: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/v0.18.0rc3
1062019-04-02T12:46:23 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1072019-04-02T12:49:12 *** shesek has quit IRC
1082019-04-02T12:49:50 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1092019-04-02T12:51:02 <wumpus> ^^
1102019-04-02T12:52:42 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1112019-04-02T12:56:10 *** obsrver has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122019-04-02T13:01:13 <fanquake> Am building. Having some connection issues with archive.ubuntu.com
1132019-04-02T13:01:52 *** peter__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1142019-04-02T13:06:17 *** peter__ has quit IRC
1152019-04-02T13:11:08 <wumpus> hopefully this is the last major release that needs to rely on that
1162019-04-02T13:25:22 *** promag has quit IRC
1172019-04-02T13:32:36 *** schmidty has quit IRC
1182019-04-02T13:35:35 *** schmidty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1192019-04-02T13:35:35 *** schmidty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202019-04-02T13:36:34 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212019-04-02T13:41:05 *** Krellan has quit IRC
1222019-04-02T13:46:54 <Sentineo> g8, building, too
1232019-04-02T13:47:33 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242019-04-02T13:51:36 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252019-04-02T13:52:28 *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262019-04-02T13:56:33 *** promag has quit IRC
1272019-04-02T14:15:39 *** Tralfaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1282019-04-02T14:24:03 <jamesob> can we maybe consider putting something in the developer guide about line length? some of these >120 col lines make review in github a pain
1292019-04-02T14:24:04 * jamesob ducks
1302019-04-02T14:33:04 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1312019-04-02T14:33:06 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5a2a9b5b0603...8dbb2c5e6704
1322019-04-02T14:33:06 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f516245 John Newbery: [rpc] remove resendwallettransactions RPC
1332019-04-02T14:33:07 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ea1a2d8 John Newbery: [wallet] Remove ResendWalletTransactionsBefore
1342019-04-02T14:33:08 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8dbb2c5 MarcoFalke: Merge #15680: Remove resendwallettransactions RPC method
1352019-04-02T14:33:10 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1362019-04-02T14:33:56 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1372019-04-02T14:33:57 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15680: Remove resendwallettransactions RPC method (master...2019_03_remove_resendwallettransactions) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15680
1382019-04-02T14:34:07 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1392019-04-02T14:34:24 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1402019-04-02T14:34:24 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] practicalswift opened pull request #15721: validation: Check absence of locks at compile-time (LOCKS_EXCLUDED) in addition to the current run-time checking (AssertLockNotHeld) (master...negative-locking-annotations) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15721
1412019-04-02T14:34:36 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1422019-04-02T14:39:56 *** user_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432019-04-02T14:41:22 *** user_ has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1442019-04-02T14:42:00 *** kljasdfvv has quit IRC
1452019-04-02T14:42:15 *** jonatack has quit IRC
1462019-04-02T14:43:39 *** kljasdfvv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1472019-04-02T14:47:02 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1482019-04-02T14:47:02 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8dbb2c5e6704...2c364fde423e
1492019-04-02T14:47:03 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ac67582 fanquake: depends: latest rapidcheck, use INSTALL_ALL_EXTRAS
1502019-04-02T14:47:03 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2c364fd MarcoFalke: Merge #14853: depends: latest RapidCheck
1512019-04-02T14:47:15 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1522019-04-02T14:47:32 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1532019-04-02T14:47:32 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #14853: depends: latest RapidCheck (master...latest-rapidcheck) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14853
1542019-04-02T14:47:33 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1552019-04-02T14:52:32 *** ossifrage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1562019-04-02T14:57:58 <wumpus> jamesob: 120 as max line length suggestion sounds fine to me
1572019-04-02T14:58:29 <wumpus> jamesob: though it will probably run into tons of discussion, which is why no one never did that
1582019-04-02T14:59:01 <jamesob> I think "causes the need to scroll horizontally on github" is a pretty good standard for too long, so I'll just measure whatever that amounts to in terms of column length
1592019-04-02T15:09:30 *** conman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602019-04-02T15:19:03 <wumpus> depends on your screen width and font size
1612019-04-02T15:25:01 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1622019-04-02T15:25:05 *** morcos has quit IRC
1632019-04-02T15:34:24 *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642019-04-02T15:44:22 *** Shivendra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1652019-04-02T15:48:13 *** Randolf has quit IRC
1662019-04-02T15:49:51 <emilr> even 120 seems a bit too much, it's not about screen or font size, our brains are used with reading books 80c width lenght for hundreds of years
1672019-04-02T15:50:55 <dongcarl> Looking at #15717, not too familiar with how licenses work but it seems that libnatpmp has this license: https://pastebin.com/a6umcv4s
1682019-04-02T15:50:58 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15717 | Changes to support NAT-PMP by MishraShivendra · Pull Request #15717 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1692019-04-02T15:51:48 <dongcarl> Not sure if this should be subtree'd, used as a dependency or something else, and how the LICENSE would affect that.
1702019-04-02T15:52:19 *** Shivendra has quit IRC
1712019-04-02T15:52:28 <dongcarl> Perhaps someone could comment on the issue
1722019-04-02T15:57:57 *** d_t has quit IRC
1732019-04-02T16:06:07 <Sentineo> fanquake: you mean the download is really slow? cause it takes ages to get anything from archive.ubuntu.com.
1742019-04-02T16:30:41 <wumpus> emilr: sigh, this is why we don't bother
1752019-04-02T16:32:07 <wumpus> dongcarl: that's the 3-clause BSD license, should be compatible with the MIT one
1762019-04-02T16:32:37 <wumpus> though not 100% sure tbh
1772019-04-02T16:35:19 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1782019-04-02T16:35:19 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #15712: Update Copyright -> 2019 (master...copyright-2019) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15712
1792019-04-02T16:35:25 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1802019-04-02T16:40:57 <dongcarl> wumpus: I guess the question is if we should subtree it or use it as a dependency? Right now it seems like the PR author wants to subtree it
1812019-04-02T16:41:16 <sipa> it's not a subtree
1822019-04-02T16:41:30 <sipa> he's copying the code with some modifications
1832019-04-02T16:41:40 <wumpus> it's a minimal amount of code, I think it would make sense to subtree, though I'm sure this is going to give tons of discussion
1842019-04-02T16:41:49 <sipa> the upstream code hasn't been touched since 2011
1852019-04-02T16:41:55 <wumpus> whoa
1862019-04-02T16:42:08 <wumpus> that is a big red flag
1872019-04-02T16:42:47 <wumpus> this effectively means we're going to have to maintain it ourselves
1882019-04-02T16:42:49 <dongcarl> actual upstream: http://miniupnp.free.fr/files/
1892019-04-02T16:43:16 <dongcarl> changelog says haven't been touched since 2013
1902019-04-02T16:43:30 <wumpus> if we have that *and* potential license issues
1912019-04-02T16:44:34 <sipa> if it does what it's designed to do, there isn't much maintainanxe to be expected
1922019-04-02T16:45:02 <dongcarl> protocol seems quite minimal: http://miniupnp.free.fr/nat-pmp.html
1932019-04-02T16:45:04 <wumpus> it's still scope creep, but ok
1942019-04-02T16:45:20 <wumpus> if someone commits to maintaining it it's fine with me, I'm just not going to do it
1952019-04-02T16:45:45 <sipa> fair
1962019-04-02T16:46:08 <sipa> regarding licence issues... i think we just need to list it in asset-attributions
1972019-04-02T16:46:12 <sipa> but ianal
1982019-04-02T16:47:15 <sipa> i have no idea about the complexity of the protocol... if it's simple enough (or at least the parts we need are simple enough), reimplementing just that part may be preferable
1992019-04-02T16:47:43 <wumpus> I'm not sure...
2002019-04-02T16:48:35 <sipa> miniupnp has a history of vulnerabilities... is this written by the same authors?
2012019-04-02T16:48:39 <wumpus> yes
2022019-04-02T16:49:09 <wumpus> though it's easier to get right, at least there's no xml generation/parsing in here
2032019-04-02T16:49:36 <wumpus> though it's still quite a heap of C code
2042019-04-02T16:51:04 <wumpus> in any case that can be improved later, I guess
2052019-04-02T16:51:14 <dongcarl> Reading thru the libnatpmp repo... It seems extremely simple...
2062019-04-02T16:51:52 <wumpus> it's great that someone is working on this
2072019-04-02T16:53:42 <dongcarl> I think we just need natpmp.{c,h} and getgateway.{c,h}
2082019-04-02T16:53:58 <dongcarl> Can someone explain to me what the difference between subtree-ing and just copying code is?
