12017-11-17T00:03:22  <gmaxwell> jcorgan: after reading NIST tests of varrious CDR media I dunno about trusting any of it-- they found two order of magnitude variations in durability of even 'archival grade' media.  Seemed like the only way to be confident at all is to have an independant lab test it.
  22017-11-17T00:04:45  *** jsfour has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  32017-11-17T00:04:57  *** torkelrogstad has quit IRC
  42017-11-17T00:05:25  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: probably a short private key with error correction scribed on metal (with a diamond scribe or cryptosteel) is probably the best durability that can be achieved.  Most other alternatives are not especially fire/water durable.
  52017-11-17T00:09:07  <jcorgan> yeah, it's more a convenience than anything to really trust. the US navy testing report i posted above used fairly good methodology and th mdisc fared well. again, though, it's a convenience and only one part of an overall system.
  62017-11-17T00:09:29  <jcorgan> "If it isn't backed up in three different ways and stored in three different places, it is already lost."
  72017-11-17T00:10:01  <gmaxwell> yea, thanks for the pointer.
  82017-11-17T00:11:20  *** ok7685 has quit IRC
  92017-11-17T00:11:21  <gmaxwell> FWIW, I've found in research that CD readers actually have far less reading robustness that in theoretically possible.  So for data recovery you could potentially read a lot of unreadable disks with a specialized drive.  (there is a project on github to read audio CDs with a USRP bolted to the photodetector output of a laserdisk player).
 102017-11-17T00:11:45  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] CryptAxe closed pull request #11098: [Qt] Add spend all button to the SendCoinsDialog (master...spendall) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11098
 112017-11-17T00:12:31  <gmaxwell> far less == e.g. they use the inner RS code only as a checksum, and the outer only as an erasure code,  and don't do any soft-input or iteration.
 122017-11-17T00:16:35  <jcorgan> i don't think the system was designed around archival, only incidental damage (scratches, etc.)
 132017-11-17T00:16:44  *** LumberCartel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 142017-11-17T00:17:36  <jcorgan> so none of the commodity write-once optical systems deal with things like fires or chemical damage, etc.
 152017-11-17T00:18:16  *** torkelrogstad has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 162017-11-17T00:19:22  <jcorgan> SDR/DSP is magic :-)
 172017-11-17T00:21:44  <jcorgan> physical damage aside, i'm still not sure if any proper bip32 hd-wallet seed/hierarchy designs have emerged
 182017-11-17T00:23:39  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: there are two things I'd like to talk to you about with future hardware wallet stuff.
 192017-11-17T00:24:20  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: One of them is that we now have a scheme where the host software can protect against a hardware wallet signing maliciously in a way that leaks keys.
 202017-11-17T00:24:49  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: perhaps you'd have some interest in implementing that. It requires an extra round trip between the host and HW wallet during signing.
 212017-11-17T00:25:54  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: the other thing is this KDF scheme.  Basically, I want to address the problem that you want to enter a password protected seed on a hardware wallet and not expose the password or seed to an untrusted host...  but the hardware wallet does not have enough CPU power to do a meaningful KDF (the 2000 rounds in BIP39 is basically pointless)
 222017-11-17T00:26:40  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: so I would suggest we use a scheme proposed some years ago by Adam Back that would let the host computer do the KDF grinding in zero knoweldge-- it learns nothing about the password entered on the hardware wallet.
 232017-11-17T00:30:38  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
 242017-11-17T00:30:57  *** torkelrogstad has quit IRC
 252017-11-17T00:32:24  <sipa> link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=311000.0
 262017-11-17T00:33:50  <achow101> what does everyone think about putting various docs about things in progress and plans (e.g. sipa's wallet thing) on the wiki here: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki
 272017-11-17T00:33:58  <achow101> that's where we did release notes things
 282017-11-17T00:39:52  <sipa> achow101: without large scale effort to commit to keeping something like that up to date, i'm afraid it will very easily go outdated
 292017-11-17T00:40:29  <achow101> sipa: I was thinking more of a repository to keep these writeups that morcos keeps asking for
 302017-11-17T00:40:43  <sipa> ah, yes
 312017-11-17T00:40:46  <achow101> to have them all in one place instead of having to search for all of them
 322017-11-17T00:41:01  <sipa> any reason they couldn't be in the repo?
 332017-11-17T00:41:19  <sipa> https://github.com/bitcoin-core/docs for example
 342017-11-17T00:41:39  <achow101> they could be in the repo I guess
 352017-11-17T00:42:36  <achow101> just somewhere that they can be easily found in one place is good enough
 362017-11-17T00:47:13  <meshcollider> +1
 372017-11-17T01:00:46  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 382017-11-17T01:06:22  *** blockchain has quit IRC
 392017-11-17T01:13:35  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
 402017-11-17T01:16:07  *** Khunbish has quit IRC
 412017-11-17T01:35:22  *** wunpunch has quit IRC
 422017-11-17T01:42:57  *** Murch has quit IRC
 432017-11-17T01:45:16  *** Muis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 442017-11-17T01:48:16  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 452017-11-17T01:55:50  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 462017-11-17T02:00:45  *** Cory has quit IRC
 472017-11-17T02:05:18  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
 482017-11-17T02:17:16  *** RubenSomsen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 492017-11-17T02:18:35  *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 502017-11-17T02:18:58  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MeshCollider opened pull request #11708: Add P2SH-P2WSH support to signrawtransaction and listunspent RPC (master...201711_signrawtransaction_wsh) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11708
 512017-11-17T02:20:45  <meshcollider> validateaddress is basically an address info call isn't it
 522017-11-17T02:21:18  <meshcollider> so should witnessScript and redeemScript be added to its output?
