1 2017-07-19T00:06:34  *** jamesob_ has quit IRC
  2 2017-07-19T00:15:00  *** kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  3 2017-07-19T00:18:23  *** kexkey has quit IRC
  4 2017-07-19T00:19:02  *** kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  5 2017-07-19T00:19:14  *** darawk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2017-07-19T00:22:04  *** chjj has quit IRC
  7 2017-07-19T00:22:06  *** talmai has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  8 2017-07-19T00:31:49  *** Murch has quit IRC
  9 2017-07-19T00:35:19  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2017-07-19T00:36:37  *** discreteunit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2017-07-19T00:44:04  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #10874: [RPC] getblockchaininfo: Loop through the bip9 soft fork deployments instead of hard coding (master...getblockchaininfo-bip9-loop) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10874
 12 2017-07-19T00:48:45  *** ivan has quit IRC
 13 2017-07-19T00:51:36  *** ayy1337|2 has quit IRC
 14 2017-07-19T00:54:59  *** jnewshoes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 15 2017-07-19T00:59:16  *** Guest33550 has quit IRC
 16 2017-07-19T01:01:03  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
 17 2017-07-19T01:02:04  *** discreteunit has quit IRC
 18 2017-07-19T01:07:11  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2017-07-19T01:13:52  *** talmai has quit IRC
 20 2017-07-19T01:17:15  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2017-07-19T01:17:21  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
 22 2017-07-19T01:17:38  *** ill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 23 2017-07-19T01:19:46  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 24 2017-07-19T01:26:34  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #10875: BIP 91 deployment parameters (master...bip91-dep-params) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10875
 25 2017-07-19T01:27:09  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DJMorgan opened pull request #10876: What do you mean a bug in the latest version? (0.14...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10876
 26 2017-07-19T01:27:32  *** chjj has quit IRC
 27 2017-07-19T01:30:16  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 28 2017-07-19T01:31:17  <gmaxwell> ::sigh::
 29 2017-07-19T01:37:01  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #10876: What do you mean a bug in the latest version? (0.14...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10876
 30 2017-07-19T01:38:07  *** ayy1337|2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2017-07-19T01:40:24  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 32 2017-07-19T01:42:43  *** goatpig has quit IRC
 33 2017-07-19T01:43:04  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 34 2017-07-19T01:49:50  *** coredump_ has quit IRC
 35 2017-07-19T01:52:47  *** ivan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 36 2017-07-19T01:57:16  *** AsadSalman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 37 2017-07-19T01:57:43  *** kexkey_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 38 2017-07-19T01:59:29  *** kexkey has quit IRC
 39 2017-07-19T01:59:45  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 40 2017-07-19T02:00:13  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 41 2017-07-19T02:00:15  *** kexkey_ is now known as kexkey
 42 2017-07-19T02:05:38  *** AsadSalman has quit IRC
 43 2017-07-19T02:17:54  *** arowser has quit IRC
 44 2017-07-19T02:18:53  *** darawk has quit IRC
 45 2017-07-19T02:24:01  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 46 2017-07-19T02:33:37  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 47 2017-07-19T02:33:40  *** chjj has quit IRC
 48 2017-07-19T02:56:47  *** ayy1337|2 has quit IRC
 49 2017-07-19T02:57:22  *** jamesob_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2017-07-19T03:03:27  *** jnewshoes has quit IRC
 51 2017-07-19T03:06:14  *** coredump_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 52 2017-07-19T03:12:06  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 53 2017-07-19T03:13:16  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2017-07-19T03:22:56  *** coredump_ has quit IRC
 55 2017-07-19T03:23:38  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
 56 2017-07-19T03:24:28  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 57 2017-07-19T03:30:45  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2017-07-19T03:35:18  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 59 2017-07-19T03:50:05  *** ill has quit IRC
 60 2017-07-19T04:01:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof opened pull request #10877: [rpc] Verbose flags for chaining and scripting (master...verbose-flagging) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10877
 61 2017-07-19T04:13:02  *** corebob has quit IRC
 62 2017-07-19T04:19:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] dongcarl opened pull request #10878: Docs: Fix markdown line breaks in init.md (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10878
 63 2017-07-19T04:26:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 64 2017-07-19T04:26:42  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 65 2017-07-19T04:28:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 66 2017-07-19T04:28:53  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2017-07-19T04:42:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 68 2017-07-19T04:42:43  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 69 2017-07-19T04:44:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 70 2017-07-19T04:44:42  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 71 2017-07-19T04:50:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 72 2017-07-19T04:50:43  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 73 2017-07-19T04:52:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 74 2017-07-19T04:52:38  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof opened pull request #10879: Difficulty adjustment (master...difficulty-adjustment) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10879
 75 2017-07-19T04:52:42  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 76 2017-07-19T04:52:44  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof closed pull request #10879: Difficulty adjustment (master...difficulty-adjustment) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10879
 77 2017-07-19T04:58:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 78 2017-07-19T04:58:42  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 79 2017-07-19T05:00:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 80 2017-07-19T05:00:43  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 81 2017-07-19T05:12:59  *** jamesob_ has quit IRC
 82 2017-07-19T05:21:58  *** kallewoof has quit IRC
 83 2017-07-19T05:25:20  *** schnerchi has quit IRC
 84 2017-07-19T05:26:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 85 2017-07-19T05:26:43  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 86 2017-07-19T05:28:41  *** schnerchi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 87 2017-07-19T05:32:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 88 2017-07-19T05:32:39  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 89 2017-07-19T05:36:01  *** kallewoof has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 90 2017-07-19T05:36:04  *** d_t has quit IRC
 91 2017-07-19T05:38:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 92 2017-07-19T05:38:45  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 93 2017-07-19T05:40:20  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
 94 2017-07-19T05:40:44  *** sdfgsdfg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 95 2017-07-19T05:42:21  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 96 2017-07-19T05:43:38  *** kallewoof has quit IRC
 97 2017-07-19T05:51:03  *** kallewoof has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2017-07-19T06:01:35  *** kexkey has quit IRC
 99 2017-07-19T06:12:48  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
100 2017-07-19T06:30:34  *** kallewoof has quit IRC
101 2017-07-19T06:33:47  *** kallewoof has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102 2017-07-19T06:41:06  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
103 2017-07-19T06:50:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] eklitzke opened pull request #10880: Update .gitignore to ignore more test files (master...gitignore) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10880
104 2017-07-19T07:12:13  *** BashCo has quit IRC
105 2017-07-19T07:12:52  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
106 2017-07-19T07:13:34  *** eck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
107 2017-07-19T07:22:39  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
108 2017-07-19T07:22:48  <eck> what's the recommended way for me to test a change before submitting a PR? is "make check" sufficient?
109 2017-07-19T07:23:16  <gmaxwell> eck: no, read test/README.md
110 2017-07-19T07:24:02  <eck> thanks
111 2017-07-19T07:24:42  <gmaxwell> test/functional/test_runner.py
112 2017-07-19T07:24:52  <gmaxwell> is what you want to run in addition to a make check.
113 2017-07-19T07:25:11  <gmaxwell> of course it depends on what you're doing, for some things make check is sufficient... or just a particular one of the functional tests.
114 2017-07-19T07:25:17  <gmaxwell> but if you don't know, better to run them all.
115 2017-07-19T07:25:45  <gmaxwell> Our CI setup will run them on whatever you submit, but if it fails you'll still need to be able to run them locally to figure out what happened, so its best to get in the habbit of it.