2092019-04-02T16:54:22 <jamesob> dongcarl: pulling in from upstream is way better with a subtree
2102019-04-02T16:54:53 <wumpus> subtreeing sets up git to easily update to newer versions of the tree, also it allows preserving commits (though we don't do this)
2112019-04-02T16:56:52 *** dqx_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2122019-04-02T16:57:48 <sipa> subtree also only makes sense if upstream is a git repo
2132019-04-02T16:57:53 <wumpus> yes
2142019-04-02T16:59:48 <wumpus> I think mentioning the files in assets-attribution makes sense, though we've never before done this for code
2152019-04-02T17:00:54 *** setpill has quit IRC
2162019-04-02T17:01:06 <wumpus> this would nto be acceptable for a completely incompatible license such as (L)GPL, but MIT/BSD is close enough
2172019-04-02T17:01:42 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2182019-04-02T17:01:42 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] emilengler opened pull request #15722: doc: Change block chain to blockchain in doc (master...fix-typos) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15722
2192019-04-02T17:01:44 <dongcarl> I see, so we should copy in the files then. Something like `src/libnatpmp`?
2202019-04-02T17:01:55 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2212019-04-02T17:02:34 <wumpus> it doesn't 'infect' the project, nor the licensing of the binary
2222019-04-02T17:03:07 <wumpus> dongcarl: that's what they do right?
2232019-04-02T17:03:54 <dongcarl> Ah. Right.
2242019-04-02T17:14:53 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2252019-04-02T17:17:12 *** Shivendra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262019-04-02T17:41:37 *** elichai2 has quit IRC
2272019-04-02T17:43:47 <luke-jr> something like libnatpmp should just be a dependency, not copied or subtree'd at all -.-
2282019-04-02T17:45:21 <luke-jr> jamesob: best not to review in github anyway
2292019-04-02T17:46:02 <jamesob> luke-jr: agree but inevitably you end up reading stuff in GH since we leave comments there
2302019-04-02T17:46:45 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2312019-04-02T17:47:45 <gmaxwell> I don't think natpmp is worth taking a sketchy library dependency, it's only supported by a relatively small number of devices. It sounded attractive when I expected its implementation to be two structs and <50 loc.
2322019-04-02T17:48:11 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: is that certainly not possible?
2332019-04-02T17:48:24 <gmaxwell> no one seems interested in doing it.
2342019-04-02T17:50:35 <gmaxwell> esp with the bad history of miniupnpc... taking /another/ dependency on code from there just seems kinda foolish.
2352019-04-02T17:53:29 <wumpus> especially one that hasn't been updated since 2013
2362019-04-02T17:53:51 <wumpus> either we merge it in and someone picks up maintenance of it, or it's dead in the water
2372019-04-02T17:54:23 <gmaxwell> that in and of itself isn't /necessarily/ a concern, it's a really simple protocol. Unlike C++ in C the language isn't shifting out from under you. :P
2382019-04-02T17:54:33 <wumpus> looks like the person maintaining it already cut it down a lot, btw
2392019-04-02T17:54:40 <gmaxwell> but its not not a concern either.
2402019-04-02T17:54:45 <wumpus> to only contain the parts that are needed for bitcoind and nothing else
2412019-04-02T17:54:55 <wumpus> s/maintaining/submitting
2422019-04-02T17:55:08 <gmaxwell> thats good there was a lot of stuff we didn't need in there before for sure.
2432019-04-02T17:55:22 <gmaxwell> (pmp is a small protocol and we only need a small subset of it)
2442019-04-02T17:55:50 <luke-jr> it looks like 2015 to me?
2452019-04-02T17:56:05 <gmaxwell> The ongoing sybil/eclipse attacks on the network highlight the need to get more ordinary users esp ones not on vpses listening.
2462019-04-02T17:56:30 <sipa> it's still 1100 lines of imported code or so
2472019-04-02T17:57:59 <dongcarl> It seems like the GitHub is maintained: https://github.com/miniupnp/libnatpmp
2482019-04-02T18:03:36 <wumpus> I honestly don't think we're ever going to agree on this, I just want to encourage the PR author to continue this work tbh
2492019-04-02T18:04:24 <wumpus> I could see this being abandoned again because everyone wants something else
2502019-04-02T18:06:29 <gmaxwell> I don't want to stand in the way of it. If we do go the library route I'll still go review the libraries code, even though I'm wary of it considering the source (and the surprisingly large size given how little we need).