 532017-11-17T02:27:57  <sipa> i believe my segwit wallet pr does that
 542017-11-17T02:28:04  <sipa> or something similar at least
 552017-11-17T02:29:06  <meshcollider> oh cool, thanks :)
 562017-11-17T02:40:13  *** intcat has quit IRC
 572017-11-17T02:42:59  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 582017-11-17T02:48:33  *** Guest83 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 592017-11-17T02:58:35  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 602017-11-17T03:03:01  *** justan0theruser has quit IRC
 612017-11-17T03:08:31  *** Guest83 has quit IRC
 622017-11-17T03:08:50  *** Guest83 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 632017-11-17T03:09:20  *** Guest83 has quit IRC
 642017-11-17T03:09:42  *** Guest83 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 652017-11-17T03:14:34  *** Guest83 has quit IRC
 662017-11-17T03:15:26  *** Guest83 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 672017-11-17T03:20:07  *** Guest83 has quit IRC
 682017-11-17T03:20:53  *** satwo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 692017-11-17T03:46:51  *** jsfour has quit IRC
 702017-11-17T03:54:08  *** cxr has quit IRC
 712017-11-17T04:08:47  *** checksauce has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 722017-11-17T04:09:43  *** checksauce has quit IRC
 732017-11-17T04:39:49  *** jsfour has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 742017-11-17T05:07:17  *** Guest92143 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 752017-11-17T05:20:09  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 762017-11-17T05:28:34  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 772017-11-17T05:28:54  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 782017-11-17T05:30:40  *** sunday-afternoon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 792017-11-17T05:41:44  *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
 802017-11-17T06:26:43  *** satwo has quit IRC
 812017-11-17T06:27:13  <achow101> meshcollider: yes, and that's why I have a PR to move most of the functionality to a new call getaddressinfo
 822017-11-17T06:27:39  <meshcollider> achow101: Ah sweet, will check it out in a second
 832017-11-17T06:30:29  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 842017-11-17T06:37:23  <jonasschnelli> [14:24:20]  <gmaxwell>	jonasschnelli: One of them is that we now have a scheme where the host software can protect against a hardware wallet signing maliciously in a way that leaks keys.
 852017-11-17T06:37:36  <jonasschnelli> That is not adam3us's proposal? Right?
 862017-11-17T06:38:23  <sipa> jonasschnelli: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7a7i69/electrum_30_release/dpaetyn/?context=3
 872017-11-17T06:39:09  <jonasschnelli> sipa... thanks! reading...
 882017-11-17T06:50:25  *** Cory has quit IRC
 892017-11-17T06:53:39  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
 902017-11-17T06:54:20  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 912017-11-17T06:54:57  *** d_t has quit IRC
 922017-11-17T06:57:26  *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 932017-11-17T06:59:02  <jonasschnelli> sipa: so your scheme is to protect against possible malicious HWW (and or it's firmware)?
 942017-11-17T07:17:40  <kallewoof> What was the configure option to enable deadlock detection stuff again?
 952017-11-17T07:20:04  <kallewoof> Got it, I think... (CPPFLAGS=-DDEBUG_LOCKORDER)
 962017-11-17T07:44:55  <sipa> kallewoof: indeed
 972017-11-17T07:44:59  <sipa> jonasschnelli: indeed
 982017-11-17T07:46:23  *** cxr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 992017-11-17T07:46:39  <jonasschnelli> For now,.. all HWW manufacturer consider the hosts/desktop as compromised.. but it's an interesting perspective (from the user) to get kind of a two factor security between HWW/Desktop
1002017-11-17T07:47:32  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012017-11-17T07:49:42  <jonasschnelli> sipa: is that scheme: (k1+H(k2,R1))*G = k1*G+H(k2,R1)*G = R1+H(k2,R1)*G compatible with BIP32?
1022017-11-17T07:50:53  <gmaxwell> it doesn't change anything about the public keys used, it changes the nonces in the signatures.
1032017-11-17T07:51:31  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: instead of secp256k1_nonce_function_rfc6979 it would use the construction k1+H(k2,R1)?
1042017-11-17T07:52:27  <jonasschnelli> interesting... the desktop could verify the signature before broadcasting.. I see
1052017-11-17T07:52:38  <gmaxwell> a concern is that hw wallets may actually reduce user security, if I were an /evil/ genius, I'd start making counterfeit trezors and selling them on ebay for slightly under the normal retail price... with evil firmware on them.  Backdooring regular computers would be a waste of my resources, but backdooring a hw wallet-- I could be confident that a high percentage of my backdoored devices were g
1062017-11-17T07:52:43  <gmaxwell> oing to get cryptocoins on them.
1072017-11-17T07:53:16  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: yes, the hw wallet sends the original R to the desktop and it can verify.  If the HW wallet did something malicious it couldn't get its malicious effect further than the desktop.
1082017-11-17T07:54:15  <gmaxwell> So a backdoored HW wallet would only compromise the user (1) through orignial key generation, if it does that (user can avoid by rolling dice or something for the key),  or (2) with the cooperation of the desktop; which an evil party selling backdoored hardware wallets hopefully wouldn't have.
1092017-11-17T07:54:29  <jonasschnelli> How Digital Bitbox wanted to prevent from that attack was by proving the device authenticity by signing arbitraty data via the HWW device and have the signature verified. But that security model is based on obscurity of the auth-private key inside the device
1102017-11-17T07:54:40  <gmaxwell> at least in that kind of setup a HW wallet couldn't make you less secure than your desktop alone.
1112017-11-17T07:55:08  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: right, which could be compromised, and it doesn't help against bad firmware being made at the maker.
1122017-11-17T07:55:13  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
1132017-11-17T07:55:34  <gmaxwell> or something like making the compromised devices out of legitimate ones... where it just passes through the tamper detect to the original hardware but intercepts the rest.
1142017-11-17T07:55:36  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: bad firmware can't be installed because the bootloader only accepts signed firmware
1152017-11-17T07:56:15  *** jtimon has quit IRC
1162017-11-17T07:56:29  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172017-11-17T07:56:42  <jonasschnelli> In the case of proving authenticity with a pinned private key in the device,.. this can be made relatively secure when using a EPROM chip with physical extraction measurements
1182017-11-17T07:56:59  <jonasschnelli> It's as hard to extract as the seed on the device
1192017-11-17T07:57:56  <jonasschnelli> But I'd say both schemes should be implemented == more security
1202017-11-17T07:58:23  <sipa> well this protects against the case where the device creator is complicit
1212017-11-17T08:02:15  <jonasschnelli> sipa: Indeed...
1222017-11-17T08:03:12  <jonasschnelli> sipa: those key-exchanges would have to be made for each single private key (input)?
1232017-11-17T08:07:39  <jonasschnelli> One downside: ability to use the HWW on any (untrusted) computer or cellphone ( == portability) would be lost.
1242017-11-17T08:08:04  <gmaxwell> why?
1252017-11-17T08:09:28  <sipa> heh?
1262017-11-17T08:11:46  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: sipa: maybe I'm not getting it. Is the key exchange only used for the nonce?
1272017-11-17T08:11:53  <sipa> yes
1282017-11-17T08:12:05  <sipa> at signing time
1292017-11-17T08:15:13  <jonasschnelli> sipa: it would only protect from leaking private key via signatures?
1302017-11-17T08:15:45  <sipa> yes
1312017-11-17T08:16:12  <jonasschnelli> What one probably wants is a security that the device have signed the data it has displayed on the device screen... I guess that hard to achieve
1322017-11-17T08:18:01  <jonasschnelli> But if we assume the host is not fully compromised, then this is not a big deal...
1332017-11-17T08:18:09  *** cxr has quit IRC
1342017-11-17T08:20:24  <jonasschnelli> Example: Trezor is backdoored. You sign "Send 1 BTC to Bob" (verified with Trezor screen), while it actually signs "Send 1 BTC to Malory". Because your using the online Trezor wallet, it would go undetected.
1352017-11-17T08:23:57  <jonasschnelli> sipa: Thanks for that proposal.. I think that is something the Digital Bitbox guys will implement in the next (hardware) version!
1362017-11-17T08:24:11  <gmaxwell> well that wouldn't be detected if the host checks the resulting transaction and isn't compromised.
1372017-11-17T08:24:21  <jonasschnelli> I'm just worries how easy it is to screw up the implementation. :)
1382017-11-17T08:25:03  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: the problem is, users just love this browser based apps!.. they are so easy to compromise IMO
1392017-11-17T08:27:13  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell, sipa: by looking at a signature, is it impossible to say wether it has used RFC6979 or if it leaks potential key material?
1402017-11-17T08:27:20  <gmaxwell> sure, if the everything the user has is compromised you're out of luck.
1412017-11-17T08:27:35  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: right you cannot tell.
1422017-11-17T08:27:43  *** d_t has quit IRC
1432017-11-17T08:28:00  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: So there is a change that plenty of public signatures leak key material and that someone may have already collected those keys?
1442017-11-17T08:28:10  <gmaxwell> Yes, sure.
1452017-11-17T08:28:25  <jonasschnelli> I never thought of this... interesting
1462017-11-17T08:28:35  <gmaxwell> I think we haven't seen attacks like this because it is not (yet) a low hanging fruit.
1472017-11-17T08:28:53  <gmaxwell> Why bother understanding crypto when you can send the user an email that says "click here, you just won a free monkey."
1482017-11-17T08:29:23  <gmaxwell> and the user says "oh hey, I like monkies."  and then all their bitcoins are gone, no signature trickery required.
1492017-11-17T08:31:02  <midnightmagic> I want a free monkey!
1502017-11-17T08:31:03  <jonasschnelli> haha
1512017-11-17T08:31:43  <jonasschnelli> I mean consider the fact that (I think so) Ledger does program their devices in china... they could have implemented that "change"
1522017-11-17T08:32:09  <jonasschnelli> Although a firmware upgrade / verification would reveal that
1532017-11-17T08:32:50  *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
1542017-11-17T08:33:03  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: If you self-compile (and have verified that it uses RFC6979) the firmware, you are pretty safe from that attack? right?
1552017-11-17T08:33:18  <gmaxwell> how can you tell if it's using the code you think it is?
1562017-11-17T08:33:28  <wumpus> yes, the new malware going around on facebook seems to be more subtle psychology than free monkies, "hey I found a video of you", in which the link infects with a malware and auto-sends it to the other friends
1572017-11-17T08:33:31  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: self compile it?
1582017-11-17T08:33:51  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: aha.. I see
1592017-11-17T08:33:51  <wumpus> so many ways to manipulate people into clicking links, even those that don't like free monkeys :)
1602017-11-17T08:34:42  <wumpus> if something like that would include a wallet grabber it'd be pretty terrible
1612017-11-17T08:38:25  *** JackH has quit IRC
1622017-11-17T08:39:50  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: if you have signed messages and the private key you can tell if 6979 was used by recomputing the nonces yourself, but thats not a useful way to secure a hardware wallet, since the point is to not have the private key laying around. :P  just testing once isn't good enough since an evil wallet could use 6979 for the first N uses or whatnot.
1632017-11-17T08:41:15  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: At least a special HWW function could recompute all your signatures and the desktop app could verify it agains the public ones...
1642017-11-17T08:42:16  <jonasschnelli> I really like the "nonce-leak-prevention"... the cost the implementation if worth the +security one can get
1652017-11-17T08:42:26  <jonasschnelli> *is worth
1662017-11-17T08:42:43  <jonasschnelli> And IMO there is no UX costs (if done right=
1672017-11-17T08:43:00  <gmaxwell> yes, no ux cost, just a little more data between the signer and host.
1682017-11-17T08:43:10  <gmaxwell> and some software.
1692017-11-17T08:43:41  <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell, sipa: are you going to write a proposal?
1702017-11-17T08:44:41  <jonasschnelli> Or is that (https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7a7i69/electrum_30_release/dpaetyn/?context=3=) the proposal?
1712017-11-17T08:45:57  * jonasschnelli falls asleep
1722017-11-17T08:51:12  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732017-11-17T08:51:41  <wumpus> you're not in the CH timezone are you jonasschnelli :)
1742017-11-17T08:53:44  *** whphhg has quit IRC
1752017-11-17T08:55:15  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1762017-11-17T08:58:35  *** wxss has quit IRC
1772017-11-17T09:03:00  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1782017-11-17T09:06:13  *** kgc has quit IRC
1792017-11-17T09:06:20  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1802017-11-17T09:06:32  <promag> wumpus: and you?
1812017-11-17T09:06:52  *** wxss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1822017-11-17T09:06:52  <wumpus> I am
1832017-11-17T09:07:04  <promag> Heh
1842017-11-17T09:07:26  <wumpus> it's morning here
1852017-11-17T09:11:15  *** whphhg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1862017-11-17T09:24:09  *** wxss_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1872017-11-17T09:25:27  *** wxss has quit IRC
1882017-11-17T09:25:28  *** wxss_ is now known as wxss
1892017-11-17T09:27:50  *** promag has quit IRC
1902017-11-17T09:36:54  *** torkelrogstad has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1912017-11-17T09:38:41  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1922017-11-17T09:40:47  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
1932017-11-17T09:48:12  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1942017-11-17T09:48:48  <wumpus> sigh @ #11466, I hate when something went through a review cycle and it's almost ready for merge
1952017-11-17T09:48:51  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11466 | Specify custom wallet directory with -walletdir param by MeshCollider · Pull Request #11466 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1962017-11-17T09:49:03  <wumpus> then people come up with "you should do it like this instead"
1972017-11-17T09:49:16  <meshcollider> Yeah haha
1982017-11-17T09:49:22  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1992017-11-17T09:49:29  <meshcollider> wumpus: I'll rebase it now
2002017-11-17T09:49:30  <wumpus> I know it's well meant, but it's no way to cooporate
2012017-11-17T09:50:07  <meshcollider> General consensus is that its fine as-is though I think, based on the feedback #11687 got
2022017-11-17T09:50:08  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11687 | External wallet files by ryanofsky · Pull Request #11687 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2032017-11-17T09:50:09  <wumpus> users have been requesting a way to store their wallets somewhere else for ages
2042017-11-17T09:50:31  <meshcollider> Yeah and IMO its not safe enough to start separating them all over the show yet
2052017-11-17T09:50:39  <wumpus> so let's just add it, we can always add another mechanism later (then walletdir will just be the *default* wallet directory)
2062017-11-17T09:53:24  <wumpus> meshcollider: I agree, the other approach just isn't ready yet
2072017-11-17T09:53:34  <wumpus> and having a default wallet directory is useful too.
2082017-11-17T09:55:16  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
2092017-11-17T09:55:37  <wumpus> meshcollider: yes please rebase, I hope I've saved your PR :)
2102017-11-17T09:56:55  <wumpus> I'll help testing it
2112017-11-17T09:57:36  <meshcollider> wumpus: rebased, thanks :)
2122017-11-17T10:03:43  *** roconnor_ has quit IRC
2132017-11-17T10:23:25  <meshcollider> Ah 1 sec there has been a change to walletbackup.py which I need to fix
2142017-11-17T10:29:52  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2152017-11-17T10:36:10  <wumpus> no hurry...
2162017-11-17T10:37:09  <meshcollider> Yep travis is passing now, let me know if you want me to squash the last commit into "Create walletdir if datadir doesn't exist and fix tests"
2172017-11-17T10:46:11  *** nickler has quit IRC
2182017-11-17T11:00:25  *** promag has quit IRC
2192017-11-17T11:03:38  *** nickler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2202017-11-17T11:05:07  <wumpus> meshcollider: seems to work as expected here
2212017-11-17T11:07:37  <wumpus> I'd hold off on the squashing, still reviewing/testing
2222017-11-17T11:07:43  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2232017-11-17T11:08:03  <meshcollider> wumpus: Okay
2242017-11-17T11:09:41  *** promag has quit IRC
2252017-11-17T11:11:46  <wumpus> I hopefully got someone else to test it as well
2262017-11-17T11:14:15  *** torkelrogstad has quit IRC
2272017-11-17T11:16:02  <wumpus> the only problem with getting testers is that people tend to want it on top of 0.15.x, but if it's relevant for backport at all it makes no sense to do so before it's merged into master
2282017-11-17T11:26:12  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2292017-11-17T11:27:39  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2302017-11-17T11:29:07  *** Lauda has quit IRC
2312017-11-17T11:29:40  *** Lauda has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2322017-11-17T11:37:46  *** photonclock_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332017-11-17T11:45:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/99bc0b428b03...41221126c855
2342017-11-17T11:45:29  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master af9103e James O'Beirne: [build] Add a script for installing db4...
2352017-11-17T11:45:29  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6e4cdd6 James O'Beirne: [docs] Add reference to install_db4.sh in OS X build instructions
2362017-11-17T11:45:30  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4122112 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11702: [build] Add a script for installing db4...
2372017-11-17T11:46:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11702: [build] Add a script for installing db4 (master...install-db4-script) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11702
2382017-11-17T11:46:10  <meshcollider> wumpus: Alright I'm heading to bed now, if you want I can squash the commits now or just do it tomorrow
2392017-11-17T11:46:39  <wumpus> I'm finished with it, ok with me to squash nwo
2402017-11-17T11:46:42  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2412017-11-17T11:47:30  <wumpus> I'll ACK
2422017-11-17T11:50:56  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
2432017-11-17T11:52:25  <meshcollider> wumpus: done, thanks :)
2442017-11-17T12:05:23  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2452017-11-17T12:07:04  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
2462017-11-17T12:08:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/41221126c855...f6f8d54aff34
2472017-11-17T12:08:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 446e261 practicalswift: [qt] Fix potential memory leak in newPossibleKey(ChangeCWallet *wallet)
2482017-11-17T12:08:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f6f8d54 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10920: [qt] Fix potential memory leak in newPossibleKey(ChangeCWallet *wallet)...
2492017-11-17T12:08:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10920: [qt] Fix potential memory leak in newPossibleKey(ChangeCWallet *wallet) (master...fix-newPossibleKeyChange-memory-leak) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10920
2502017-11-17T12:12:37  *** roconnor_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512017-11-17T12:14:32  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522017-11-17T12:17:31  *** Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW
2532017-11-17T12:17:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f6f8d54aff34...ccc70a295fc5
2542017-11-17T12:17:51  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f9cd9b1 John Newbery: [tests] Move test_framework Bitcoin primitives into separate module...
2552017-11-17T12:17:52  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1135c79 John Newbery: [tests] Tidy up mininode.py module...
2562017-11-17T12:17:52  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ccc70a2 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11648: [tests] Add messages.py...
2572017-11-17T12:18:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11648: [tests] Add messages.py (master...add_primitives_py) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11648
2582017-11-17T12:29:56  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592017-11-17T12:29:56  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602017-11-17T12:31:27  <promag> wumpus: are you going to merge #11466?
2612017-11-17T12:31:30  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11466 | Specify custom wallet directory with -walletdir param by MeshCollider · Pull Request #11466 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2622017-11-17T12:32:03  <wumpus> promag: I intend to, but would prefer if it gets stilll some more testing of course
2632017-11-17T12:32:25  <promag> I was planning to test it after lunch
2642017-11-17T12:33:08  <wumpus> great!
2652017-11-17T12:33:32  <promag> ok
2662017-11-17T12:34:45  <wumpus> I just tested it quite extensively as I was the person to propose the change in the first place, but I didn't try e.g. multiwallet things (though I don't see why there'd be an issue)
2672017-11-17T12:37:19  <wumpus> but could always be some edge case
2682017-11-17T12:38:26  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
2692017-11-17T12:41:26  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702017-11-17T12:46:42  *** torkelrogstad has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2712017-11-17T12:52:13  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2722017-11-17T12:54:15  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732017-11-17T12:54:32  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742017-11-17T12:55:46  <fanquake> Hope that wasn't too rude #11709
2752017-11-17T12:55:47  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11709 | issue : Message store directory does not exist · Issue #11709 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2762017-11-17T12:57:36  <wumpus> fanquake: no, your response is clear and to the point, he's on his own there, we can't provide support for all the gazilion forks
2772017-11-17T12:58:25  <wumpus> and if he's able to use git enough to trace it back to our repository he's also able to find the person that made the relevant change for his altcoin...
2782017-11-17T13:00:12  <wumpus> I get loads of mail about altcoins as well because my mail is in the git log so often
2792017-11-17T13:01:32  <fanquake> Yea, I seem to get random messages on Twitter all the time. Get a few emails as well.
2802017-11-17T13:02:36  <fanquake> #11621 Should be able to go in now
2812017-11-17T13:02:37  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11621 | [build] Add temp_bitcoin_locale_qrc to CLEAN_QT to fix make distcheck by fanquake · Pull Request #11621 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2822017-11-17T13:03:53  <fanquake> I might fixup 11222 over the weekend, and the original author doesn't seem to have time for it.
2832017-11-17T13:03:57  <wumpus> fanquake: thanks
2842017-11-17T13:04:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ccc70a295fc5...1f7695b4194b
2852017-11-17T13:04:31  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a7c949f fanquake: [build] Add temp_bitcoin_locale_qrc to CLEAN_QT to fix make distcheck
2862017-11-17T13:04:31  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1f7695b Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11621: [build] Add temp_bitcoin_locale_qrc to CLEAN_QT to fix make distcheck...
2872017-11-17T13:05:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11621: [build] Add temp_bitcoin_locale_qrc to CLEAN_QT to fix make distcheck (master...fix-osx-distcheck) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11621
2882017-11-17T13:05:41  <wumpus> fanquake: my reply there was a last ping, if he doesn't reply or pick it up again I'll close and add a 'up for grabs' label. But yes feel free to pick it up if it's worth doing so :)
2892017-11-17T13:08:24  <wumpus> apparently I stumbled on the issue exactly a month after cfields' last comment
2902017-11-17T13:08:49  *** Guest92143 has quit IRC
2912017-11-17T13:09:32  <fanquake> heh, it's easy for PRs to sit and idle for a long time. Little burst of activity and interest, and then it gets a few rebases out of date, or too far buried in the stream of new PRs
2922017-11-17T13:13:23  <fanquake> wumpus Thoughts on new PGP key additions? A few recently seem to be submitting their keys for addition before they've even gitian built. There's not really a rule about adding them?
2932017-11-17T13:14:19  <fanquake> I think jonass is right in that there are so few builders you don't want to turn anyone away. Keys can also easily be removed later on.
2942017-11-17T13:14:54  <wumpus> fanquake: that tends to happen, it's quite common for open source projects, especially busy ones. Though it can be sad if a certain PR gets no review interest at all, e.g. #10994
2952017-11-17T13:14:56  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10994 | Add option to avoid warning on certain network upgrades by ajtowns · Pull Request #10994 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2962017-11-17T13:15:25  <wumpus> fanquake: we currently have no rules for that, because addition was so rare
2972017-11-17T13:15:40  <wumpus> fanquake: I think we should have rules for expiration, remove the key if someone isn't gitian building anymore for e.g. a year
2982017-11-17T13:15:48  *** promag has quit IRC
2992017-11-17T13:16:01  <wumpus> fanquake: but not for addition so much, if people can gitian build at this point they're awesome
3002017-11-17T13:16:15  <wumpus> fanquake: and he's proven he could do it at least once :)
3012017-11-17T13:16:49  <fanquake> Indeed https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gitian.sigs/graphs/contributors isn't a long list. Plenty of people in there that haven't built recently as well.
3022017-11-17T13:17:08  <wumpus> yes, even expiration might be overkill at this point, it's just not so much of an issue
3032017-11-17T13:17:22  <wumpus> not like the repository is getting cluttered with them
3042017-11-17T13:17:29  <fanquake> I think the fact that the build process is so much *easier* now is great. Can remember I struggled to get it working for a while.
3052017-11-17T13:18:39  <fanquake> Guess #11700 can go in then. If no-one objects.
3062017-11-17T13:18:40  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11700 | Add gitian PGP key: willyko by willyko · Pull Request #11700 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3072017-11-17T13:19:30  <wumpus> agree
3082017-11-17T13:20:07  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1f7695b4194b...595ec11d804f
3092017-11-17T13:20:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f88d900 Willy Ko: Add gitian PGP key: willyko
3102017-11-17T13:20:08  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 595ec11 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11700: Add gitian PGP key: willyko...
3112017-11-17T13:20:34  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11700: Add gitian PGP key: willyko (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11700
3122017-11-17T13:21:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #11710: cli: Reject arguments to -getinfo (master...2017_11_getinfo_args) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11710
3132017-11-17T13:25:43  <fanquake> I think #11704 should be ok now. If sipsorcery is committed to getting the Windows build side of things in order, that'll be good.
3142017-11-17T13:25:44  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11704 | Windows build doc update by sipsorcery · Pull Request #11704 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3152017-11-17T13:26:13  <wumpus> fanquake: it's great to have someone working on that
3162017-11-17T13:28:55  <wumpus> I'm going to edit his commit message a bit before merging, he put everything in the subject line
3172017-11-17T13:29:34  *** Nhia has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3182017-11-17T13:32:45  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/595ec11d804f...ea68190132b2
3192017-11-17T13:32:45  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1cecea7 Aaron Clauson: doc: Specify required source location for Windows WSL builds...
3202017-11-17T13:32:46  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ea68190 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11704: Windows build doc update...
3212017-11-17T13:33:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11704: Windows build doc update (master...windoc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11704
3222017-11-17T13:37:05  *** davec has quit IRC
3232017-11-17T13:38:55  *** glauberdm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3242017-11-17T13:42:52  <fanquake> Still not sure about #11526 though. We had discussions about this with an Xcode project a while ago. Ended up in a separate repository, doesn't look like it lasted too long.
3252017-11-17T13:42:54  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11526 | Visual Studio build configuration for Bitcoin Core. by sipsorcery · Pull Request #11526 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3262017-11-17T13:44:50  <wumpus> I don't know either. I like the idea of making MSVC build easier, but I don't want to expect from people to maintain two build systems when e.g. adding a file.
3272017-11-17T13:45:31  <wumpus> certainly not one that only runs on one platform
3282017-11-17T13:46:01  *** nelruk has quit IRC
3292017-11-17T13:46:16  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3302017-11-17T13:46:38  <wumpus> I'm ok with merging it though, the author committed to maintaining MSVC support
3312017-11-17T13:47:40  <fanquake> There are some other PRs that need merging first. To fix compilation issues, and "a tonne of warnings" apparently. Should probably get those in fix at least, and see what other issues they turn up. If any.
3322017-11-17T13:47:59  <fanquake> Mostly in #11558
3332017-11-17T13:48:01  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11558 | Minimal code changes to allow msvc compilation by sipsorcery · Pull Request #11558 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3342017-11-17T13:48:56  <fanquake> Corys comment re #11196 should get a look too I think
3352017-11-17T13:48:59  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11196 | Switch memory_cleanse implementation to BoringSSLs to ensure memory clearing even with -lto by maaku · Pull Request #11196 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3362017-11-17T13:49:22  <fanquake> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11196#discussion_r137124417
3372017-11-17T13:49:33  *** uneeb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3382017-11-17T13:50:06  *** uneeb has quit IRC
3392017-11-17T13:50:14  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3402017-11-17T13:52:28  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3412017-11-17T14:00:02  <wumpus> #11558 is pretty much ready, though I agree with cfields' last comment
3422017-11-17T14:00:04  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11558 | Minimal code changes to allow msvc compilation by sipsorcery · Pull Request #11558 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3432017-11-17T14:00:17  <wumpus> we should keep the compat header out of the headers
3442017-11-17T14:01:21  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ea68190132b2...5197100704b8
3452017-11-17T14:01:21  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e89adba Matt Corallo: Make default issue text all comments to make issues more readable
3462017-11-17T14:01:21  *** torkelrogstad has quit IRC
3472017-11-17T14:01:22  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5197100 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11706: Make default issue text all comments to make issues more readable...
3482017-11-17T14:01:29  *** torkelrogstad has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3492017-11-17T14:01:46  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11706: Make default issue text all comments to make issues more readable (master...2017-11-shorter-default-issue-redux) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11706
3502017-11-17T14:02:31  <fanquake> Hopefully now the first line I'll see in issue emails will actually contain some information, rather than 99% of the time it being the template text.
3512017-11-17T14:03:13  <wumpus> oh yes that's annoying, almost everyone just kept the template text there, usually without even paying attention to it
3522017-11-17T14:04:01  <wumpus> I certainly understand why some bug reporting systems (e.g. bugzilla) make people fill in a form, instead of just offering a free text field
3532017-11-17T14:04:54  <fanquake> It's a trade off between capturing everything, and missing some obscure bug being reported by an unmotivated passer by
3542017-11-17T14:04:56  <wumpus> a template is apparently not a working substitute for that, well who knows, maybe BlueMatt's cleanups improve it
3552017-11-17T14:05:20  <wumpus> yes
3562017-11-17T14:09:45  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
3572017-11-17T14:10:15  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3582017-11-17T14:10:23  <fanquake> wumpus trivial merge or close? #11140
3592017-11-17T14:10:25  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11140 | Trivial: Improve #endif comments by danra · Pull Request #11140 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3602017-11-17T14:13:52  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3612017-11-17T14:13:59  *** torkelrogstad has quit IRC
3622017-11-17T14:18:18  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
3632017-11-17T14:18:43  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3642017-11-17T14:21:51  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3652017-11-17T14:23:51  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3662017-11-17T14:26:52  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
3672017-11-17T14:27:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #11711: bitcoin_qt.m4: Minor fixes and clean-ups. (master...bitcoin-qt-m4-cleanup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11711
3682017-11-17T14:27:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #11222: bitcoin_qt.m4: Minor fixes and clean-ups. (master...config-fixes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11222
3692017-11-17T14:28:14  <promag> I would say meh to 11140
3702017-11-17T14:29:24  <promag> the blocks are so small I would remove the comments, repeating the condition is kind of unnecessary there
3712017-11-17T14:33:12  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3722017-11-17T14:33:40  <wumpus> well he has a point w/ mentioning ==0, and it has an ACK so meh, i'm just going to merge it
3732017-11-17T14:34:36  <wumpus> promag: agree that the blocks are so small that mentinoing the condition on the endif is not necessary in the first place
3742017-11-17T14:34:46  <wumpus> but it's there, so it should be correct...
3752017-11-17T14:35:15  <fanquake> just merge it then heh
3762017-11-17T14:35:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5197100704b8...142913296f00
3772017-11-17T14:35:17  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ac1cf8d danra: Trivial: Improve #endif comments...
3782017-11-17T14:35:17  <promag> yes, at the moment the comment is misleading
3792017-11-17T14:35:17  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1429132 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11140: Trivial: Improve #endif comments...
3802017-11-17T14:35:29  <promag> hence the meh
3812017-11-17T14:35:42  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11140: Trivial: Improve #endif comments (master...patch-4) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11140
3822017-11-17T14:35:46  *** satwo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3832017-11-17T14:36:01  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
3842017-11-17T14:37:23  <fanquake> wumpus looking in byteswap, does the protobuf check affect your work in 11622 at all?
3852017-11-17T14:37:26  <promag> wumpus: regarding #11466
3862017-11-17T14:37:29  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11466 | Specify custom wallet directory with -walletdir param by MeshCollider · Pull Request #11466 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3872017-11-17T14:37:55  <promag> first time run is doesn't use -walletdir right?
3882017-11-17T14:37:56  <fanquake> I assume not looking at the comments, if the behaviour is assumed to be the same in either case
3892017-11-17T14:38:30  <wumpus> fanquake: I think it's harmless to run it, though maybe unnecessary, I don't know
3902017-11-17T14:38:57  <wumpus> fanquake: the test is there to check if there is a collision between protobuf and our bswap primitives, so it will always pass if protobuf is not included
3912017-11-17T14:39:24  <wumpus> promag: you mean when it's run when the datadir doesn't exist yet?
3922017-11-17T14:39:30  <promag> yes
3932017-11-17T14:39:40  <wumpus> promag: that would be bad, let's see
3942017-11-17T14:39:48  <promag> it's building here so..
3952017-11-17T14:52:51  *** glauberdm has quit IRC
3962017-11-17T14:54:08  *** nelruk has quit IRC
3972017-11-17T14:57:05  <promag> wumpus: it creates datadir/wallets but uses the provided -walletdir
3982017-11-17T14:57:13  <wumpus> promag: yep, that's expected
3992017-11-17T14:57:49  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4002017-11-17T14:58:23  <wumpus> promag: there was earlier discussion about that: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11466#discussion_r150251905
4012017-11-17T14:59:43  <wumpus> not creating all new data directories (including when running without wallets) with a wallets subdirectory would enormously complicate things
4022017-11-17T15:00:19  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4032017-11-17T15:01:18  <promag> yes I saw that. But here I've provided -walletdir no there's no need (and no harm) creating datadir/wallets
4042017-11-17T15:01:34  <wumpus> it should still be created if you want to run without -walletdir later
4052017-11-17T15:01:34  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
4062017-11-17T15:01:52  <wumpus> because if not it's too late - it's no longer a new data directory, so it will use legacy layout
4072017-11-17T15:02:30  <promag> right
4082017-11-17T15:02:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #9737: Don't disconnect feeler connections prematurely (master...ServicesIrrelevantForFeelerConnections) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9737
4092017-11-17T15:02:45  <promag> btw, why not validate walletdir before intro?
4102017-11-17T15:03:10  <promag> edge case?
4112017-11-17T15:03:15  <wumpus> it's a bit tricky but I think it's the most straightforward and easy to verify way to do this
4122017-11-17T15:03:45  <wumpus> promag: doing things before intro is extremely difficult
4132017-11-17T15:04:07  <wumpus> e.g. bitcoin.conf hasn't been read yet
4142017-11-17T15:04:27  <wumpus> nor have per-network GUI settings
4152017-11-17T15:04:41  <wumpus> so if you'd validate walletdir before intro, you'd miss it if it's provided in bitcoin.conf
4162017-11-17T15:04:42  <promag> btw, if -walletdir points to a file, the error is still "Error: Specified wallet directory "/Users/promag/foo2" does not exist."
4172017-11-17T15:04:59  <wumpus> that could use a clearer error
4182017-11-17T15:05:03  *** nelruk has quit IRC
4192017-11-17T15:06:21  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4202017-11-17T15:07:59  *** lolek_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4212017-11-17T15:10:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #10172: Fix opt-in RBF reliance on compiler integer size (master...rbf-numlimits-fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10172
4222017-11-17T15:13:30  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #10702: [Trivial] Improve end-of-namespace comment consistency (master...improve-end-of-namespace-comment-consistence) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10702
4232017-11-17T15:13:48  *** nelruk has quit IRC
4242017-11-17T15:16:01  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4252017-11-17T15:18:21  *** RubenSomsen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4262017-11-17T15:18:51  *** lolek_ has quit IRC
4272017-11-17T15:25:03  *** nelruk has quit IRC
4282017-11-17T15:25:25  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4292017-11-17T15:31:41  *** satwo has quit IRC
4302017-11-17T15:31:55  *** satwo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4312017-11-17T15:32:15  *** nelruk has quit IRC
4322017-11-17T15:34:11  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4332017-11-17T15:34:56  *** fanquake has quit IRC
4342017-11-17T15:34:59  <promag> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11648#discussion_r151709875
4352017-11-17T15:35:14  <promag> MarcoFalke: just a question, I saw the moveonly
4362017-11-17T15:35:40  <promag> now it can be cleaned right?
4372017-11-17T15:36:19  *** satwo has quit IRC
4382017-11-17T15:36:41  *** satwo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4392017-11-17T15:40:48  *** nelruk has quit IRC
4402017-11-17T15:40:51  <wumpus> promag: sure
4412017-11-17T15:44:15  *** JackH has quit IRC
4422017-11-17T15:45:16  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4432017-11-17T15:51:11  *** jadox has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4442017-11-17T15:52:21  *** nelruk has quit IRC
4452017-11-17T15:53:08  *** Edgardo10Toy has quit IRC
4462017-11-17T15:54:27  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4472017-11-17T15:54:41  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4482017-11-17T15:55:50  *** torkelrogstad has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4492017-11-17T15:56:57  *** jadox has quit IRC
4502017-11-17T15:58:05  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
4512017-11-17T15:58:53  <MarcoFalke> promag: Not sure if that single change warrants a pull on its own
4522017-11-17T16:00:22  <MarcoFalke> I'd prefer if is cleaned up when the function is touched by other reasons. Though, no strong opinion. Just -0
4532017-11-17T16:00:36  *** Erich43Homenick has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4542017-11-17T16:01:37  *** nelruk has quit IRC
4552017-11-17T16:02:26  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4562017-11-17T16:02:26  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4572017-11-17T16:05:35  *** nelruk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4582017-11-17T16:06:01  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4592017-11-17T16:07:39  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
4602017-11-17T16:10:06  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4612017-11-17T16:16:41  *** Erich43Homenick has quit IRC
4622017-11-17T16:24:32  *** Darryl87Hartmann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4632017-11-17T16:27:49  *** torkelrogstad has quit IRC
4642017-11-17T16:34:17  *** promag has quit IRC
4652017-11-17T16:34:36  *** jadox has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4662017-11-17T16:42:30  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4672017-11-17T16:46:55  *** promag has quit IRC
4682017-11-17T16:48:35  *** LumberCartel has quit IRC
4692017-11-17T17:07:52  *** nelruk has quit IRC
4702017-11-17T17:14:01  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4712017-11-17T17:15:05  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4722017-11-17T17:21:19  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4732017-11-17T17:21:25  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4742017-11-17T17:28:22  *** tomahawk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4752017-11-17T17:34:10  *** thanos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4762017-11-17T17:34:34  *** thanos has quit IRC
4772017-11-17T17:36:16  *** LumberCartel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4782017-11-17T17:39:10  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
4792017-11-17T17:40:15  *** tomahawk has quit IRC
4802017-11-17T17:53:24  <meshcollider> wumpus: re net-specific walletdir subdirectories, what do you think of it just using them if they exist, but defaulting to root dir (so the user has to create the subdirectories themselves if they want them)
4812017-11-17T17:54:11  <meshcollider> Would be a much simpler change I think
4822017-11-17T17:55:31  *** bule has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4832017-11-17T18:15:08  *** jitendra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4842017-11-17T18:15:42  *** jitendra has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4852017-11-17T18:33:00  *** pergaminho has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4862017-11-17T18:35:08  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: yeah. Not in CH timezone. Right now in Hawaii
4872017-11-17T18:36:47  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
4882017-11-17T18:42:44  *** timothy has quit IRC
4892017-11-17T18:51:47  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4902017-11-17T18:54:37  *** satwo has quit IRC
4912017-11-17T19:06:33  *** Provoostenator has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4922017-11-17T19:16:00  *** satwo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4932017-11-17T19:29:33  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
4942017-11-17T19:34:00  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4952017-11-17T19:36:09  *** LumberCartel has quit IRC
4962017-11-17T19:36:28  *** jadox has quit IRC
4972017-11-17T19:58:15  *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
4982017-11-17T19:59:15  *** RubenSomsen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4992017-11-17T20:11:11  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
5002017-11-17T20:12:31  <jonasschnelli> is there a quick way to compile without tests (without re-configure)? I wish i could speed up compile time of pull requests for a quick test...
5012017-11-17T20:12:46  <jonasschnelli> compile time is a main show stopper for testing pulls
5022017-11-17T20:13:01  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: make src/bitcoind (or maybe its just make bitcoind?)
5032017-11-17T20:13:55  <jonasschnelli> BlueMatt: hmm.. yes. That could work (now all pre-built,.. need to test with a new PR)
5042017-11-17T20:15:44  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5052017-11-17T20:18:57  *** Drrhh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5062017-11-17T20:23:30  *** Drrhh has quit IRC
5072017-11-17T20:27:24  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
5082017-11-17T20:27:45  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
5092017-11-17T20:35:31  *** d_t has quit IRC
5102017-11-17T20:45:46  *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
5112017-11-17T20:46:49  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5122017-11-17T21:11:57  *** LumberCartel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5132017-11-17T21:25:42  *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5142017-11-17T21:26:53  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
5152017-11-17T21:34:07  *** Khunbish has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5162017-11-17T21:41:07  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5172017-11-17T21:47:49  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #11712: [tests] Split NodeConn from NodeConnCB (master...split_nodeconn) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11712
5182017-11-17T21:52:33  *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
5192017-11-17T21:55:35  *** neha has quit IRC
5202017-11-17T22:03:44  *** JackH has quit IRC
5212017-11-17T22:04:15  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5222017-11-17T22:11:30  *** Provoostenator has quit IRC
5232017-11-17T22:24:23  *** coin_trader has quit IRC
5242017-11-17T22:25:26  *** spinza has quit IRC
5252017-11-17T22:30:17  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5262017-11-17T22:42:45  *** sunday-afternoon has quit IRC
5272017-11-17T22:51:01  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
5282017-11-17T22:54:05  *** roadcrap has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5292017-11-17T22:54:14  *** Dizzle has quit IRC
5302017-11-17T23:12:59  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5312017-11-17T23:21:35  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
5322017-11-17T23:28:22  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5332017-11-17T23:29:28  *** moctos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5342017-11-17T23:38:05  *** moctos has quit IRC
5352017-11-17T23:52:20  *** devin_ has quit IRC