116 2017-07-19T07:41:36  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] eklitzke opened pull request #10881: trivial: fix various pyflakes/vulture warnings (master...vulture) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10881
117 2017-07-19T07:48:49  *** d_t has quit IRC
118 2017-07-19T08:07:42  *** ADheaume has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
119 2017-07-19T08:08:50  *** ADheaume has quit IRC
120 2017-07-19T08:12:32  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
121 2017-07-19T08:13:13  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122 2017-07-19T08:37:13  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
123 2017-07-19T08:42:31  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
124 2017-07-19T08:47:56  *** darawk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
125 2017-07-19T08:50:22  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2017-07-19T08:52:58  *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
127 2017-07-19T09:01:34  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
128 2017-07-19T09:04:27  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
129 2017-07-19T09:17:23  *** darawk has quit IRC
130 2017-07-19T09:29:56  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2017-07-19T09:46:24  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132 2017-07-19T09:46:38  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
133 2017-07-19T09:54:08  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9e8d6a3fb43a...a6ec5802b0a9
134 2017-07-19T09:54:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e0d4592 practicalswift: Avoid redundant redeclaration of GetWarnings(const string&)...
135 2017-07-19T09:54:09  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a6ec580 Jonas Schnelli: Merge #10864: Avoid redundant redeclaration of GetWarnings(const string&)...
136 2017-07-19T09:54:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10864: Avoid redundant redeclaration of GetWarnings(const string&) (master...GetWarnings-in-warnings.h) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10864
137 2017-07-19T09:54:56  <jonasschnelli> Oh. I guess I should not have merged this because of the freeze.
138 2017-07-19T09:54:58  <jonasschnelli> Sry
139 2017-07-19T10:03:04  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
140 2017-07-19T10:03:23  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
141 2017-07-19T10:04:35  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
142 2017-07-19T11:00:30  *** chjj has quit IRC
143 2017-07-19T11:10:22  *** BashCo has quit IRC
144 2017-07-19T11:11:10  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
145 2017-07-19T11:13:35  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
146 2017-07-19T11:36:25  *** jtimon has quit IRC
147 2017-07-19T11:39:07  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
148 2017-07-19T11:40:25  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
149 2017-07-19T11:53:07  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
150 2017-07-19T12:57:04  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
151 2017-07-19T13:07:33  *** talmai has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
152 2017-07-19T13:11:20  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
153 2017-07-19T13:12:14  *** riemann has quit IRC
154 2017-07-19T13:17:10  *** goatpig has quit IRC
155 2017-07-19T13:20:00  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
156 2017-07-19T13:21:08  *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
157 2017-07-19T13:25:17  *** arowser has quit IRC
158 2017-07-19T13:31:32  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
159 2017-07-19T13:31:53  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
160 2017-07-19T13:32:05  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
161 2017-07-19T13:44:54  *** ayy1337|2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162 2017-07-19T13:46:32  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
163 2017-07-19T13:54:34  <jonasschnelli> I can't reproduce the following travis issue locally (by using Ubuntu 14.04 and the same build configuration): https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/254826520#L2299
164 2017-07-19T13:54:50  <jonasschnelli> Maybe someone has an idea why I get a "/usr/include/c++/4.8/debug/safe_iterator.h:279:error: attempt to dereference a singular iterator."
165 2017-07-19T13:55:29  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
166 2017-07-19T13:59:32  *** talmai has quit IRC
167 2017-07-19T14:02:00  *** Guest32541 has quit IRC
168 2017-07-19T14:05:12  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
169 2017-07-19T14:06:41  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
170 2017-07-19T14:10:21  <cfields> jonasschnelli: that one uses everything built with extra debugging defines
171 2017-07-19T14:10:40  <jonasschnelli> cfields: D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG, right?
172 2017-07-19T14:10:46  <cfields> jonasschnelli: -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG_PEDANTIC
173 2017-07-19T14:11:00  <cfields> make -C depends DEBUG=1
174 2017-07-19T14:11:12  <jonasschnelli> Ah.. the dependencies...
175 2017-07-19T14:11:43  <jonasschnelli> cfields: Just passing -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG_PEDANTIC into ./configure won't be "enought"?
176 2017-07-19T14:12:19  <cfields> jonasschnelli: iirc all the deps have to be built with those flags otherwise wonky things happen
177 2017-07-19T14:12:23  <cfields> but i could be misremembering
178 2017-07-19T14:12:35  <jonasschnelli> okay. Let me try that...
179 2017-07-19T14:12:36  <jonasschnelli> (via depends)
180 2017-07-19T14:13:03  <cfields> jonasschnelli: those errors are almost always foo.empty() && foo[0]
181 2017-07-19T14:13:28  <jonasschnelli> cfields: accessing an index that is not available?
182 2017-07-19T14:15:02  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
183 2017-07-19T14:15:02  <cfields> jonasschnelli: ah, looks like a "singular" iterator is one that can't be reached.
184 2017-07-19T14:15:15  <cfields> so probably more like *foo.end()
185 2017-07-19T14:15:23  *** Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW
186 2017-07-19T14:16:59  <jonasschnelli> cfields: Thanks... I'll check the code.
187 2017-07-19T14:18:30  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
188 2017-07-19T14:25:11  <wumpus> re: #10873 we really need to add a comment, this isn't the first time someone has tried to replace the signal handling with a mutex
189 2017-07-19T14:25:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10873 | Use a condition variable for shutdown notifications by eklitzke · Pull Request #10873 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
190 2017-07-19T14:25:40  <wumpus> this won't work for handling UNIX signals, certainly not in a portable way
191 2017-07-19T14:26:02  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: Yes. How long was it ago since I tried it. :)
192 2017-07-19T14:26:36  <jonasschnelli> I didn't commented because I tried with a boost signal rather then a mutex
193 2017-07-19T14:26:46  <jonasschnelli> Wasn't sure if this is portable or not
194 2017-07-19T14:27:15  <cfields> jonasschnelli: the list of things you're actually allowed to use is remarkably small
195 2017-07-19T14:27:41  <jonasschnelli> cfields: Yes. I once checked... atomics should be fine... but I guess conditional vars aren't
196 2017-07-19T14:27:54  <wumpus> yes, setting a flag is fine
197 2017-07-19T14:28:17  <wumpus> I think you are allowed to read/write pipes as well
198 2017-07-19T14:29:43  <wumpus> there are some tricks that could be taken over from other daemons, but it might not be worth the trouble
199 2017-07-19T14:30:08  *** Gnof has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
200 2017-07-19T14:30:46  *** sdfgsdfg has quit IRC
201 2017-07-19T14:37:48  <wumpus> maybe there's even some obscure trick with sigwait() that would work
202 2017-07-19T14:45:04  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
203 2017-07-19T14:47:09  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
204 2017-07-19T14:47:14  *** promag has left #bitcoin-core-dev
205 2017-07-19T14:47:18  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
206 2017-07-19T14:47:26  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a6ec5802b0a9...9022aa37226b
207 2017-07-19T14:47:28  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b138585 Alex Morcos: Remove factor of 3 from definition of dust....
208 2017-07-19T14:47:28  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f4d00e6 Alex Morcos: Add a discard_rate...
209 2017-07-19T14:47:29  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9022aa3 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10817: Redefine Dust and add a discard_rate...
210 2017-07-19T14:47:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10817: Redefine Dust and add a discard_rate (master...discardmore) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10817
211 2017-07-19T14:47:59  *** riemann has quit IRC
212 2017-07-19T14:48:08  <promag> is practicalswift around?
213 2017-07-19T14:50:20  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery, ryanofsky: continue the discussion about -wallet vs -usewallet here?
214 2017-07-19T14:50:50  <jonasschnelli> I can't follow the argument of having -wallet for both use-cases (define which wallet to use and for adding a wallet to the daemon).
215 2017-07-19T14:51:12  <jonasschnelli> Why would you want the use same argument for two different things?
216 2017-07-19T14:51:55  <jonasschnelli> In the daemon case, you define a wallet to add to the sync process. For cli, you want to define which of those availavle wallets you want to use (1:n)
217 2017-07-19T14:52:35  <ryanofsky> jonasschnelli, maybe you can give a practical example of why having different argument names is useful
218 2017-07-19T14:53:15  <ryanofsky> obviously command line arguments can have different meanings on different commands. if you add --help or --verbose to a unix command it will do different things depending on the command
219 2017-07-19T14:53:36  <jonasschnelli> ryanofsky: a) because its to different things (and users should learn that from the beginning), b) -usewallet could be reused for bitcoin-Qt (until there is a GUI way to select the wallet)
220 2017-07-19T14:53:46  <jonasschnelli> "two
221 2017-07-19T14:54:53  <jnewbery> jonasschnelli, for the reasons I gave in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10868#issuecomment-316409725 - I think the name usewallet is meaningless and confusing
222 2017-07-19T14:54:53  <ryanofsky> can you explain qt use case a little more? qt runs a full node & wallet
223 2017-07-19T14:55:05  <jonasschnelli> Users now need to learn that they can run multiple wallets by providing multiple of the same -wallet arguments (it's already kind of confusing, most users would expect a comma separator argument)
224 2017-07-19T14:55:28  <jonasschnelli> ryanofsky; Right now, Qt always uses the wallet at index 0
225 2017-07-19T14:56:05  <jonasschnelli> I think having then -wallet for CLI, they would need to learn that in one case they specify multiple wallets while in the other case they specify a single wallet... seems confusing to me
226 2017-07-19T14:56:16  <ryanofsky> right, so what do you need a -usewallet option for in context of qt?
227 2017-07-19T14:56:55  <jonasschnelli> ryanofsky: Qt: until we have a wallet selection via GUI, you could define which of those wallets is accessible over Qt.
228 2017-07-19T14:57:58  <ryanofsky> jonasschnelli, right now with qt, you already have it serve multiple wallets, and you can choose which wallet will be shown in the display by putting the wallet first. there is no need for -usewallet
229 2017-07-19T14:58:21  <ryanofsky> adding -usewallet for qt would again just be adding confusion & complexity for no reason
230 2017-07-19T14:58:44  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Agree that this would work, though do we really want to depend on orders of arguments?
231 2017-07-19T14:58:53  <ryanofsky> no, we want to add a dropdown or tab
232 2017-07-19T14:59:00  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Indeed.
233 2017-07-19T14:59:17  <ryanofsky> i'm saying adding "usewallet" is not clarifying, it is just throwing in more complexity
234 2017-07-19T14:59:22  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I'm not sure if the -usewallet case for Qt is valid... though I think it is for cli
235 2017-07-19T14:59:39  <jonasschnelli> It is already complex.
236 2017-07-19T14:59:40  <ryanofsky> -wallet=filename everywhere should just work
237 2017-07-19T15:00:35  <jonasschnelli> So users need to know that in one case (daemon) it's the key to "have multiple" while in the other case (cli) is the key to reduce it from multiple to one?
238 2017-07-19T15:00:37  <ryanofsky> nobody objects that "cp" and "mv" both take "--help" or "--verbose" arguments because verbose output is different in both cases, it's just a weird argument
239 2017-07-19T15:01:15  <jonasschnelli> --help is always help. Not once setting the -help information and once reading it
240 2017-07-19T15:01:34  <ryanofsky> users do need to know that daemon accepts multiple -wallet= arguments to load multiple wallets. i'm not sure why that is a problem
241 2017-07-19T15:01:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9022aa37226b...d445a2c2eaa1
242 2017-07-19T15:02:00  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1c9b818 Andrew Chow: getinfo deprecation warning
243 2017-07-19T15:02:00  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d445a2c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10857: [RPC] Add a deprecation warning to getinfo's output...
244 2017-07-19T15:02:18  <ryanofsky> users should just be shown an error if they are expecting bitcoin-cli to send an single rpc command to multiple wallets
245 2017-07-19T15:02:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10857: [RPC] Add a deprecation warning to getinfo's output (master...deprecate-getinfo) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10857
246 2017-07-19T15:02:54  <jonasschnelli> It's just my opinion. I can live with the pure -wallet for everything approach.
247 2017-07-19T15:03:12  <ryanofsky> sounds good to me
248 2017-07-19T15:03:36  <jnewbery> I think the error message in my PR can be improved, but russ is correct - the error should inform the user that they need to specify -wallet on the command line
249 2017-07-19T15:03:38  <jonasschnelli> I wonder what other developers think...
250 2017-07-19T15:04:10  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery: but that is how it currently works (just with -usewallet), right?
251 2017-07-19T15:04:29  <ryanofsky> pr needs reviews, so i also want other developers to chime in :)
252 2017-07-19T15:04:40  <jonasschnelli> I just can't follow why you would want to add code to differenciate -wallet in bitcoin conf to -wallet passed into bitcoin-cli
253 2017-07-19T15:06:32  <ryanofsky> that is a drawback. if you want bitcoin-cli to be able to use wallet filename from a config file, you have to call the option something other than -wallet
254 2017-07-19T15:07:44  <jnewbery> but how -usewallet is interpreted is differentiated as well - acted on by bitcoin-cli, ignored by bitcoind, and you haven't decided on whether it should be ignored or not by bitcoin-qt
255 2017-07-19T15:07:56  <ryanofsky> reason i think tradeoff is worth is is that -wallet=filename means our tools do not silently ignore bad wallet filenames, and there is weirdness and option interactions to have to think about
256 2017-07-19T15:10:53  *** BashCo has quit IRC
257 2017-07-19T15:11:32  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2017-07-19T15:15:06  <jonasschnelli> Maybe something we should discuss at this weeks IRC meeting
259 2017-07-19T15:21:25  <ryanofsky> i'd prefer pr reviews & acks but ok :)
260 2017-07-19T15:25:31  <jnewbery> I agree. I think Russ is the only one who's reviewed/tested the code so far. But happy to discuss further at the meeting
261 2017-07-19T15:32:27  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
262 2017-07-19T15:34:12  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
263 2017-07-19T15:38:04  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
264 2017-07-19T15:39:18  <sipa> jonasschnelli: i though the same way
265 2017-07-19T15:39:50  *** mmgen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
266 2017-07-19T15:40:05  <sipa> jonasschnelli: but it's not so different from how -rpcport for bitcoind means "the port to listen on" nd for bitcoin-cli means "the port to connect to"
267 2017-07-19T15:40:55  <sipa> the ignoring of arguments in the config file is weird... but it is (almost) just an implementation detail... in practice you always get the expected behaviour
268 2017-07-19T15:41:05  <sipa> evwn if it were implemwnted differentlt
269 2017-07-19T15:50:40  *** mmgen has quit IRC
270 2017-07-19T15:53:05  *** promag has quit IRC
271 2017-07-19T15:54:08  <wumpus> I don't think re-using -wallet for bitcoin-cli is a good idea
272 2017-07-19T15:55:17  <wumpus> re-using rpcport is clever because the setting on client and server side happens to match up w/ the interface in between
273 2017-07-19T15:56:16  <wumpus> if it'd be possible to specify multiple rpcports in the server config, we'd have the same problem there
274 2017-07-19T15:56:40  <wumpus> -rpcbind is allowed to be used multiple times, but isn't used by the client at all
275 2017-07-19T15:57:10  <wumpus> e.g. a multi-option on the server side shouldn't be a single option on the client side, given we parse the same configuration file
276 2017-07-19T15:59:12  <wumpus> <ryanofsky> nobody objects that "cp" and "mv" both take "--help" or "--verbose" arguments because verbose output is different in both cases, it's just a weird argument <- yes, but cp and mv don't read their arguments from a configuration file
277 2017-07-19T15:59:28  <wumpus> e.g. you might want to set a default wallet for bitcoin-cli to use in the configuration file, you can't use -wallet for that
278 2017-07-19T15:59:55  <wumpus> if bitconi-cli read a different configuration file I'd have agreed there was no conflict
279 2017-07-19T16:00:11  <wumpus> but that's not where we're coming from, or even where we're going
280 2017-07-19T16:00:23  <ryanofsky> wumpus, yes, the tradeoff for having bitcoin-cli accept a wallet argument is having to ignore wallet values from the config file
281 2017-07-19T16:00:31  <wumpus> that sounds stupid
282 2017-07-19T16:00:48  <wumpus> why would you be so insistent in using -wallet for the option to special case it in config file reading?
283 2017-07-19T16:00:57  <wumpus> just use a different argument name and be done with it
284 2017-07-19T16:01:03  <ryanofsky> ok, well that's the tradeoff, we've discussed what i think are better options for allowing default wallets
285 2017-07-19T16:01:16  <ryanofsky> i'm not insistent on anything
286 2017-07-19T16:01:20  <wumpus> what is the trade-off? why would you insist on using -wallet at all?
287 2017-07-19T16:01:32  <wumpus> it causes a conflict so imo the option should not be named that
288 2017-07-19T16:01:49  <ryanofsky> i'm just saying what i think, which is that using different arguments is confusing, and being able to read wallet from config file is not actually useful compared to better options
289 2017-07-19T16:01:50  <wumpus> making a special workarounds just to be able to call it -wallet is strange
290 2017-07-19T16:02:11  <wumpus> if bitcoin-cli would not read the config file at all, or a different config file, I'd be ok with it
291 2017-07-19T16:02:12  <ryanofsky> ok, well that's my strange argument :)
292 2017-07-19T16:02:25  <wumpus> but we can't just do that, certainly not for 0.15
293 2017-07-19T16:02:30  <ryanofsky> if you object, then go with usewallet and wallet
294 2017-07-19T16:02:39  <wumpus> special-casing just seems weird
295 2017-07-19T16:02:43  <wumpus> I really dislike it
296 2017-07-19T16:02:57  <wumpus> 'why would all options be read from the config file except for X?' that's just drunk
297 2017-07-19T16:03:18  <jnewbery> having a `useargument` argument that is used by bitcoin-cli but is not used by bitcoind seems strange to me
298 2017-07-19T16:03:43  <wumpus> why owuld that be strange? bitcoin-cli has lots of arguments that are not used by bitcoind
299 2017-07-19T16:03:48  <wumpus> why would they need to overlap?
300 2017-07-19T16:03:57  <ryanofsky> yeah, i just think this wallet config file thing is a strange corner case compared to everyday usage
301 2017-07-19T16:04:10  <wumpus> what would bitcoind want to do with it ta all?
302 2017-07-19T16:04:19  <jnewbery> Because of the arguments I give here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10868#issuecomment-316409725
303 2017-07-19T16:04:22  <wumpus> it'd be the default wallet for the *client*
304 2017-07-19T16:04:22  <sipa> if the '-use' sounds liie meaningless, use -rpcwallet maybe
305 2017-07-19T16:04:29  <wumpus> sipa: yes! sounds good to me
306 2017-07-19T16:04:42  <ryanofsky> i'd be fine with rpcwallet, that's what i suggested when the arg was first added
307 2017-07-19T16:04:53  <instagibbs> rpcwallet is nicer
308 2017-07-19T16:04:59  <wumpus> I don't really care what name, it should just not be -wallet
309 2017-07-19T16:05:32  <wumpus> though I guess rpcwallet would be more consistent with some other rpc options
310 2017-07-19T16:05:59  <jnewbery> I still think ryanofksy's point about protecting against users putting in bad -wallet arguments is valid, but -rpcwallet is definitely a step up from -usewallet
311 2017-07-19T16:06:09  <ryanofsky> maybe also consider making it an error for user to specify -wallet on bitcoin-cli command line if it will be ignored
312 2017-07-19T16:06:18  <wumpus> multiple -rpcwallet should also be an error
313 2017-07-19T16:06:26  <sipa> ryanofsky: ?
314 2017-07-19T16:06:53  <wumpus> ryanofsky: that'd result in an error as well  when it's specified in the config file
315 2017-07-19T16:07:13  <ryanofsky> yes that's why i said "on bitcoin-cli command line"
316 2017-07-19T16:07:24  <jnewbery> wumpus: depends where you put the check
317 2017-07-19T16:07:32  <wumpus> then again, when bitcoind runs in multiwallet mode, it won't accept missing wallet
318 2017-07-19T16:07:40  <ryanofsky> or don't, anyway i was just suggesting that because i think -wallet -rpcwallet are easy to confuse
319 2017-07-19T16:07:40  <wumpus> so you *have* to run -cli with rpcwallet
320 2017-07-19T16:07:46  <wumpus> right?
321 2017-07-19T16:08:19  <ryanofsky> you wouldn't need -rpcwallet if you are making a non-wallet rpc call or your node only has one wallet loaded
322 2017-07-19T16:08:31  <wumpus> yes, and that's fine
323 2017-07-19T16:08:58  <jnewbery> I think Russ is thinking about the case where someone starts bitcoind with -wallet=mybusinesswallet.dat in the conf file, then calls `bitcoin-cli -wallet=mypersonalwallet.dat send ...` and is confused that money is sent from their business wallet even though they specified a different wallet
324 2017-07-19T16:09:02  <ryanofsky> yes, i'm just said that in response to "so you *have* to run -cli with rpcwallet
325 2017-07-19T16:09:45  <wumpus> we don't distinguish command line and config options, and imo that should stay that way
326 2017-07-19T16:10:09  <jnewbery> not true - rpcport is an example
327 2017-07-19T16:10:40  <wumpus> how?
328 2017-07-19T16:10:50  <sipa> it has a different meaning for client and server, sure
329 2017-07-19T16:11:06  <sipa> but we don't complain in bitcoin-cli that -dbcache is specfied, right?
330 2017-07-19T16:11:16  <jnewbery> oh sorry - yes you're right
331 2017-07-19T16:13:00  *** jnewbery has left #bitcoin-core-dev
332 2017-07-19T16:16:32  <sipa> i guess there is one example of an option that is treated differently between cmdline and configfile... -conf
333 2017-07-19T16:16:39  *** jnewbery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
334 2017-07-19T16:18:11  <jnewbery> and I'd expect #10267 to be treated differently on command-line versus .conf file, but again I may be in the minority
335 2017-07-19T16:18:12  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10267 | New -includeconf argument for including external configuration files by kallewoof · Pull Request #10267 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
336 2017-07-19T16:18:33  <jnewbery> >we don't complain in bitcoin-cli that -dbcache is specfied
337 2017-07-19T16:18:58  <jnewbery> but specifying the wrong -dbcache on the command line for bitcoin-cli cannot lead to loss of funds
338 2017-07-19T16:21:03  <sipa> i think that's unlikely here
339 2017-07-19T16:21:26  <gmaxwell> Wrong testnet parameter can, in the same way wallet parameters can. (much worse, in fact)
340 2017-07-19T16:21:54  <gmaxwell> I've been saved multiple times from doing something phenominally dumb re testnet vs mainnet through using wallet encryption as an authorization step.
341 2017-07-19T16:23:41  <wumpus> yes, having separate configuration files per network would make a lot of sense too
342 2017-07-19T16:24:47  <gmaxwell> (I like sharing them for most parameters, in fact...)
343 2017-07-19T16:24:52  <sipa> wumpus: oh tes
344 2017-07-19T16:24:53  <sipa> yes
345 2017-07-19T16:24:54  <wumpus> jnewbery: yes, -conf is somewhat of an exception too, it's not explicitly treated differently but in effect it is because -conf in a configuration file does nothing, it's parsed before
346 2017-07-19T16:25:09  <wumpus> gmaxwell: yes, keeping a shared one is ok too
347 2017-07-19T16:25:42  <wumpus> doesn't have to be either or
348 2017-07-19T16:25:49  <wumpus> as long as the precedence order is well-defined
349 2017-07-19T16:26:44  *** JackH has quit IRC
350 2017-07-19T16:32:19  *** timothy has quit IRC
351 2017-07-19T16:34:33  *** jamesob_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352 2017-07-19T16:42:26  <wumpus> especially for things like network configuration it's almost essential have different config files per network, e.g. as soon as you specify rpcbind or bind with explicit port you'll run into port conflicts otherwise
353 2017-07-19T17:10:28  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
354 2017-07-19T17:38:08  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
355 2017-07-19T17:39:19  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
356 2017-07-19T17:39:59  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
357 2017-07-19T17:51:39  *** THoVer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
358 2017-07-19T17:56:11  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
359 2017-07-19T17:56:30  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
360 2017-07-19T18:00:36  *** newbie-- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
361 2017-07-19T18:03:20  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
362 2017-07-19T18:05:39  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
363 2017-07-19T18:06:49  *** darawk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
364 2017-07-19T18:11:10  *** ovovo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
365 2017-07-19T18:15:00  *** owowo has quit IRC
366 2017-07-19T18:17:12  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
367 2017-07-19T18:20:48  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #10882: [WIP] Keypool topup (master...keypool_topup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10882
368 2017-07-19T18:22:01  <jnewbery> 10882 is the cut-down version of #10830 which sipa and gmaxwell were asking for in the last meeting. I'm still fixing the testcase, but I'd appreciate some code review if possible
369 2017-07-19T18:22:03  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10830 | [WIP] [wallet] keypool restore by jnewbery · Pull Request #10830 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
370 2017-07-19T18:22:11  <jnewbery> I think people wanted this in 0.15 as a bugfix
371 2017-07-19T18:24:28  *** u_nuSLASHkm8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372 2017-07-19T18:25:50  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
373 2017-07-19T18:25:57  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
374 2017-07-19T18:27:03  *** u_nuSLASHkm8 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
375 2017-07-19T18:27:43  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
376 2017-07-19T18:27:50  *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
377 2017-07-19T18:34:07  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
378 2017-07-19T18:34:39  <instagibbs> jnewbery, will review
379 2017-07-19T18:35:52  <jnewbery> thanks instagibbs
380 2017-07-19T18:37:17  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery closed pull request #10830: [WIP] [wallet] keypool restore (master...pr10240) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10830
381 2017-07-19T18:38:44  <jonasschnelli> I just did a quick scrollback read. Is -rpcwallet still in talk?
382 2017-07-19T18:38:52  <jonasschnelli> I'd prefere to keep rpc out of the naming...
383 2017-07-19T18:39:03  <jonasschnelli> isn't bitcoin-cli transport agnostic?
384 2017-07-19T18:39:18  <jonasschnelli> (from the users interface perspective)
385 2017-07-19T18:40:18  <sipa> what do you mean transport agnostic/
386 2017-07-19T18:42:53  <jonasschnelli> I probably over-engineer. But what if we once change bitcoin-cli's transport layer?
387 2017-07-19T18:43:04  <jonasschnelli> the rpc layer is hidden from the user
388 2017-07-19T18:43:34  <jonasschnelli> -rpcwallet includes the used transport layer in the naming scheme.
389 2017-07-19T18:43:34  <sipa> so?
390 2017-07-19T18:43:42  <sipa> so does -wallet
391 2017-07-19T18:43:48  <jonasschnelli> ?
392 2017-07-19T18:44:00  <sipa> i may misunderstand what you're saying
393 2017-07-19T18:44:08  <jonasschnelli> -(rpc)wallet
394 2017-07-19T18:44:18  <sipa> bitcoin-cli is an rpc client
395 2017-07-19T18:44:30  <sipa> the transport layer may change from TCP to Unix sockets or something
396 2017-07-19T18:44:35  <sipa> but it'll still be an RPC client
397 2017-07-19T18:44:57  <jonasschnelli> What if we change to a different IPC protocol?
398 2017-07-19T18:45:15  <jonasschnelli> I probably over-enginee. Nm.
399 2017-07-19T18:45:24  <sipa> then everything needs to change; including rpcport, rpcserver, ...
400 2017-07-19T18:45:33  <jonasschnelli> I just though until now, I could not see any "rpc" in bitcoin-cli (from the users perspetive)
401 2017-07-19T18:45:44  <jonasschnelli> Yeah. That.. so yes. nm then.
402 2017-07-19T18:46:17  <jonasschnelli> Okay. I take back my argument. With -rpcserver, etc. -rpcwallet may make sense.
403 2017-07-19T18:47:07  <gmaxwell> what is -rpcwallet precisely
404 2017-07-19T18:47:24  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: I guess it would be the substitute for -usewallet
405 2017-07-19T18:47:27  <gmaxwell> is it the setting that tells bitcoin-cli what wallet to talk to
406 2017-07-19T18:47:28  <sipa> gmaxwell: suggested new name for -usewallet
407 2017-07-19T18:47:31  <gmaxwell> okay
408 2017-07-19T18:47:32  <sipa> yes
409 2017-07-19T18:47:41  <jonasschnelli> What was the issue with -usewallet?
410 2017-07-19T18:47:56  <sipa> people think use is a weasel word
411 2017-07-19T18:48:08  <sipa> (i really don't care anymore)
412 2017-07-19T18:48:51  <jonasschnelli> Yeah, I don't care. But please not -wallet
413 2017-07-19T18:49:58  <gmaxwell> gowallet=foo :P
414 2017-07-19T18:50:41  <sipa> ./bitcoin-cli -thethingimean=foo
415 2017-07-19T18:51:08  <gmaxwell> enablewallet=bob
416 2017-07-19T18:51:36  <gmaxwell> walletify=bob
417 2017-07-19T18:51:57  <sipa> ok...
418 2017-07-19T18:52:09  <gmaxwell> openwallet=info
419 2017-07-19T18:52:26  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
420 2017-07-19T18:56:06  <jonasschnelli> Among those options, I would still prefere "usewallet"
421 2017-07-19T18:56:35  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
422 2017-07-19T19:08:23  *** THoVer has quit IRC
423 2017-07-19T19:08:33  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
424 2017-07-19T19:10:53  *** BashCo has quit IRC
425 2017-07-19T19:11:20  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
426 2017-07-19T19:11:29  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
427 2017-07-19T19:24:50  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
428 2017-07-19T19:25:13  <morcos> wumpus: I don't care too much what we call the argument name, and I think we should just decide so we can make the behavior nice around it (my vote would be wallet, rpcwallet, usewallet in that order, but I don't care)
429 2017-07-19T19:25:33  <morcos> I would say though that I think we should break the conf file and command line option thing being treated equally no matter what
430 2017-07-19T19:26:17  <morcos> If we use wallet as the -cli option, then we break it as per jnewbery's pull.  If we use rpcwallet or usewallet, then i think it makes sense to flag an error if -wallet is given on the command line.
431 2017-07-19T19:26:50  <morcos> I agree with ryanofsky that it is possible people will make that mistake, and I don't think we should let them semi-reasonably think they are specifying one wallet and have things happen to another
432 2017-07-19T19:28:15  <wumpus> if it wasn't for the authentication options we could stop parsing bitcoin.conf completely for the -cli
433 2017-07-19T19:28:43  <wumpus> that would be fine with me, I don't want to parse one option from .conf but not another though, exceptions like that always result in confusion and wtf in the longer run
434 2017-07-19T19:28:49  <morcos> We should also let it be an error if there are multiple instances of (rpc/use)wallet which begs the question of what do we do if you put (rpc/use)wallet in the conf file because clearly you need to be able to override from the command line
435 2017-07-19T19:29:18  <wumpus> I'm not convinced it should be treated otherwise than other options
436 2017-07-19T19:29:30  <morcos> Meaning the last value controls?
437 2017-07-19T19:29:33  <wumpus> yes
438 2017-07-19T19:29:45  <wumpus> if you use -rpcport you don't expect it to connect to all ports at once, do you?
439 2017-07-19T19:29:56  <wumpus> not sure why -rpcwallet would be different
440 2017-07-19T19:30:02  <morcos> no but i expect someone to tell me i'm an idiot
441 2017-07-19T19:30:37  <wumpus> if so,the whole command line/config parsing should be refactored, whih should probably happen at some time, including errors if you provide an unrecognized option
442 2017-07-19T19:30:43  <wumpus> however we're not there, and we're not going to be there for 0.15
443 2017-07-19T19:31:18  <wumpus> I think any special-casing we introduce now for rpcwallet is a bad idea, especially as the whole API is still supposed to be experimental in the first place
444 2017-07-19T19:31:25  <morcos> hmm, is the code to figure out whether something is a multiarg vs a single arg shared btwn bitcoind and -cli
445 2017-07-19T19:31:51  <morcos> i guess it must not be?
446 2017-07-19T19:31:54  <morcos> oh
447 2017-07-19T19:31:56  <morcos> never mind
448 2017-07-19T19:32:03  <morcos> if its different names it doesnt matter
449 2017-07-19T19:32:11  <wumpus> all the argument parsing code is shared
450 2017-07-19T19:32:13  <wumpus> itis' in util.cpp
451 2017-07-19T19:32:16  <morcos> (rpc/use)wallet is a single arg, wallet ais a multi arg
452 2017-07-19T19:32:19  <wumpus> but just use a different name so it doesn't matter
453 2017-07-19T19:32:20  <wumpus> right.
454 2017-07-19T19:32:22  <ryanofsky> i mostly like john's pr because i think it gets rid of all the ways to shoot yourself in the foot. and i don't think the special casing is a big deal. but if it is, then obvs different approach is needed
455 2017-07-19T19:32:42  <wumpus> I do think the special casing is a big deal
456 2017-07-19T19:32:49  <wumpus> but I have to maintain the code over a long time
457 2017-07-19T19:32:59  <morcos> well lets just pick and be done with it, any will be fine..
458 2017-07-19T19:33:00  <wumpus> and I'm sick of all kind of weird special casing
459 2017-07-19T19:33:33  <morcos> rpcwallet it is..  although i admit i'm hesitant about specifying multiple rpcwallets and having the last one control..  but i don't know an easy solution to that
460 2017-07-19T19:33:38  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
461 2017-07-19T19:33:38  <wumpus> it might seem easier on the short term but on the long time, arbitrariness is going to confuse
462 2017-07-19T19:33:57  <wumpus> both developers and users
463 2017-07-19T19:34:03  <wumpus> but it's always 'hey, why not add another special case'
464 2017-07-19T19:34:14  <jnewbery> I don't even consider it special casing. Command line overrides conf file, just as for other arguments
465 2017-07-19T19:34:21  <wumpus> noo of course not
466 2017-07-19T19:34:23  <morcos> but you're right a later clean up could allow for all rpc options, you can only have a second single arg if its the command line overriding the conf file
467 2017-07-19T19:34:42  <jnewbery> it's implemented differently because it's not possible to fully override mapmultiargs
468 2017-07-19T19:34:47  <wumpus> if you do it it's not a special case
469 2017-07-19T19:34:48  <jnewbery> but that's the functional outcome
470 2017-07-19T19:34:50  <ryanofsky> wumpus, these arguments just seem pretty abstract to me, and i wish you'd bring them down to concrete examples of how the actual code in the pr could cause problems
471 2017-07-19T19:35:18  <wumpus> I don't feel like repeating myself
472 2017-07-19T19:35:31  <wumpus> I already argued against reusing -wallet forbitcoin-cli specifically
473 2017-07-19T19:35:32  <ryanofsky> happy to defer
474 2017-07-19T19:36:11  <wumpus> it's strange to have a same argument name as single-option for one utility then for multi-option for another utility
475 2017-07-19T19:36:20  *** tinyurl_comSLASH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
476 2017-07-19T19:36:23  <morcos> so arguably the only thing to change from the merged code is s/usewallet/rpcwallet/ if that would overall be preferred?
477 2017-07-19T19:36:24  <wumpus> *if* htey parse the same configuration file
478 2017-07-19T19:36:29  <wumpus> yes
479 2017-07-19T19:36:33  <wumpus> rpcwallet is a better name
480 2017-07-19T19:36:42  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
481 2017-07-19T19:37:33  <jonasschnelli> Should we still revoke (halt bitcoin-cli) if one provides multiple -rpc/-usewallet arguments?
482 2017-07-19T19:37:39  <wumpus> and I'm ok with making providing -wallet on the command line for -cli an error, though I think it's overthinking it
483 2017-07-19T19:37:52  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: no, I don't think so
484 2017-07-19T19:38:06  <jonasschnelli> So just use the last one?
485 2017-07-19T19:38:08  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: just like multiple -rpcport is not an error
486 2017-07-19T19:38:11  *** tinyurl_comSLASH has left #bitcoin-core-dev
487 2017-07-19T19:38:19  <wumpus> unless we change that behavior on a global level
488 2017-07-19T19:38:19  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: Okay. Fine by me
489 2017-07-19T19:38:34  <wumpus> so if multiple of any non-multi argument is an error, it should be an error, obviously
490 2017-07-19T19:38:46  <wumpus> but there's no need to suddenly do all kinds of crazy stuff for rpcwallet
491 2017-07-19T19:38:49  <jonasschnelli> Yes. No special case for every argument type
492 2017-07-19T19:39:25  <jonasschnelli> But I guess what we should merge for 0.15 is the Qt console support: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10870
493 2017-07-19T19:39:32  <jonasschnelli> Right now, Qt console is useless in multiwallet
494 2017-07-19T19:39:37  <wumpus> yes
495 2017-07-19T19:40:04  <wumpus> I certainly think making the functionality work in the first place is important :)
496 2017-07-19T19:40:34  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
497 2017-07-19T19:41:12  *** treebeardd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
498 2017-07-19T19:41:21  <wumpus> tagged it
499 2017-07-19T19:42:29  <jonasschnelli> thanks
500 2017-07-19T19:43:29  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
501 2017-07-19T19:44:47  <wumpus> from what I see "if an argument is specified multiple times, the last value holds" seems to be pretty standard behavior, I don't know of many command line utilities that reject if you specify a flag multiple times
502 2017-07-19T19:45:28  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
503 2017-07-19T19:45:50  <eck> I am trying to understand the BIP process, and I'm confused how I can tell which BIPs were actually deployed
504 2017-07-19T19:45:53  <eck> e.g. is BIP 62 deployed?
505 2017-07-19T19:46:02  <wumpus> it can even be useful in scripts etc, to be able to override something that is set before
506 2017-07-19T19:46:05  <ryanofsky> GetArg implement first value holds, right?
507 2017-07-19T19:46:21  <wumpus> ryanofsky: ugh, okay
508 2017-07-19T19:46:25  <instagibbs> eck, #bitcoin (can answer there)
509 2017-07-19T19:46:32  <jonasschnelli> eck: look at the overview. Bip62 is "Withdrawn"
510 2017-07-19T19:46:34  <wumpus> ryanofsky: are you sure?
511 2017-07-19T19:46:40  <ryanofsky> no
512 2017-07-19T19:46:51  <ryanofsky> which is why i like these things to be errors :)
513 2017-07-19T19:47:09  <wumpus> but every other comamnd line utiltiy I know uses 'last setting holds'
514 2017-07-19T19:47:10  <jonasschnelli> But then it should be globally?
515 2017-07-19T19:47:20  <wumpus> gcc, ld, ls, etc
516 2017-07-19T19:47:46  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] morcos opened pull request #10883: Rename -usewallet to -rpcwallet (master...rpcwallet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10883
517 2017-07-19T19:50:25  <morcos> wumpus: sigh.. it chooses the first option given in the conf file unless you give it on the command line and then its the last one from the command line
518 2017-07-19T19:50:50  <jonasschnelli> :/
519 2017-07-19T19:50:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10867: Allow only a single -usewallet argument (master...2017/07/multiwallet_bitcoincli) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10867
520 2017-07-19T19:51:01  <wumpus> yes, it seems to correctly chose the latest from the command line
521 2017-07-19T19:51:09  <wumpus> .conf semantics are strange
522 2017-07-19T19:51:12  <jonasschnelli> but why the first from the conf?
523 2017-07-19T19:51:20  <jonasschnelli> that makes no sense..
524 2017-07-19T19:51:23  <wumpus> no, it doesn't
525 2017-07-19T19:51:45  *** arubi has quit IRC
526 2017-07-19T19:51:47  <wumpus> it should be the other way aorund
527 2017-07-19T19:52:05  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
528 2017-07-19T19:52:22  <wumpus> for all options, not special casing one :)
529 2017-07-19T19:52:29  <jonasschnelli> yes.
530 2017-07-19T19:52:49  <jonasschnelli> Though changing it now could have unexpected consequences. :/
531 2017-07-19T19:53:06  <morcos> that behavior is what preseves command line overriding right?
532 2017-07-19T19:53:41  <wumpus> morcos: yes, indeed, in the silly way it works currently
533 2017-07-19T19:53:56  <jonasschnelli> morcos: IMO the command line overriding is good. But the last config value should be takend before we go to the optional command line overriding
534 2017-07-19T19:54:33  <jonasschnelli> however, we should not change that.
535 2017-07-19T19:55:04  <wumpus> in any case there are probably a zillion things broken in command line / config file handling, nothing we should do about that for 0.15, but for later on it makes sense to actually think about it
536 2017-07-19T19:56:06  <wumpus> especially with things like includeconf=..., people are going to expect later config options are overriding previous ones
537 2017-07-19T19:56:36  <wumpus> like it is for any other config file parser in the world
538 2017-07-19T19:56:49  <jonasschnelli> heh. Indeed
539 2017-07-19T19:57:13  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
540 2017-07-19T19:57:14  *** Guest24650 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
541 2017-07-19T19:58:20  <wumpus> how do other programs handle multi-args? I think our way is strange, in that we can never clear something that has been set, things are only added
542 2017-07-19T19:59:18  <wumpus> so if the config file sets bind=, the command line can never override that, only add to it
543 2017-07-19T20:00:16  <jonasschnelli> I'm not sure, but isn't comma separation a thing? -wallet=w1.dat,w2.dat?
544 2017-07-19T20:00:28  <wumpus> yeah
545 2017-07-19T20:00:48  <wumpus> though that always leaves 'what if we have a comma in our value'
546 2017-07-19T20:00:59  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
547 2017-07-19T20:01:00  <jonasschnelli> Use ;
548 2017-07-19T20:01:12  <wumpus> but that conflicts with the shell :-)
549 2017-07-19T20:01:33  <jonasschnelli> heh.. yes. use -wallet="a;b;c"?
550 2017-07-19T20:01:37  <jonasschnelli> But meh
551 2017-07-19T20:01:40  <wumpus> hehe
552 2017-07-19T20:01:52  <wumpus> I was just illustrating a point, I know it's hard to work around
553 2017-07-19T20:02:14  <wumpus> json syntax config file would work
554 2017-07-19T20:02:21  <wumpus> for command line it's harder
555 2017-07-19T20:02:33  <jonasschnelli> Yes
556 2017-07-19T20:03:42  <wumpus> I must say it wouldn't be the first time I typed -debug=tor,bench though, comma-separated is kind of natural, when it works
557 2017-07-19T20:04:38  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
558 2017-07-19T20:05:25  <jonasschnelli> Yes. For the wallet it would feel more natural and there is no need for a comma in the filename, though there could be other use cases where you may want/need it
559 2017-07-19T20:06:21  <wumpus> cool, it warns at least now: Warning: Unsupported logging category -debug=rpc,net,tor.
560 2017-07-19T20:06:34  <wumpus> suppose that is since the debug categories are an enum
561 2017-07-19T20:06:51  <wumpus> it used to be silent about it
562 2017-07-19T20:09:33  <jnewbery> quick question about -rpcwallet in .conf: does that mean that server RPCs are also sent to the /wallet/<rpcwallet> endpoint? That's allowed in the current implementation, but it'll break when we do wallet process separation
563 2017-07-19T20:09:35  <jonasschnelli> BTW: github recommends to add a COC to the bitcoin core project: https://opensource.guide/code-of-conduct/
564 2017-07-19T20:11:19  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
565 2017-07-19T20:11:49  <wumpus> jnewbery: I'd expect -rpcwallet  would mean commands are sent to a wallet endpoint, yes, -cli doesn't have the knowledge whether something is a wallet call or not
566 2017-07-19T20:11:50  <jnewbery> I suppose we'll generally need to give bitcoin-cli more smarts if we do wallet process separation
567 2017-07-19T20:12:45  <wumpus> well ... we'll worry about that, then
568 2017-07-19T20:12:49  <sipa> well my view is that the 'wallet process' would still be a full bitcoind-like thing communicating over SPV... so it would still have P2P connections (typically just one), etc
569 2017-07-19T20:13:05  <wumpus> there's no way to specify an alternative endpoint at all at the moment
570 2017-07-19T20:13:05  <sipa> so there's not much reason why you couldn't send a getpeerinfo to a wallet endpoint
571 2017-07-19T20:13:14  <sipa> which is exactly what it does now
572 2017-07-19T20:13:25  <sipa> for a few things, like mempool or fee estimation something else may be needed
573 2017-07-19T20:13:55  <sipa> but that's a worry for later indeed
574 2017-07-19T20:13:58  <wumpus> heh yes if a wallet endpoints getpeerinfo you can send getpeerinfo to it
575 2017-07-19T20:14:35  <wumpus> if it doesn't, you'll get an error that it's not implemented
576 2017-07-19T20:14:57  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
577 2017-07-19T20:15:01  <jonasschnelli> sipa: Curious, could you think that – if we have p2p enc/auth – mempool and fee est would be something to serve over p2p to auth. peers?
578 2017-07-19T20:15:23  <jonasschnelli> Or do you see a different channel (RPC, etc,) for that?
579 2017-07-19T20:15:58  <sipa> jonasschnelli: maybe... that may be controversial
580 2017-07-19T20:16:44  <sipa> but i don't see much problem in having private extensions available only for known peers
581 2017-07-19T20:16:48  <jonasschnelli> I'd say that would simplify connection management massively. But I'd also say some people would dislike that.
582 2017-07-19T20:17:06  <jonasschnelli> Yes. me two
583 2017-07-19T20:17:11  <sipa> actually, i think that was one of the uses for -whitelist when i suggested :)
584 2017-07-19T20:17:20  <jonasschnelli> *too
585 2017-07-19T20:17:54  <jonasschnelli> But thats far in future (net refactor, Bip151, Bip150 and maybe then).
586 2017-07-19T20:18:00  <sipa> yah
587 2017-07-19T20:18:04  <wumpus> I agree authenticated extensions could make sense, please don't overload -whitelist with more things
588 2017-07-19T20:18:18  <sipa> wumpus: oh, absolutely - i agree with that now
589 2017-07-19T20:21:16  <sipa> just giving some historical background
590 2017-07-19T20:23:15  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
591 2017-07-19T20:25:12  <wumpus> oh sure, it's one kind of whitelisting option
592 2017-07-19T20:26:59  *** roidster has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
593 2017-07-19T20:27:02  *** roidster is now known as Guest86981
594 2017-07-19T20:28:17  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
595 2017-07-19T20:30:57  *** Gnof has quit IRC
596 2017-07-19T20:37:08  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] eliahuhorwitz opened pull request #10884: Update build-windows.md (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10884
597 2017-07-19T20:47:01  *** treebeardd has quit IRC
598 2017-07-19T20:48:22  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d445a2c2eaa1...df0793f324e3
599 2017-07-19T20:48:22  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7ec3343 Gregory Sanders: add gdb attach process to test README
600 2017-07-19T20:48:23  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master df0793f MarcoFalke: Merge #10681: add gdb attach process to test README...
601 2017-07-19T20:48:47  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #10681: add gdb attach process to test README (master...gdbattach) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10681
602 2017-07-19T20:57:32  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
603 2017-07-19T20:57:33  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
604 2017-07-19T21:02:57  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
605 2017-07-19T21:13:34  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
606 2017-07-19T21:18:07  <promag> is this correct bitcoin-qt -wallet=foo.dat -wallet=wallet.dat -regtest ?
607 2017-07-19T21:18:27  <promag> to run multiwallet in qt?
608 2017-07-19T21:28:20  <sipa> yes
609 2017-07-19T21:30:50  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
610 2017-07-19T21:40:44  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
611 2017-07-19T21:49:17  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
612 2017-07-19T21:53:08  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
613 2017-07-19T22:08:08  <promag> sipa: what should be the load order when -wallet=foo -wallet=bar -wallet=foo
614 2017-07-19T22:10:14  <sipa> ha, no clue
615 2017-07-19T22:10:42  <sipa> does that even work?
616 2017-07-19T22:11:06  <promag> yeah
617 2017-07-19T22:11:08  <promag> :P
618 2017-07-19T22:11:25  <promag> I'm submitting a PR to handle that
619 2017-07-19T22:11:55  <sipa>  cool
620 2017-07-19T22:13:11  <promag> anyway, I have 2 ideas: 1st add second argumento unique = false to ArgsManager::GetArgs
621 2017-07-19T22:13:40  <promag> the other is to add GetUniqueArgs
622 2017-07-19T22:14:25  <promag> which preserves order (first takes effect)
623 2017-07-19T22:14:34  <cfields> i think the arg manager itself should just sort that out
624 2017-07-19T22:14:50  <cfields> would we ever care about dupes post-init?
625 2017-07-19T22:15:15  <promag> however ParseParameters explicit says that the last takes effect when one only wants the arg as a single value
626 2017-07-19T22:15:50  <cfields> promag: yes, that's the common convention. so that you can add things later in the line to disable earlier ones
627 2017-07-19T22:16:05  <cfields> s/disable/override/
628 2017-07-19T22:16:36  <promag> cfields: right so it's config < arg[n] < arg[m] where m > n
629 2017-07-19T22:17:47  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
630 2017-07-19T22:18:05  <promag> but in the case of multi value then the order is? config[0], config[1], arg[0], arg[1] right?
631 2017-07-19T22:18:32  <cfields> that's what i'd expect, yes
632 2017-07-19T22:18:50  <promag> would we ever care about dupes post-init? -> dunno, wdyt?
633 2017-07-19T22:19:00  <sipa> i thinkit should just error if you soecify the same one twice
634 2017-07-19T22:19:08  <sipa> sorry, ohone typing
635 2017-07-19T22:19:28  <promag> sipa: and if you config[1] = arg[0] ?
636 2017-07-19T22:20:05  <promag> I mean, if you pass a value in the command line which happens to be in config?
637 2017-07-19T22:20:11  <promag> is that a error?
638 2017-07-19T22:20:13  <cfields> right, i would expect it to just quietly drop the dupe
639 2017-07-19T22:20:38  <promag> the error/warn should be just for the command line args right?
640 2017-07-19T22:20:59  <promag> so it's just a matter of fixing ParseParameters
641 2017-07-19T22:21:00  <sipa> ok, merging them is also a reasonable thing to fo
642 2017-07-19T22:21:16  <sipa> is it *always* the right thing?
643 2017-07-19T22:21:32  <cfields> sipa: you mean for all args? or for wallet in particular?
644 2017-07-19T22:21:33  <promag> dunno, didn't go that far
645 2017-07-19T22:21:47  <sipa> cfields: for all args
646 2017-07-19T22:21:56  <sipa> if you're talking about changing ParseParameters
647 2017-07-19T22:22:04  <promag> for instance, -connect
648 2017-07-19T22:22:40  <cfields> sipa: well at minimum, i think we always want to be able to override the config
649 2017-07-19T22:22:58  <cfields> and i think that always implies merging?
650 2017-07-19T22:23:33  <sipa> cfields: multiargs don't get merged, they get appended
651 2017-07-19T22:23:34  <promag> if it's multiarg then imo it's unique stable merge
652 2017-07-19T22:24:04  *** Guest86981 has quit IRC
653 2017-07-19T22:24:06  <sipa> i'm not convinced that for all options uniquifying is the right thing to do
654 2017-07-19T22:24:47  <cfields> yea, ok...
655 2017-07-19T22:24:59  <cfields> -addnode= -addnode=
656 2017-07-19T22:25:03  <cfields> i want 2 connections there
657 2017-07-19T22:25:22  <promag> does that make sense?
658 2017-07-19T22:25:41  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
659 2017-07-19T22:25:56  <promag> if that's the case, GetUniqueArgs is the way to go?
660 2017-07-19T22:26:32  <sipa> or just unique it in the wallet loading code
661 2017-07-19T22:26:40  <sipa> at least if you're talking about 0.15
662 2017-07-19T22:27:31  <promag> it's in 3 different places
663 2017-07-19T22:29:08  <promag> the PR adds GetUniqueArgs and changes 3 occurencies of gArgs.GetArgs("-wallet")
664 2017-07-19T22:29:28  <promag> and adds tests for GetUniqueArgs
665 2017-07-19T23:00:49  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
666 2017-07-19T23:04:21  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
667 2017-07-19T23:11:28  *** BashCo has quit IRC
668 2017-07-19T23:12:07  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
669 2017-07-19T23:30:23  *** roidster has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
670 2017-07-19T23:31:34  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
671 2017-07-19T23:38:00  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672 2017-07-19T23:38:33  <promag> sipa, cfields: what should GetArg("-foo") give when -foo=a -foo=b -foo=a? (for me last "a" takes effect even though it's duplicate)
673 2017-07-19T23:38:53  <sipa> yes, that's intentional
674 2017-07-19T23:39:01  <sipa> last option takes effect
675 2017-07-19T23:39:48  <promag> but GetUniqueArgs("-foo") gives {"a", "b"} sgty?
676 2017-07-19T23:42:29  <sipa> sure