2512019-04-02T18:08:14 <gmaxwell> (My (maybe bitrotted) understanding is that this protocol requires we send and recieve a single udp packet with a fixed layout struct. The only moderate complexity comes in via the fact that we need to get the default gateway IP, which needs some OS specific code)
2522019-04-02T18:08:36 <sipa> it seems finding the gateway is a significant portion of the code
2532019-04-02T18:10:04 *** Karyon has quit IRC
2542019-04-02T18:11:21 <wumpus> well, currently the code is being imported, I think it should stay like that
2552019-04-02T18:11:59 <wumpus> sipa: that might well be the most difficult part
2562019-04-02T18:12:34 <wumpus> also, testing
2572019-04-02T18:13:33 <wumpus> this seems difficult to test without building a whole multi-VM network setup
2582019-04-02T18:14:32 <wumpus> though, everything considered, I don't think we test upnp functionality at all at the moment
2592019-04-02T18:14:45 <gmaxwell> I'd rather have it without tests than not have it.
2602019-04-02T18:15:26 <wumpus> (nor ever did)
2612019-04-02T18:16:12 <wumpus> I mean, if people with a router that support it test it that'd be something
2622019-04-02T18:20:47 *** Shivendra has quit IRC
2632019-04-02T18:37:29 <dongcarl> I'd be happy to test it with a natpmp daemon on my gateway
2642019-04-02T18:38:49 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652019-04-02T18:38:49 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2662019-04-02T18:44:51 *** Karyon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2672019-04-02T18:59:35 *** jarthur has quit IRC
2682019-04-02T19:00:47 *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2692019-04-02T19:27:34 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
2702019-04-02T19:28:23 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2712019-04-02T19:34:30 *** obsrver has quit IRC
2722019-04-02T19:39:47 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2732019-04-02T19:54:13 *** sipa has quit IRC
2742019-04-02T20:01:13 *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2752019-04-02T20:02:39 *** jarthur has quit IRC
2762019-04-02T20:22:07 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2772019-04-02T20:22:08 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #15722: doc: Change block chain to blockchain in doc (master...fix-typos) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15722
2782019-04-02T20:22:09 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2792019-04-02T20:29:02 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
2802019-04-02T20:31:00 *** nanotube has quit IRC
2812019-04-02T20:42:52 *** omonk has quit IRC
2822019-04-02T20:43:01 <gwillen> achow101: review beg for #15508? :-)
2832019-04-02T20:43:04 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15508 | Refactor analyzepsbt for use outside RPC code by gwillen · Pull Request #15508 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2842019-04-02T20:43:12 <gwillen> (or does anybody else want to take a final look?)
2852019-04-02T20:45:47 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
2862019-04-02T20:45:50 *** qrestlove has quit IRC
2872019-04-02T20:46:17 *** omonk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2882019-04-02T20:46:51 *** somethinglittle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2892019-04-02T20:57:58 *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2902019-04-02T21:19:50 <conman> I'm trying to find the code that prioritises block inclusion according to GetModifiedFee() in CreateNewBlock() and I can't see it. I've tried using prioritisetransaction and confirmed it's getting a fee increase way above any other transactions but not included in getblocktemplate
2912019-04-02T21:20:23 <conman> has this functionality been confirmed working in recent releases?
2922019-04-02T21:20:50 <conman> I've not tried it in a couple of years
2932019-04-02T21:20:55 *** sipa has quit IRC
2942019-04-02T21:26:27 *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2952019-04-02T21:30:50 <gmaxwell> conman: there are tests for it, it appears to be working to me.
2962019-04-02T21:32:06 <gmaxwell> conman: its tested by mining_prioritisetransaction, mempool_persist, and mempool_packages
2972019-04-02T21:32:48 <gmaxwell> conman: is the transaction not being included for some other reason? (invalid, non-standard, too large?)
2982019-04-02T21:35:29 <conman> it's definitely in the mempool, I've tried editing the code to make sure it's included by manually setting bypass_limits in sendrawtransaction and that makes no difference, and it's a small regular sized tx
2992019-04-02T21:35:47 <conman> I'm baffled as to why it won't show up in a getblocktemplate though
3002019-04-02T21:36:23 <gmaxwell> conman: lol
3012019-04-02T21:36:37 <conman> :\
3022019-04-02T21:36:41 <conman> yulol
3032019-04-02T21:36:45 <gmaxwell> conman: is your problem that it uses segwit (or has unconfirmed parents that do) and you're not calling GBT with the segwit flag?
3042019-04-02T21:36:53 <conman> nah
3052019-04-02T21:36:56 <gmaxwell> darn
3062019-04-02T21:36:58 <conman> definitely using segwit
3072019-04-02T21:37:09 <gmaxwell> Are its parents confirmed?
3082019-04-02T21:37:14 <conman> yeah
3092019-04-02T21:37:38 <gmaxwell> What code are you running?
3102019-04-02T21:38:15 <conman> 0.17.1 vanilla
3112019-04-02T21:38:28 <conman> (without the hack above I tried)
3122019-04-02T21:40:09 <gmaxwell> You're using the fee_delta argument to prioritisetransaction? not the second argument which is now a dummy?
3132019-04-02T21:40:43 <conman> it won't let you set anything but 0 there anyway
3142019-04-02T21:40:52 <conman> it rejects any other value
3152019-04-02T21:41:06 <gmaxwell> zero or 'null' but yeah, okay. hm.
3162019-04-02T21:41:36 <conman> 2019-04-02T21:37:56Z PrioritiseTransaction: $txid feerate += 0.10
3172019-04-02T21:41:39 <conman> is in the debug log
3182019-04-02T21:42:00 <gmaxwell> I dunno what to say, I can see it reordering transactions for me. and the test looks reasonable (it's actually testing that it gets txn into the block that otherwise wouldn't)
3192019-04-02T21:42:10 * conman scratches head
3202019-04-02T21:42:42 <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: ^ any thoughts?
3212019-04-02T21:43:39 <gmaxwell> conman: does getmempoolentry look sensible?
3222019-04-02T21:44:47 <conman> sec
3232019-04-02T21:44:50 *** aitorjs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3242019-04-02T21:45:03 <conman> yes
3252019-04-02T21:45:06 <conman> shows modifiedfee too
3262019-04-02T21:45:31 * gmaxwell puts on his good tech support hat
3272019-04-02T21:45:38 <gmaxwell> conman: are you querying the right node?
3282019-04-02T21:45:43 *** aitorjs has quit IRC
3292019-04-02T21:46:21 <gmaxwell> can you look at your template, grabe a txid from somewhere in the middle, and see that it looks worse in getmempoolentry?
3302019-04-02T21:46:21 <conman> heh
3312019-04-02T21:46:50 *** zaka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3322019-04-02T21:47:10 <gmaxwell> (sorry to ask a dumb question, but too often I've seen those solve problems. :) )
3332019-04-02T21:47:19 <conman> I assume you mean modified is lower, yes
3342019-04-02T21:47:32 <conman> even the top entry in the block template has a lower modified fee than this
3352019-04-02T21:48:21 <conman> should the wtxid be different to the txid in the mempoolentry ?
3362019-04-02T21:50:48 <gmaxwell> for non-segwit txn wtxid and txid are the same, for non-sw they're different.
3372019-04-02T21:50:59 <gmaxwell> er for sw they're different
3382019-04-02T21:51:02 <gmaxwell> sorry, distratcted. :)
3392019-04-02T21:51:11 <conman> roger
3402019-04-02T21:51:20 <conman> well it's a segwit txn
3412019-04-02T21:51:51 <conman> that's the only thing that's different from when I did this 2 years ago
3422019-04-02T21:52:02 <conman> they were regular txns
3432019-04-02T21:52:28 <conman> can't imagine that's the reason but that's the only thing I've changed
3442019-04-02T21:52:43 * gmaxwell looks to see if the test use segwit txn, maybe its broken for those!
3452019-04-02T21:54:18 <conman> [08:32] <gmaxwell> conman: its tested by mining_prioritisetransaction, mempool_persist, and mempool_packages
3462019-04-02T21:54:25 <conman> I don't see a mining_prioritisetransaction anywhere
3472019-04-02T21:54:31 <conman> what function are you actually referring to?
3482019-04-02T21:55:59 <gmaxwell> the tests are in bitcoin/test/functional/mining_prioritisetransaction.py
3492019-04-02T21:56:12 <conman> oh I was looking in src/
3502019-04-02T21:56:34 <gmaxwell> you can run it by running ./test_runner.py mining_prioritisetransaction.py it runs fine on a system already running a node.
3512019-04-02T21:57:07 <gmaxwell> looks to me like the test will use segwit (it'll use whatever address type the node returns by default)
3522019-04-02T21:57:25 <gmaxwell> But I could be misreading the test.
3532019-04-02T21:57:34 <conman> I see a fixed txid in the code
3542019-04-02T21:59:18 <gmaxwell> thats just testing an invalid value
3552019-04-02T21:59:44 * conman scratches head
3562019-04-02T22:00:12 <conman> I'll build and try the test
3572019-04-02T22:00:17 <gmaxwell> thanks.
3582019-04-02T22:04:36 <conman> says it passes, but I can't actually give it a transaction of my choice to see if that's okay
3592019-04-02T22:05:10 *** zaka has quit IRC
3602019-04-02T22:05:12 <conman> anyway got to run damnit, bbl to do some more debugging... really can't see why it won't show up in the template
3612019-04-02T22:05:24 <conman> thanks so far
3622019-04-02T22:05:33 <gmaxwell> are you perhaps confusing wtxid and txid in the template or something and it's there? (sorry last ditch guess)
3632019-04-02T22:08:34 <conman> :O
3642019-04-02T22:08:39 * conman looks
3652019-04-02T22:09:24 <conman> nope, not there by either txid or wtxid
3662019-04-02T22:11:34 *** makey40 has quit IRC
3672019-04-02T22:12:33 *** makey40 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3682019-04-02T22:14:17 *** zaka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3692019-04-02T22:15:04 *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
3702019-04-02T22:29:17 <gwillen> achow101: also, can you advise me on the intended way of using https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14075
3712019-04-02T22:29:22 <gwillen> (watch-only-keypool)
3722019-04-02T22:31:40 *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3732019-04-02T22:35:34 *** spinza has quit IRC
3742019-04-02T22:40:36 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3752019-04-02T22:41:03 *** nanotube has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3762019-04-02T22:42:09 *** Zenton has quit IRC
3772019-04-02T22:55:27 <achow101> gwillen: make a wallet without private keys. import something using importmulti and set 'keypool': true
3782019-04-02T22:57:45 <gwillen> achow101: so I've been fiddling with it
3792019-04-02T22:58:08 <gwillen> it seems like the magic I was initially missing was that "internal": true is mandatory with "keypool": true, or it has no effect
3802019-04-02T22:58:26 <gwillen> which makes sense in retrospect
3812019-04-02T22:59:06 <gwillen> also, the address has to be unused
3822019-04-02T22:59:15 <gwillen> or it will go into the keypool but not be considered for use as a change address
3832019-04-02T23:02:17 *** zaka has quit IRC
3842019-04-02T23:07:32 *** dqx has quit IRC
3852019-04-02T23:10:40 *** zaka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3862019-04-02T23:13:26 *** dqx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3872019-04-02T23:17:14 *** zaka has quit IRC
3882019-04-02T23:26:44 <achow101> internal: true only makes it a change address
3892019-04-02T23:26:52 <achow101> it isn't mandatory
3902019-04-02T23:30:12 <conman> darn it confirmed, now I can't try it again
3912019-04-02T23:30:17 <gwillen> ... you know I was so focused on change addresses I actually forgot that they keypool is used for other stuff
3922019-04-02T23:30:25 <gwillen> like, receiving addresses
3932019-04-02T23:35:22 <gmaxwell> conman: try some other txn
3942019-04-02T23:36:13 <conman> yeah when I get a chance later
3952019-04-02T23:36:29 <conman> oh you mean someone else's transaction
3962019-04-02T23:36:33 <conman> but yeah when I have time
3972019-04-02T23:39:15 <conman> I do think there's something actually wrong
3982019-04-02T23:45:20 <gmaxwell> I'd believe it, the interface isn't used much anymore AFAIK, and so maybe there is some issue that the test happens to not trigger or maybe in some particular config.
3992019-04-02T23:47:15 <conman> nod
4002019-04-02T23:47:29 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev