1 2019-04-02T00:01:58  *** StopAndDecrypt_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  2 2019-04-02T00:02:51  *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
  3 2019-04-02T00:04:43  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
  4 2019-04-02T00:05:43  *** spinza has quit IRC
  5 2019-04-02T00:12:40  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2019-04-02T00:15:14  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  7 2019-04-02T00:39:10  *** MrPaz has quit IRC
  8 2019-04-02T00:43:19  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  9 2019-04-02T01:07:53  *** promag has quit IRC
 10 2019-04-02T01:08:25  *** MrPaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2019-04-02T01:35:46  *** jhfrontz has quit IRC
 12 2019-04-02T02:01:50  *** MrPaz has quit IRC
 13 2019-04-02T02:08:34  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 14 2019-04-02T02:12:58  *** promag has quit IRC
 15 2019-04-02T03:03:02  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 16 2019-04-02T03:20:04  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 17 2019-04-02T03:53:03  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
 18 2019-04-02T03:54:33  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2019-04-02T04:49:26  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 20 2019-04-02T05:14:54  *** dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2019-04-02T05:17:10  *** dviola has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 22 2019-04-02T05:24:53  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
 23 2019-04-02T05:25:32  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 24 2019-04-02T05:26:32  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
 25 2019-04-02T05:27:03  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 26 2019-04-02T05:49:34  *** _Sam-- has quit IRC
 27 2019-04-02T05:57:11  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 28 2019-04-02T06:01:36  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 29 2019-04-02T06:04:39  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 30 2019-04-02T06:09:04  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2019-04-02T06:09:12  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 32 2019-04-02T06:11:51  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 33 2019-04-02T06:14:03  *** promag has quit IRC
 34 2019-04-02T06:15:47  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
 35 2019-04-02T06:37:46  *** droark has quit IRC
 36 2019-04-02T07:04:15  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
 37 2019-04-02T07:05:58  *** dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 38 2019-04-02T07:17:43  *** dermoth has quit IRC
 39 2019-04-02T07:18:08  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 40 2019-04-02T07:18:52  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
 41 2019-04-02T07:20:10  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 42 2019-04-02T07:22:49  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 43 2019-04-02T07:39:55  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 44 2019-04-02T07:39:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #15714: tests: Volkswagen (master...1904-testsVolkswagen) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15714
 45 2019-04-02T07:39:56  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 46 2019-04-02T07:51:54  *** shtirlic has quit IRC
 47 2019-04-02T07:59:16  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
 48 2019-04-02T07:59:17  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 49 2019-04-02T08:02:33  *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2019-04-02T08:03:36  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 51 2019-04-02T08:05:25  *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 52 2019-04-02T08:14:23  *** shtirlic has quit IRC
 53 2019-04-02T08:15:20  *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2019-04-02T08:18:46  *** mn94958858 has quit IRC
 55 2019-04-02T08:18:46  *** mn949588 has quit IRC
 56 2019-04-02T08:18:46  *** mn94958862 has quit IRC
 57 2019-04-02T08:19:03  *** mn9495885 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2019-04-02T08:19:04  *** mn94958863 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 59 2019-04-02T08:19:04  *** mn949588 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 60 2019-04-02T08:24:24  *** StopAndDecrypt_ has quit IRC
 61 2019-04-02T08:30:51  *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 62 2019-04-02T08:55:37  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 63 2019-04-02T09:23:17  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 64 2019-04-02T09:31:38  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2019-04-02T10:02:12  *** spinza has quit IRC
 66 2019-04-02T10:18:46  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2019-04-02T10:28:16  *** shtirlic has quit IRC
 68 2019-04-02T10:29:45  *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 69 2019-04-02T10:59:29  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 70 2019-04-02T11:04:50  *** ossifrage has quit IRC
 71 2019-04-02T11:14:39  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 72 2019-04-02T11:34:23  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2019-04-02T11:35:09  <fanquake> sipa / wumpus could you block Stivovo from GH. They are spamming nonsense in multiple threads.
 74 2019-04-02T11:36:40  *** Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW
 75 2019-04-02T11:38:37  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 76 2019-04-02T11:38:37  <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
 77 2019-04-02T11:38:42  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 78 2019-04-02T11:38:47  <wumpus> fanquake: yes, probably for the best
 79 2019-04-02T11:38:52  *** elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2019-04-02T11:40:44  <fanquake> missed some discussion last week, but must be close to an rc3 post #15691.
 81 2019-04-02T11:40:46  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15691 | 0.18: rc3 backports by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #15691 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 82 2019-04-02T11:41:24  <wumpus> yes, looking at that one
 83 2019-04-02T11:42:56  <wumpus> I think you're right
 84 2019-04-02T11:43:12  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 85 2019-04-02T11:49:01  *** dviola has quit IRC
 86 2019-04-02T12:03:39  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 87 2019-04-02T12:03:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 9 commits to 0.18: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7bcf90cb01aa...32ec90085044
 88 2019-04-02T12:03:41  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.18 6355214 Pieter Wuille: Simplify orphan processing in preparation for interruptibility
 89 2019-04-02T12:03:42  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.18 bb60121 Pieter Wuille: [MOVEONLY] Move processing of orphan queue to ProcessOrphanTx
 90 2019-04-02T12:03:43  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.18 50c56f2 Pieter Wuille: Interrupt orphan processing after every transaction
 91 2019-04-02T12:03:45  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 92 2019-04-02T12:03:59  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 93 2019-04-02T12:03:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #15691: 0.18: rc3 backports (0.18...1904-18B) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15691
 94 2019-04-02T12:04:04  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 95 2019-04-02T12:04:17  <wumpus> going to tag rc3 in a bit
 96 2019-04-02T12:06:31  <fanquake> \o/
 97 2019-04-02T12:06:36  *** spinza has quit IRC
 98 2019-04-02T12:09:22  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 99 2019-04-02T12:16:33  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
100 2019-04-02T12:21:17  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
101 2019-04-02T12:26:20  *** spaced0ut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102 2019-04-02T12:38:39  *** shtirlic has quit IRC
103 2019-04-02T12:39:06  *** shtirlic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
104 2019-04-02T12:46:22  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
105 2019-04-02T12:46:22  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed tag v0.18.0rc3: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/v0.18.0rc3
106 2019-04-02T12:46:23  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
107 2019-04-02T12:49:12  *** shesek has quit IRC
108 2019-04-02T12:49:50  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
109 2019-04-02T12:51:02  <wumpus> ^^
110 2019-04-02T12:52:42  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
111 2019-04-02T12:56:10  *** obsrver has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112 2019-04-02T13:01:13  <fanquake> Am building. Having some connection issues with archive.ubuntu.com
113 2019-04-02T13:01:52  *** peter__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2019-04-02T13:06:17  *** peter__ has quit IRC
115 2019-04-02T13:11:08  <wumpus> hopefully this is the last major release that needs to rely on that
116 2019-04-02T13:25:22  *** promag has quit IRC
117 2019-04-02T13:32:36  *** schmidty has quit IRC
118 2019-04-02T13:35:35  *** schmidty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
119 2019-04-02T13:35:35  *** schmidty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
120 2019-04-02T13:36:34  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
121 2019-04-02T13:41:05  *** Krellan has quit IRC
122 2019-04-02T13:46:54  <Sentineo> g8, building, too
123 2019-04-02T13:47:33  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
124 2019-04-02T13:51:36  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
125 2019-04-02T13:52:28  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2019-04-02T13:56:33  *** promag has quit IRC
127 2019-04-02T14:15:39  *** Tralfaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
128 2019-04-02T14:24:03  <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
129 2019-04-02T14:24:04  * jamesob ducks
130 2019-04-02T14:33:04  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2019-04-02T14:33:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5a2a9b5b0603...8dbb2c5e6704
132 2019-04-02T14:33:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f516245 John Newbery: [rpc] remove resendwallettransactions RPC
133 2019-04-02T14:33:07  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ea1a2d8 John Newbery: [wallet] Remove ResendWalletTransactionsBefore
134 2019-04-02T14:33:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8dbb2c5 MarcoFalke: Merge #15680: Remove resendwallettransactions RPC method
135 2019-04-02T14:33:10  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
136 2019-04-02T14:33:56  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
137 2019-04-02T14:33:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15680: Remove resendwallettransactions RPC method (master...2019_03_remove_resendwallettransactions) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15680
138 2019-04-02T14:34:07  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
139 2019-04-02T14:34:24  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
140 2019-04-02T14:34:24  <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
141 2019-04-02T14:34:36  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
142 2019-04-02T14:39:56  *** user_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
143 2019-04-02T14:41:22  *** user_ has left #bitcoin-core-dev
144 2019-04-02T14:42:00  *** kljasdfvv has quit IRC
145 2019-04-02T14:42:15  *** jonatack has quit IRC
146 2019-04-02T14:43:39  *** kljasdfvv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
147 2019-04-02T14:47:02  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
148 2019-04-02T14:47:02  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8dbb2c5e6704...2c364fde423e
149 2019-04-02T14:47:03  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ac67582 fanquake: depends: latest rapidcheck, use INSTALL_ALL_EXTRAS
150 2019-04-02T14:47:03  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2c364fd MarcoFalke: Merge #14853: depends: latest RapidCheck
151 2019-04-02T14:47:15  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
152 2019-04-02T14:47:32  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
153 2019-04-02T14:47:32  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #14853: depends: latest RapidCheck (master...latest-rapidcheck) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14853
154 2019-04-02T14:47:33  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
155 2019-04-02T14:52:32  *** ossifrage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
156 2019-04-02T14:57:58  <wumpus> jamesob: 120 as max line length suggestion sounds fine to me
157 2019-04-02T14:58:29  <wumpus> jamesob: though it will probably run into tons of discussion, which is why no one never did that
158 2019-04-02T14:59:01  <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
159 2019-04-02T15:09:30  *** conman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
160 2019-04-02T15:19:03  <wumpus> depends on your screen width and font size
161 2019-04-02T15:25:01  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162 2019-04-02T15:25:05  *** morcos has quit IRC
163 2019-04-02T15:34:24  *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
164 2019-04-02T15:44:22  *** Shivendra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
165 2019-04-02T15:48:13  *** Randolf has quit IRC
166 2019-04-02T15:49:51  <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
167 2019-04-02T15:50:55  <dongcarl> Looking at #15717, not too familiar with how licenses work but it seems that libnatpmp has this license: https://pastebin.com/a6umcv4s
168 2019-04-02T15:50:58  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15717 | Changes to support NAT-PMP by MishraShivendra · Pull Request #15717 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
169 2019-04-02T15:51:48  <dongcarl> Not sure if this should be subtree'd, used as a dependency or something else, and how the LICENSE would affect that.
170 2019-04-02T15:52:19  *** Shivendra has quit IRC
171 2019-04-02T15:52:28  <dongcarl> Perhaps someone could comment on the issue
172 2019-04-02T15:57:57  *** d_t has quit IRC
173 2019-04-02T16:06:07  <Sentineo> fanquake: you mean the download is really slow? cause it takes ages to get anything from archive.ubuntu.com.
174 2019-04-02T16:30:41  <wumpus> emilr: sigh, this is why we don't bother
175 2019-04-02T16:32:07  <wumpus> dongcarl: that's the 3-clause BSD license, should be compatible with the MIT one
176 2019-04-02T16:32:37  <wumpus> though not 100% sure tbh
177 2019-04-02T16:35:19  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
178 2019-04-02T16:35:19  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #15712: Update Copyright -> 2019 (master...copyright-2019) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15712
179 2019-04-02T16:35:25  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
180 2019-04-02T16:40:57  <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
181 2019-04-02T16:41:16  <sipa> it's not a subtree
182 2019-04-02T16:41:30  <sipa> he's copying the code with some modifications
183 2019-04-02T16:41:40  <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
184 2019-04-02T16:41:49  <sipa> the upstream code hasn't been touched since 2011
185 2019-04-02T16:41:55  <wumpus> whoa
186 2019-04-02T16:42:08  <wumpus> that is a big red flag
187 2019-04-02T16:42:47  <wumpus> this effectively means we're going to have to maintain it ourselves
188 2019-04-02T16:42:49  <dongcarl> actual upstream: http://miniupnp.free.fr/files/
189 2019-04-02T16:43:16  <dongcarl> changelog says haven't been touched since 2013
190 2019-04-02T16:43:30  <wumpus> if we have that *and* potential license issues
191 2019-04-02T16:44:34  <sipa> if it does what it's designed to do, there isn't much maintainanxe to be expected
192 2019-04-02T16:45:02  <dongcarl> protocol seems quite minimal: http://miniupnp.free.fr/nat-pmp.html
193 2019-04-02T16:45:04  <wumpus> it's still scope creep, but ok
194 2019-04-02T16:45:20  <wumpus> if someone commits to maintaining it it's fine with me, I'm just not going to do it
195 2019-04-02T16:45:45  <sipa> fair
196 2019-04-02T16:46:08  <sipa> regarding licence issues... i think we just need to list it in asset-attributions
197 2019-04-02T16:46:12  <sipa> but ianal
198 2019-04-02T16:47:15  <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
199 2019-04-02T16:47:43  <wumpus> I'm not sure...
200 2019-04-02T16:48:35  <sipa> miniupnp has a history of vulnerabilities... is this written by the same authors?
201 2019-04-02T16:48:39  <wumpus> yes
202 2019-04-02T16:49:09  <wumpus> though it's easier to get right, at least there's no xml generation/parsing in here
203 2019-04-02T16:49:36  <wumpus> though it's still quite a heap of C code
204 2019-04-02T16:51:04  <wumpus> in any case that can be improved later, I guess
205 2019-04-02T16:51:14  <dongcarl> Reading thru the libnatpmp repo... It seems extremely simple...
206 2019-04-02T16:51:52  <wumpus> it's great that someone is working on this
207 2019-04-02T16:53:42  <dongcarl> I think we just need natpmp.{c,h} and getgateway.{c,h}
208 2019-04-02T16:53:58  <dongcarl> Can someone explain to me what the difference between subtree-ing and just copying code is?
209 2019-04-02T16:54:22  <jamesob> dongcarl: pulling in from upstream is way better with a subtree
210 2019-04-02T16:54:53  <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)
211 2019-04-02T16:56:52  *** dqx_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212 2019-04-02T16:57:48  <sipa> subtree also only makes sense if upstream is a git repo
213 2019-04-02T16:57:53  <wumpus> yes
214 2019-04-02T16:59:48  <wumpus> I think mentioning the files in assets-attribution makes sense, though we've never before done this for code
215 2019-04-02T17:00:54  *** setpill has quit IRC
216 2019-04-02T17:01:06  <wumpus> this would nto be acceptable for a completely incompatible license such as (L)GPL, but MIT/BSD is close enough
217 2019-04-02T17:01:42  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
218 2019-04-02T17:01:42  <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
219 2019-04-02T17:01:44  <dongcarl> I see, so we should copy in the files then. Something like `src/libnatpmp`?
220 2019-04-02T17:01:55  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
221 2019-04-02T17:02:34  <wumpus> it doesn't 'infect' the project, nor the licensing of the binary
222 2019-04-02T17:03:07  <wumpus> dongcarl: that's what they do right?
223 2019-04-02T17:03:54  <dongcarl> Ah. Right.
224 2019-04-02T17:14:53  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
225 2019-04-02T17:17:12  *** Shivendra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
226 2019-04-02T17:41:37  *** elichai2 has quit IRC
227 2019-04-02T17:43:47  <luke-jr> something like libnatpmp should just be a dependency, not copied or subtree'd at all -.-
228 2019-04-02T17:45:21  <luke-jr> jamesob: best not to review in github anyway
229 2019-04-02T17:46:02  <jamesob> luke-jr: agree but inevitably you end up reading stuff in GH since we leave comments there
230 2019-04-02T17:46:45  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
231 2019-04-02T17:47:45  <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.
232 2019-04-02T17:48:11  <luke-jr> gmaxwell: is that certainly not possible?
233 2019-04-02T17:48:24  <gmaxwell> no one seems interested in doing it.
234 2019-04-02T17:50:35  <gmaxwell> esp with the bad history of miniupnpc...  taking /another/ dependency on code from there just seems kinda foolish.
235 2019-04-02T17:53:29  <wumpus> especially one that hasn't been updated since 2013
236 2019-04-02T17:53:51  <wumpus> either we merge it in and someone picks up maintenance of it, or it's dead in the water
237 2019-04-02T17:54:23  <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
238 2019-04-02T17:54:33  <wumpus> looks like the person maintaining it already cut it down a lot, btw
239 2019-04-02T17:54:40  <gmaxwell> but its not not a concern either.
240 2019-04-02T17:54:45  <wumpus> to only contain the parts that are needed for bitcoind and nothing else
241 2019-04-02T17:54:55  <wumpus> s/maintaining/submitting
242 2019-04-02T17:55:08  <gmaxwell> thats good there was a lot of stuff we didn't need in there before for sure.
243 2019-04-02T17:55:22  <gmaxwell> (pmp is a small protocol and we only need a small subset of it)
244 2019-04-02T17:55:50  <luke-jr> it looks like 2015 to me?
245 2019-04-02T17:56:05  <gmaxwell> The ongoing sybil/eclipse attacks on the network highlight the need to get more ordinary users esp ones not on vpses listening.
246 2019-04-02T17:56:30  <sipa> it's still 1100 lines of imported code or so
247 2019-04-02T17:57:59  <dongcarl> It seems like the GitHub is maintained: https://github.com/miniupnp/libnatpmp
248 2019-04-02T18:03:36  <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
249 2019-04-02T18:04:24  <wumpus> I could see this being abandoned again because everyone wants something else
250 2019-04-02T18:06:29  <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).
251 2019-04-02T18:08:14  <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)
252 2019-04-02T18:08:36  <sipa> it seems finding the gateway is a significant portion of the code
253 2019-04-02T18:10:04  *** Karyon has quit IRC
254 2019-04-02T18:11:21  <wumpus> well, currently the code is being imported, I think it should stay like that
255 2019-04-02T18:11:59  <wumpus> sipa: that might well be the most difficult part
256 2019-04-02T18:12:34  <wumpus> also, testing
257 2019-04-02T18:13:33  <wumpus> this seems difficult to test without building a whole multi-VM network setup
258 2019-04-02T18:14:32  <wumpus> though, everything considered, I don't think we test upnp functionality at all at the moment
259 2019-04-02T18:14:45  <gmaxwell> I'd rather have it without tests than not have it.
260 2019-04-02T18:15:26  <wumpus> (nor ever did)
261 2019-04-02T18:16:12  <wumpus> I mean, if people with a router that support it test it that'd be something
262 2019-04-02T18:20:47  *** Shivendra has quit IRC
263 2019-04-02T18:37:29  <dongcarl> I'd be happy to test it with a natpmp daemon on my gateway
264 2019-04-02T18:38:49  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
265 2019-04-02T18:38:49  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
266 2019-04-02T18:44:51  *** Karyon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
267 2019-04-02T18:59:35  *** jarthur has quit IRC
268 2019-04-02T19:00:47  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
269 2019-04-02T19:27:34  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
270 2019-04-02T19:28:23  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
271 2019-04-02T19:34:30  *** obsrver has quit IRC
272 2019-04-02T19:39:47  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
273 2019-04-02T19:54:13  *** sipa has quit IRC
274 2019-04-02T20:01:13  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
275 2019-04-02T20:02:39  *** jarthur has quit IRC
276 2019-04-02T20:22:07  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
277 2019-04-02T20:22:08  <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
278 2019-04-02T20:22:09  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
279 2019-04-02T20:29:02  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
280 2019-04-02T20:31:00  *** nanotube has quit IRC
281 2019-04-02T20:42:52  *** omonk has quit IRC
282 2019-04-02T20:43:01  <gwillen> achow101: review beg for #15508? :-)
283 2019-04-02T20:43:04  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15508 | Refactor analyzepsbt for use outside RPC code by gwillen · Pull Request #15508 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
284 2019-04-02T20:43:12  <gwillen> (or does anybody else want to take a final look?)
285 2019-04-02T20:45:47  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
286 2019-04-02T20:45:50  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
287 2019-04-02T20:46:17  *** omonk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
288 2019-04-02T20:46:51  *** somethinglittle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
289 2019-04-02T20:57:58  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
290 2019-04-02T21:19:50  <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
291 2019-04-02T21:20:23  <conman> has this functionality been confirmed working in recent releases?
292 2019-04-02T21:20:50  <conman> I've not tried it in a couple of years
293 2019-04-02T21:20:55  *** sipa has quit IRC
294 2019-04-02T21:26:27  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
295 2019-04-02T21:30:50  <gmaxwell> conman: there are tests for it, it appears to be working to me.
296 2019-04-02T21:32:06  <gmaxwell> conman: its tested by mining_prioritisetransaction, mempool_persist, and mempool_packages
297 2019-04-02T21:32:48  <gmaxwell> conman: is the transaction not being included for some other reason? (invalid, non-standard, too large?)
298 2019-04-02T21:35:29  <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
299 2019-04-02T21:35:47  <conman> I'm baffled as to why it won't show up in a getblocktemplate though
300 2019-04-02T21:36:23  <gmaxwell> conman: lol
301 2019-04-02T21:36:37  <conman> :\
302 2019-04-02T21:36:41  <conman> yulol
303 2019-04-02T21:36:45  <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?
304 2019-04-02T21:36:53  <conman> nah
305 2019-04-02T21:36:56  <gmaxwell> darn
306 2019-04-02T21:36:58  <conman> definitely using segwit
307 2019-04-02T21:37:09  <gmaxwell> Are its parents confirmed?
308 2019-04-02T21:37:14  <conman> yeah
309 2019-04-02T21:37:38  <gmaxwell> What code are you running?
310 2019-04-02T21:38:15  <conman> 0.17.1 vanilla
311 2019-04-02T21:38:28  <conman> (without the hack above I tried)
312 2019-04-02T21:40:09  <gmaxwell> You're using the fee_delta argument to prioritisetransaction? not the second argument which is now a dummy?
313 2019-04-02T21:40:43  <conman> it won't let you set anything but 0 there anyway
314 2019-04-02T21:40:52  <conman> it rejects any other value
315 2019-04-02T21:41:06  <gmaxwell> zero or 'null' but yeah, okay. hm.
316 2019-04-02T21:41:36  <conman> 2019-04-02T21:37:56Z PrioritiseTransaction: $txid feerate += 0.10
317 2019-04-02T21:41:39  <conman> is in the debug log
318 2019-04-02T21:42:00  <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)
319 2019-04-02T21:42:10  * conman scratches head
320 2019-04-02T21:42:42  <gmaxwell> sdaftuar: ^ any thoughts?
321 2019-04-02T21:43:39  <gmaxwell> conman: does getmempoolentry  look sensible?
322 2019-04-02T21:44:47  <conman> sec
323 2019-04-02T21:44:50  *** aitorjs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
324 2019-04-02T21:45:03  <conman> yes
325 2019-04-02T21:45:06  <conman> shows modifiedfee too
326 2019-04-02T21:45:31  * gmaxwell puts on his good tech support hat
327 2019-04-02T21:45:38  <gmaxwell> conman: are you querying the right node?
328 2019-04-02T21:45:43  *** aitorjs has quit IRC
329 2019-04-02T21:46:21  <gmaxwell> can you look at your template, grabe a txid from somewhere in the middle, and see that it looks worse in getmempoolentry?
330 2019-04-02T21:46:21  <conman> heh
331 2019-04-02T21:46:50  *** zaka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332 2019-04-02T21:47:10  <gmaxwell> (sorry to ask a dumb question, but too often I've seen those solve problems. :) )
333 2019-04-02T21:47:19  <conman> I assume you mean modified is lower, yes
334 2019-04-02T21:47:32  <conman> even the top entry in the block template has a lower modified fee than this
335 2019-04-02T21:48:21  <conman> should the wtxid be different to the txid in the mempoolentry ?
336 2019-04-02T21:50:48  <gmaxwell> for non-segwit txn wtxid and txid are the same, for non-sw they're different.
337 2019-04-02T21:50:59  <gmaxwell> er for sw they're different
338 2019-04-02T21:51:02  <gmaxwell> sorry, distratcted. :)
339 2019-04-02T21:51:11  <conman> roger
340 2019-04-02T21:51:20  <conman> well it's a segwit txn
341 2019-04-02T21:51:51  <conman> that's the only thing that's different from when I did this 2 years ago
342 2019-04-02T21:52:02  <conman> they were regular txns
343 2019-04-02T21:52:28  <conman> can't imagine that's the reason but that's the only thing I've changed
344 2019-04-02T21:52:43  * gmaxwell looks to see if the test use segwit txn, maybe its broken for those!
345 2019-04-02T21:54:18  <conman> [08:32] <gmaxwell> conman: its tested by mining_prioritisetransaction, mempool_persist, and mempool_packages
346 2019-04-02T21:54:25  <conman> I don't see a mining_prioritisetransaction anywhere
347 2019-04-02T21:54:31  <conman> what function are you actually referring to?
348 2019-04-02T21:55:59  <gmaxwell> the tests are in bitcoin/test/functional/mining_prioritisetransaction.py
349 2019-04-02T21:56:12  <conman> oh I was looking in src/
350 2019-04-02T21:56:34  <gmaxwell> you can run it by running ./test_runner.py mining_prioritisetransaction.py   it runs fine on a system already running a node.
351 2019-04-02T21:57:07  <gmaxwell> looks to me like the test will use segwit (it'll use whatever address type the node returns by default)
352 2019-04-02T21:57:25  <gmaxwell> But I could be misreading the test.
353 2019-04-02T21:57:34  <conman> I see a fixed txid in the code
354 2019-04-02T21:59:18  <gmaxwell> thats just testing an invalid value
355 2019-04-02T21:59:44  * conman scratches head
356 2019-04-02T22:00:12  <conman> I'll build and try the test
357 2019-04-02T22:00:17  <gmaxwell> thanks.
358 2019-04-02T22:04:36  <conman> says it passes, but I can't actually give it a transaction of my choice to see if that's okay
359 2019-04-02T22:05:10  *** zaka has quit IRC
360 2019-04-02T22:05:12  <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
361 2019-04-02T22:05:24  <conman> thanks so far
362 2019-04-02T22:05:33  <gmaxwell> are you perhaps confusing wtxid and txid in the template or something and it's there?  (sorry last ditch guess)
363 2019-04-02T22:08:34  <conman> :O
364 2019-04-02T22:08:39  * conman looks
365 2019-04-02T22:09:24  <conman> nope, not there by either txid or wtxid
366 2019-04-02T22:11:34  *** makey40 has quit IRC
367 2019-04-02T22:12:33  *** makey40 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
368 2019-04-02T22:14:17  *** zaka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
369 2019-04-02T22:15:04  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
370 2019-04-02T22:29:17  <gwillen> achow101: also, can you advise me on the intended way of using https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14075
371 2019-04-02T22:29:22  <gwillen> (watch-only-keypool)
372 2019-04-02T22:31:40  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
373 2019-04-02T22:35:34  *** spinza has quit IRC
374 2019-04-02T22:40:36  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
375 2019-04-02T22:41:03  *** nanotube has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
376 2019-04-02T22:42:09  *** Zenton has quit IRC
377 2019-04-02T22:55:27  <achow101> gwillen: make a wallet without private keys. import something using importmulti and set 'keypool': true
378 2019-04-02T22:57:45  <gwillen> achow101: so I've been fiddling with it
379 2019-04-02T22:58:08  <gwillen> it seems like the magic I was initially missing was that "internal": true is mandatory with "keypool": true, or it has no effect
380 2019-04-02T22:58:26  <gwillen> which makes sense in retrospect
381 2019-04-02T22:59:06  <gwillen> also, the address has to be unused
382 2019-04-02T22:59:15  <gwillen> or it will go into the keypool but not be considered for use as a change address
383 2019-04-02T23:02:17  *** zaka has quit IRC
384 2019-04-02T23:07:32  *** dqx has quit IRC
385 2019-04-02T23:10:40  *** zaka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
386 2019-04-02T23:13:26  *** dqx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
387 2019-04-02T23:17:14  *** zaka has quit IRC
388 2019-04-02T23:26:44  <achow101> internal: true only makes it a change address
389 2019-04-02T23:26:52  <achow101> it isn't mandatory
390 2019-04-02T23:30:12  <conman> darn it confirmed, now I can't try it again
391 2019-04-02T23:30:17  <gwillen> ... you know I was so focused on change addresses I actually forgot that they keypool is used for other stuff
392 2019-04-02T23:30:25  <gwillen> like, receiving addresses
393 2019-04-02T23:35:22  <gmaxwell> conman: try some other txn
394 2019-04-02T23:36:13  <conman> yeah when I get a chance later
395 2019-04-02T23:36:29  <conman> oh you mean someone else's transaction
396 2019-04-02T23:36:33  <conman> but yeah when I have time
397 2019-04-02T23:39:15  <conman> I do think there's something actually wrong
398 2019-04-02T23:45:20  <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.
399 2019-04-02T23:47:15  <conman> nod
400 2019-04-02T23:47:29  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev