1 2017-12-20T00:00:00  *** mrannanay has quit IRC
   2 2017-12-20T00:03:40  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
   3 2017-12-20T00:07:16  *** intcat has quit IRC
   4 2017-12-20T00:11:54  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
   5 2017-12-20T00:13:08  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
   6 2017-12-20T00:14:28  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
   7 2017-12-20T00:14:51  <promag> jonasschnelli: is it possible to know if a rescan is in progress?
   8 2017-12-20T00:16:43  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
   9 2017-12-20T00:17:41  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  10 2017-12-20T00:22:41  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  11 2017-12-20T00:23:07  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  12 2017-12-20T00:23:55  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
  13 2017-12-20T00:24:36  *** zshlyk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  14 2017-12-20T00:24:37  *** intcat has quit IRC
  15 2017-12-20T00:24:42  *** alreadylate has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  16 2017-12-20T00:25:35  <midnightmagic> good heavens, lots of new sigs in the gitian.sigs repo.
  17 2017-12-20T00:26:06  <luke-jr> sipa: jonasschnelli: FWIW, my test had chainstate on a 5400 RPM drive with btrfs+compression (no encryption); i7-4771 CPU
  18 2017-12-20T00:26:53  <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, expiration is keeping the relay fee from going up?
  19 2017-12-20T00:27:21  <luke-jr> short of the compression, I think that's about the worst-possible disk scenario (although it may be all cached in RAM..)
  20 2017-12-20T00:27:21  <phantomcircuit> iirc we dont remember expired transactions at all, i expected that to mean they just end up back in the mempool after a few hours
  21 2017-12-20T00:27:44  *** Randolf has quit IRC
  22 2017-12-20T00:30:53  *** alreadylate has quit IRC
  23 2017-12-20T00:45:32  *** DrBenway has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  24 2017-12-20T00:45:55  <DrBenway> hi folks, is the 2018 roadmap published anywhere? i can't seem to find it
  25 2017-12-20T00:46:34  *** cloudrunner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  26 2017-12-20T00:46:34  <sipa> there is no roadmap
  27 2017-12-20T00:46:35  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] agsstaff opened pull request #11954: update (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11954
  28 2017-12-20T00:46:57  <DrBenway> is there some kind of plan for the future or are you guys just maintaining the current codebase and trying to keep it as is?
  29 2017-12-20T00:47:08  <sipa> many people have many plans for the future
  30 2017-12-20T00:47:19  <sipa> but bitcoin core is just an open source project
  31 2017-12-20T00:47:20  <DrBenway> and none of it is public?
  32 2017-12-20T00:47:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #11954: update (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11954
  33 2017-12-20T00:47:39  <sipa> DrBenway: what is your roadmap?
  34 2017-12-20T00:47:53  <DrBenway> sipa: i dont have one. but im also not a project
  35 2017-12-20T00:47:55  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  36 2017-12-20T00:47:58  <sipa> neither am i
  37 2017-12-20T00:48:15  <DrBenway> o_O
  38 2017-12-20T00:48:37  <DrBenway> friendly community
  39 2017-12-20T00:48:41  <sipa> i volunteer my time, and i'll gladly tell you what i'm working on or excited about
  40 2017-12-20T00:48:57  <sipa> but i can't tell people what they need to work on, or guarantee what they will prioritize
  41 2017-12-20T00:49:05  <sipa> that's up to them
  42 2017-12-20T00:49:41  <DrBenway> so what are you working on?
  43 2017-12-20T00:49:49  <jonasschnelli> promag: currently not possible...
  44 2017-12-20T00:50:07  <jonasschnelli> though adding a check in getwalletinfo would be trivial
  45 2017-12-20T00:50:27  <jonasschnelli> just test if you can reserve via the WalletRescanReserver
  46 2017-12-20T00:50:32  <sipa> DrBenway: i'm currently working on segwit wallet support in bitcoin core, reviewing many other changes, and longer term i'm working on a signature aggregation proposal and a few further out cryptographic constructions
  47 2017-12-20T00:50:46  <eck> what are you excited about?
  48 2017-12-20T00:51:09  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
  49 2017-12-20T00:51:16  <DrBenway> is bitcoin core going ahead with segwit? there's been so much back and forth that im not sure anymore
  50 2017-12-20T00:51:34  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  51 2017-12-20T00:52:11  <meshcollider> DrBenway: Segwit has been activated for months... you are probably getting confused with S2X which is definitely not going ahead, no
  52 2017-12-20T00:52:56  <DrBenway> so currently signatures are not stored with the block itself? or there's an extended block?
  53 2017-12-20T00:53:12  <sipa> DrBenway: segwit absolutely keeps all signatures in blocks
  54 2017-12-20T00:53:15  <meshcollider> Signatures are stored within the block yes
  55 2017-12-20T00:53:27  <sipa> they're just moved to another place, and hashed slightly differently
  56 2017-12-20T00:53:44  *** BashCo has quit IRC
  57 2017-12-20T00:53:47  <DrBenway> i thought the whole idea of segwit was that the signature would go in an extended block? (im not sure where that extended block ends up in the blcok chain)
  58 2017-12-20T00:53:55  <DrBenway> ok
  59 2017-12-20T00:53:55  <sipa> no
  60 2017-12-20T00:54:25  <sipa> the point is (1) signatures are not committed to by transaction ids (but still included in blocks) and (2) are discounted for the purposes of resource limits
  61 2017-12-20T00:54:28  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  62 2017-12-20T00:54:37  <sipa> but if you download a block, it still has all the signatures
  63 2017-12-20T00:54:43  <sipa> it'll be invalid without them
  64 2017-12-20T00:54:54  <DrBenway> sure
  65 2017-12-20T00:55:13  <cfields> NicolasDorier: ping. transaction_tests/test_big_witness_transaction takes 20sec to sign the inputs on x86. I suspect it takes minutes on travis. Suggestions for reducing that without defeating the purpose of the test?
  66 2017-12-20T00:55:18  <DrBenway> and that was done as a mean of reducing memory in case that the signute is used several times within a single block?
  67 2017-12-20T00:55:33  <DrBenway> s/memory/data
  68 2017-12-20T00:55:44  <meshcollider> DrBenway: no, signatures can't be reused for different transactions
  69 2017-12-20T00:55:47  <sipa> DrBenway: https://segwit.org/
  70 2017-12-20T00:57:21  *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  71 2017-12-20T00:58:45  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
  72 2017-12-20T01:00:01  *** Kozuch has quit IRC
  73 2017-12-20T01:00:09  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  74 2017-12-20T01:06:06  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
  75 2017-12-20T01:09:18  <echeveria> GBT over ZMQ seems to be a win.
  76 2017-12-20T01:10:20  <promag> echeveria: GBT?
  77 2017-12-20T01:10:41  <meshcollider> getblocktemplate?
  78 2017-12-20T01:10:41  <echeveria> `getblocktemplate`
  79 2017-12-20T01:11:00  <meshcollider> those are used for very different things though?
  80 2017-12-20T01:11:38  *** mds404 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  81 2017-12-20T01:11:48  *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
  82 2017-12-20T01:11:57  <echeveria> not really. at the moment there's a load of suboptimal ways of getting work updates from Bitcoin Core, adding a GBT endpoint means you don't need to poll or do any roundtrips to RPC.
  83 2017-12-20T01:12:34  <echeveria> the status quo at the moment is using -blocknotify to trigger a RPC call, which involves spawning a shell, making a HTTP connection, and the RPC request time.
  84 2017-12-20T01:14:17  *** DrBenway has quit IRC
  85 2017-12-20T01:14:33  *** mds404 has left #bitcoin-core-dev
  86 2017-12-20T01:14:36  <promag> echeveria: you can use pubrawblock
  87 2017-12-20T01:14:44  <promag> ops, pubhashblock
  88 2017-12-20T01:16:11  <promag> I don't think it's a good idea to have a gbt notification
  89 2017-12-20T01:16:12  <echeveria> promag: that still needs a round trip.
  90 2017-12-20T01:16:58  <promag> echeveria: how would you define template_request of gbt?
  91 2017-12-20T01:17:31  <promag> what is the problem of the round trip?
  92 2017-12-20T01:18:14  <echeveria> template_request?
  93 2017-12-20T01:18:24  <promag> gbt argument
  94 2017-12-20T01:19:33  <sipa> promag: ?
  95 2017-12-20T01:19:50  <echeveria> promag: none of those arguments are necessary.
  96 2017-12-20T01:20:50  *** cloudrunner has quit IRC
  97 2017-12-20T01:24:09  <promag> not sure if a notification is the right thing
  98 2017-12-20T01:25:07  <promag> current notifications are things that "happened" where what you want is to pub a computation (a heavy one?)
  99 2017-12-20T01:25:17  <sipa> echeveria: you're saying to compare with -blocknotify... but you can use GBT over RPC, and use ZMQ notifications too
 100 2017-12-20T01:25:30  <sipa> i would certainly advise against using -blocknotify
 101 2017-12-20T01:25:54  <echeveria> by 'seems to be a win' I meant the code is written and running.
 102 2017-12-20T01:25:55  <promag> right, that's why I said to use pubhashblock
 103 2017-12-20T01:28:44  *** sploot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 104 2017-12-20T01:29:33  <promag> echeveria: even if that was possible, you should keep the gbt thru rpc. don't rely only in zmq notifications.
 105 2017-12-20T01:30:09  <promag> for intance, with rpc you get errors
 106 2017-12-20T01:30:42  <echeveria> not seeing a scheduled ZMQ frame is also an error.
 107 2017-12-20T01:31:00  <sipa> ZMQ is unreliable
 108 2017-12-20T01:31:16  *** zshlyk has quit IRC
 109 2017-12-20T01:31:48  <promag> I'm not talking about that errors, for instance, if the node crash, you will be sitting there waiting for notifications...
 110 2017-12-20T01:32:41  *** zshlyk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 111 2017-12-20T01:32:58  *** some_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 112 2017-12-20T01:33:40  <promag> with RPC you can measure the request duration, trigger something if above a certain value, etc it's much more expressive than zmq notifications
 113 2017-12-20T01:35:01  <promag> zmq notifications are cool to avoid polling or the nasty process spawn, but then use the existing interface
 114 2017-12-20T01:35:14  <promag> the roundtrip should not be a problem imo
 115 2017-12-20T01:39:40  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 116 2017-12-20T01:40:12  *** some_ has quit IRC
 117 2017-12-20T01:43:46  *** rockhouse has quit IRC
 118 2017-12-20T01:44:06  *** rockhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 119 2017-12-20T01:44:23  <morcos> gmaxwell: what is the issue with expired transactions keeping the relay fee from going up?  why do you want the relay fee to go up and how will it go up faster with your idea?
 120 2017-12-20T01:44:44  *** zshlyk has quit IRC
 121 2017-12-20T01:45:27  <morcos> at first glance it doesn't make much sense to me.  for instance i just today placed some transactions that were 120 sat/byte.  i'm assuming they'll get confirmed over christmas weekend.  the whole point of longer estimates is people might be able to wait for the weekly cycle so the mempool should be big enough to handle that
 122 2017-12-20T01:45:57  <echeveria> promag: not receiving a scheduled message, or missing a sequence number clearly indicates that.
 123 2017-12-20T01:45:57  <morcos> on top of that, i think you want to be able to do CPFP and its nice to have the stuck transactions still in mempools
 124 2017-12-20T01:46:01  <gmaxwell> morcos: relay fee now appears to be unrealistically low.  e.g. we're regularly wasting bandwidth on transactions that are not going to confirm before they expire.
 125 2017-12-20T01:46:36  <morcos> gmaxwell: ahh.. i think thats ok.
 126 2017-12-20T01:46:51  <promag> echeveria: not receiving a scheduled message - you mean you timeout when no notification arrives?
 127 2017-12-20T01:46:53  <gmaxwell> what I'm suggesting is that the only way transactions that aren't making it to the top of your mempool would expire is if they're evicted due to low fee. So they'd be there for CPFPing.
 128 2017-12-20T01:47:02  *** zshlyk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 129 2017-12-20T01:47:07  <echeveria> promag: yes.
 130 2017-12-20T01:47:33  <morcos> hopefully we wrote it up in the PR that did mempool limiting, but we were aware of that issue, but the amount of free relay that can be achieved that way is limited  (and is not that much)
 131 2017-12-20T01:48:42  <morcos> gmaxwell: i'm confused.  i thought you wanted to expire/evict/remove them if they haven't been in the top 4M weight for 48 hours?
 132 2017-12-20T01:48:52  <morcos> oh but then you want to make that the mempool min fee?
 133 2017-12-20T01:49:30  <gmaxwell> no, the other way around. I want to have a counter on each txn that counts roughly how long it's been in the top 4MB weight, and only expires once that goes over 48 hours.
 134 2017-12-20T01:49:39  <promag> echeveria: not the best approach though, worst case you would be 10min until you do something
 135 2017-12-20T01:49:46  <gmaxwell> because if it's in the top 4mb and not getting mined, then it's been softforked out.
 136 2017-12-20T01:49:48  <echeveria> promag: 5 seconds.
 137 2017-12-20T01:49:51  <morcos> ohhhh
 138 2017-12-20T01:50:18  <morcos> wow i misunderstood, ok, so you want to get rid of expiration, but need to solve for the unminable txs
 139 2017-12-20T01:50:22  <morcos> yeah that makes way more sense
 140 2017-12-20T01:50:26  <promag> you mean you gbt each 5 seconds?
 141 2017-12-20T01:50:35  <echeveria> yes.
 142 2017-12-20T01:50:49  <promag> so why do you need zmq?
 143 2017-12-20T01:50:53  <echeveria> this is not unexpected, ckpool does GBT every 100ms in some modes.
 144 2017-12-20T01:50:59  <gmaxwell> morcos: yes, I want to get rid of expiration but don't want the risk of your mempool getting filled up with high fee unminable coins.
 145 2017-12-20T01:51:28  <echeveria> promag: please try and consider what you're arguing. it's clearly ludicrous to poll GBT RPC every 5 seconds, the amount of work wasted would be colossal.
 146 2017-12-20T01:51:37  <gmaxwell> also for unmineable tx, two weeks is a horrific amount of time to keep them around anyways...
 147 2017-12-20T01:51:54  <echeveria> promag: pushing GBT on UpdateTip, and every 5 seconds is clearly different.
 148 2017-12-20T01:52:17  <promag> how is that less work?
 149 2017-12-20T01:52:41  <echeveria> there's no round trips, and I'm not sequestering cs_main every 100ms.
 150 2017-12-20T01:53:07  <promag> every 100ms or 5s?
 151 2017-12-20T01:53:21  <morcos> gmaxwell: it's an intersting idea, but i'm not sure how large the problem is that you're trying to address.  at least with mempool expiration there is a cumbersome mechanism to replace a non-RBF tx
 152 2017-12-20T01:53:23  <echeveria> > ckpool does GBT every 100ms in some modes.
 153 2017-12-20T01:53:44  <promag> so in those modes with zmq there would be a zmq notification each 100ms?
 154 2017-12-20T01:54:14  <promag> I mean, even to pub the notification you have to acquire cs_main like gbt
 155 2017-12-20T01:54:29  <echeveria> ( poll RPC every 100ms | ZMQ on UpdateTip + every 5 seconds) two different things.
 156 2017-12-20T01:54:39  <morcos> without expiration, then you kind of have to hope it gets evicted, and then you have nodes with larger mempools actually having a worse picture of things b/c they dont' accept the replacement
 157 2017-12-20T01:54:47  <morcos> would make more sense in a full-rbf world
 158 2017-12-20T01:55:25  <gmaxwell> morcos: I'm not sure yet if 1s/vb is a feerate that will never confirm... but I do think we don't want minifee to be frequently below the never-confirm rate.
 159 2017-12-20T01:55:28  <aj> could just continue to expire non-rbf txes after a week?
 160 2017-12-20T01:56:38  <morcos> gmaxwell: i agree with that, except what we really want is the incremental rate to not be below that.. not just the mempool min fee, where the incremental rate is the floor for minrelay
 161 2017-12-20T01:56:53  <morcos> and the bump requirement for RBF and mempool min fee after eviction
 162 2017-12-20T01:56:56  <gmaxwell> Speaking of RBF, I've been thinking some of the the RBF pinning problem, and think we could solve it by having a flag set on a transaction that an unconfirmed spend of its outputs is only allowed in the mempool the resulting package feerate would be near-confirmation.
 163 2017-12-20T01:57:17  <morcos> so perhaps we want a way to set incremental fee... but i'm just not sure yet how to do that
 164 2017-12-20T01:58:16  <aj> gmaxwell: noticing you're seeing unmined transactions that you think seem valid might be a useful warning indicator of weird things going on (eg, it might mean your fee estimation is being based on bad data?)
 165 2017-12-20T01:58:17  <gmaxwell> RBF-pinning for those who don't know what I'm referring to is the issue where you make a moderate fee RBF payment with an intention of bidding up the RBF over the next couple days until it confirms... but then one of your payees manages their input-clutter by immediately creating a very low feerate 100kb transaction that aggregates up all their small inputs.
 166 2017-12-20T01:58:37  <morcos> i know people hate defaults...  but arguably the best thing to do is just change the default incremental relay rate
 167 2017-12-20T01:59:57  <gmaxwell> The RBF pinning problem is then that the RBFer above can't RBF their transaction unless they also pay the incremental rate for the 100kb child.
 168 2017-12-20T01:59:59  <morcos> aj: yes, i wrote a MPAM (miner policy alignment meter) for Core, but Peter Todd had some esoteric complaints about it and i forgot it.. i forget a lot of things though
 169 2017-12-20T02:00:02  <gmaxwell> Which is quite expensive!
 170 2017-12-20T02:01:13  <promag> echeveria: right, but you can do that now
 171 2017-12-20T02:02:03  <gmaxwell> a user of ours who hit rbf-pinning hard was trying to suggest that we prohibit all spends of unconfirmed outputs, which is nuts... but perhaps something to opt-in where the outputs could only be spent by txn that would bump the feerate to near confirmation.. everyone could still CPFP... but no more major pinning problem.
 172 2017-12-20T02:02:53  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 173 2017-12-20T02:03:25  <morcos> i think we need segfee for segregating the fee out of txid, so you can increase it without invalidating descendants
 174 2017-12-20T02:04:16  <aj> morcos: isn't that CPFP?
 175 2017-12-20T02:04:18  <gmaxwell> yea... I've thought abot that.
 176 2017-12-20T02:04:31  <gmaxwell> CPFP is inherently not that efficient.
 177 2017-12-20T02:05:05  <morcos> gmaxwell: one somewhat smart suggestion on those lines would be to have an online mode for Core where if the wallet expects to remain online, it doesn't bother broadcasting lower fee txs until later (but then i guess you'd stil have to resign if the parent changed)
 178 2017-12-20T02:05:17  <aj> gmaxwell: is this where you point to a wiki page from five years ago explaining how to do it efficiently?
 179 2017-12-20T02:05:38  <gmaxwell> morcos: yep, made the same observation myself, but it reuires the second party to be helpful at their own very slight expense.
 180 2017-12-20T02:07:41  <phantomcircuit> wait there's no way to trigger wallet rescan unless the private key is actually new
 181 2017-12-20T02:07:43  <phantomcircuit> lol
 182 2017-12-20T02:08:12  <morcos> i probably shouldn't be spitting out my stupid ideas here without thinking on them first, but we could imagine a more efficient CPFP via some softfork mechanism, where a future tx (without needing to spend prior txs outputs could pay for them)
 183 2017-12-20T02:08:33  <morcos> you could reduce the cost so barely over 32 bytes on the paying tx and could include as many paid for txs as you wanted
 184 2017-12-20T02:09:21  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 185 2017-12-20T02:09:44  <morcos> which you broadcast in an extended tx format potentially, but hmmm...   how do you know which ones go with it in the block perhaps by required ordering and then just the number of txs
 186 2017-12-20T02:09:51  <morcos> getting complicated and messy
 187 2017-12-20T02:10:43  <gmaxwell> Well these sighash no input things wouldn't invalidate the child but they are phenominally dangerous and we really wouldn't want to encourage their use outside of specialized cases.
 188 2017-12-20T02:10:51  <gmaxwell> (they have no replay protection of any form at all...)
 189 2017-12-20T02:11:15  *** belcher has quit IRC
 190 2017-12-20T02:11:43  <aj> having the 100kB RBF-pinning tx use SIGHASH_NOINPUT could be made to work okay afaics
 191 2017-12-20T02:11:46  <aj> but augh
 192 2017-12-20T02:12:26  *** zshlyk has quit IRC
 193 2017-12-20T02:13:13  *** zshlyk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 194 2017-12-20T02:15:17  *** sploot has quit IRC
 195 2017-12-20T02:17:24  <echeveria> promag: yes I can, because I've written the patch.
 196 2017-12-20T02:19:00  <promag> echeveria: PR #?
 197 2017-12-20T02:19:08  <gmaxwell> aj: yes except you really can't safely do that, because the payer needs to know to be sure to NEVER pay to that pubkey again.
 198 2017-12-20T02:24:57  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
 199 2017-12-20T02:43:29  *** sanjeev has quit IRC
 200 2017-12-20T02:44:15  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 201 2017-12-20T02:46:50  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 202 2017-12-20T02:48:01  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
 203 2017-12-20T02:58:46  *** promag has quit IRC
 204 2017-12-20T03:02:38  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 205 2017-12-20T03:04:24  *** zshlyk has quit IRC
 206 2017-12-20T03:04:29  *** Murch has quit IRC
 207 2017-12-20T03:06:36  *** zshlyk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 208 2017-12-20T03:08:13  *** bob___ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 209 2017-12-20T03:08:45  <bob___> hello
 210 2017-12-20T03:08:54  *** ludo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 211 2017-12-20T03:09:17  *** ludo is now known as Guest49262
 212 2017-12-20T03:09:48  <Guest49262> Bonjour
 213 2017-12-20T03:09:51  <bob___> having an issue with bitcoin core changing the transaction fee to a lower amount?
 214 2017-12-20T03:10:06  <bob___> can anyone help?
 215 2017-12-20T03:11:05  *** Guest49262 has quit IRC
 216 2017-12-20T03:13:15  *** bob___ has quit IRC
 217 2017-12-20T03:15:00  *** kikooo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 218 2017-12-20T03:15:14  <kikooo> yop
 219 2017-12-20T03:15:56  *** kikooo has quit IRC
 220 2017-12-20T03:16:28  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
 221 2017-12-20T03:16:41  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 222 2017-12-20T03:22:48  <meshcollider> bob___: try #bitcoin channel, this one is not for support
 223 2017-12-20T03:30:28  *** Cory has quit IRC
 224 2017-12-20T03:42:35  <adiabat> did I hear sighash_noinput?  I love that stuff! :) (but yes, I understand that it's a serious foot-cannon)
 225 2017-12-20T03:57:29  *** atroxes has quit IRC
 226 2017-12-20T03:58:25  *** atroxes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 227 2017-12-20T03:58:35  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
 228 2017-12-20T03:58:35  *** Ge0rges has quit IRC
 229 2017-12-20T04:01:10  *** fanquake has quit IRC
 230 2017-12-20T04:02:01  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 231 2017-12-20T04:03:04  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
 232 2017-12-20T04:03:38  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 233 2017-12-20T04:03:49  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 234 2017-12-20T04:04:20  *** zshlyk has quit IRC
 235 2017-12-20T04:05:32  *** zshlyk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 236 2017-12-20T04:09:23  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 237 2017-12-20T04:10:45  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 238 2017-12-20T04:11:16  *** Ge0rges has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 239 2017-12-20T04:11:52  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
 240 2017-12-20T04:12:17  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 241 2017-12-20T04:13:27  *** larafale has quit IRC
 242 2017-12-20T04:15:06  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 243 2017-12-20T04:18:17  *** zshlyk has quit IRC
 244 2017-12-20T04:19:13  *** zshlyk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 245 2017-12-20T04:24:43  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 246 2017-12-20T04:33:27  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 247 2017-12-20T04:33:58  *** lesderid has quit IRC
 248 2017-12-20T04:35:13  *** lesderid has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 249 2017-12-20T04:35:23  *** savin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 250 2017-12-20T04:39:15  *** savin has quit IRC
 251 2017-12-20T04:42:32  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 252 2017-12-20T05:03:27  *** Ge0rges has quit IRC
 253 2017-12-20T05:05:27  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
 254 2017-12-20T05:11:20  *** Ge0rges has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 255 2017-12-20T05:11:45  *** BashCo has quit IRC
 256 2017-12-20T05:16:54  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 257 2017-12-20T05:19:25  *** zshlyk has quit IRC
 258 2017-12-20T05:20:17  *** zshlyk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 259 2017-12-20T05:24:15  *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
 260 2017-12-20T05:26:22  *** basho has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 261 2017-12-20T05:26:26  *** zshlyk has quit IRC
 262 2017-12-20T05:27:14  *** basho has quit IRC
 263 2017-12-20T05:27:14  *** zshlyk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 264 2017-12-20T05:46:08  *** luke-jr has quit IRC
 265 2017-12-20T05:46:16  *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 266 2017-12-20T05:49:06  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 267 2017-12-20T05:50:16  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 268 2017-12-20T05:52:42  *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 269 2017-12-20T05:57:38  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
 270 2017-12-20T06:11:06  *** zshlyk has quit IRC
 271 2017-12-20T06:11:11  *** yoctopede has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 272 2017-12-20T06:12:17  *** yoctopede has quit IRC
 273 2017-12-20T06:13:35  *** yoctopede has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 274 2017-12-20T06:16:31  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 275 2017-12-20T06:23:31  *** anditto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 276 2017-12-20T06:27:10  *** kraeftig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 277 2017-12-20T06:38:10  *** anditto has quit IRC
 278 2017-12-20T06:38:39  *** anditto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 279 2017-12-20T06:39:11  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 280 2017-12-20T06:41:25  *** alfa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 281 2017-12-20T06:43:42  *** anditto has quit IRC
 282 2017-12-20T06:46:45  *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 283 2017-12-20T06:50:15  *** anditto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 284 2017-12-20T06:54:31  *** anditto has quit IRC
 285 2017-12-20T06:58:07  *** anditto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 286 2017-12-20T06:59:04  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 287 2017-12-20T07:01:54  <fanquake> If everyone could refrain from being part of a secret society that'd be great.
 288 2017-12-20T07:02:43  *** mrannanay has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 289 2017-12-20T07:09:18  *** yoctopede has quit IRC
 290 2017-12-20T07:09:40  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 291 2017-12-20T07:10:13  *** yoctopede has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 292 2017-12-20T07:10:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fockkboy opened pull request #11958: Update README.md to let people know about (((Bilderberg))) and HIGH FEES! (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11958
 293 2017-12-20T07:10:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #11958: Update README.md to let people know about (((Bilderberg))) and HIGH FEES! (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11958
 294 2017-12-20T07:11:15  <wumpus> sorry MJ12 doesn't take kindly on people trying to quit
 295 2017-12-20T07:11:58  <phantomcircuit> is there a reason there isn't a wallet rescan rpc separate from the import* functions?
 296 2017-12-20T07:12:32  <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: you haven't submitted yet. Bonus points if you make it handle multiwallet sanely (not scanning them one at a fking time!)
 297 2017-12-20T07:12:50  <fanquake> wumpus :o
 298 2017-12-20T07:12:53  <gmaxwell> double bonus if it lets you specify a blinking range (code from importmulti, I guess)
 299 2017-12-20T07:15:16  <wumpus> phantomcircuit: the reasoning behind that was always that it was unnecessary, because import should let you provide the key birthdates and thus it can determine what to scan for itself
 300 2017-12-20T07:15:38  <wumpus> phantomcircuit: if you need a loose rescan, something is usually wrong
 301 2017-12-20T07:15:49  <wumpus> phantomcircuit: so it's a diagnostic option for startup only
 302 2017-12-20T07:17:22  <phantomcircuit> yeah what's wrong is i used importprivkey with rescan false and the only way to fix it is to restart with -rescan but i dont want to restart
 303 2017-12-20T07:17:45  <sipa> phantomcircuit: you mean the rescanblockchain RPC? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/wallet/rpcwallet.cpp#L3362
 304 2017-12-20T07:18:11  <gmaxwell> oh yea, that reasoning, I forgot about that.
 305 2017-12-20T07:18:19  <gmaxwell> crazy users rescanning for no reason. :(
 306 2017-12-20T07:18:54  <sipa> guys. we. have. an. RPC. for. that.
 307 2017-12-20T07:19:08  <phantomcircuit> oh
 308 2017-12-20T07:19:09  <phantomcircuit> neat
 309 2017-12-20T07:19:29  *** yoctopede has quit IRC
 310 2017-12-20T07:19:41  <gmaxwell> is it hidden?
 311 2017-12-20T07:19:49  <wumpus> ok. Please don't ask about existing RPCs, apparently I've lost track :-)
 312 2017-12-20T07:19:50  <gmaxwell> speaking of hidden... we have some things that should get unhidden.
 313 2017-12-20T07:20:00  <gmaxwell> The logging thing, in particular which is the best damn rpc ever.
 314 2017-12-20T07:20:13  <echeveria> logging?
 315 2017-12-20T07:20:17  <wumpus> no, it's not hidden
 316 2017-12-20T07:20:21  <sipa> what about the increasebalance RPC? i think that one's pretty neat too
 317 2017-12-20T07:20:30  <wumpus> the only hidden one is 'resendwallettransactions'
 318 2017-12-20T07:20:33  *** yoctopede has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 319 2017-12-20T07:20:43  <wumpus> noooo sipa don't mention that one, it's only for secret society use
 320 2017-12-20T07:21:02  <eck> gentlemen save this for the bilderberg meeting, please
 321 2017-12-20T07:21:07  <gmaxwell> echeveria: there is an RPC to set the amount of logging detail.
 322 2017-12-20T07:21:13  <fanquake> Too late now. Trending on Reddit asap.
 323 2017-12-20T07:21:37  <gmaxwell> echeveria: which means you can shut off the chatty as heck leveldb stuff when it irritates you without restarting. :P
 324 2017-12-20T07:22:05  <echeveria> gmaxwell: that’s handy, my node takes a very long time to restart, and restarting tends to absolve problems I’d like to debug with -debug=net.
 325 2017-12-20T07:22:34  <Sentineo> the syntax is pretty easy, just do not forget to escape the " :)
 326 2017-12-20T07:22:48  <wumpus> logging was unhidden in #11626
 327 2017-12-20T07:22:49  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11626 | rpc: Make `logging` RPC public by laanwj · Pull Request #11626 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 328 2017-12-20T07:22:50  <gmaxwell> blocksonly is also hidden. though I think the rational for hiding it has not been addressed. :(
 329 2017-12-20T07:22:55  <gmaxwell> woot.
 330 2017-12-20T07:23:15  <Sentineo> yep 15.1 has it in help
 331 2017-12-20T07:23:19  <echeveria> very, very large mempools take an extraordinary time to load (I understand why).
 332 2017-12-20T07:23:26  <gmaxwell> I'm sorry I've been on github less lately.
 333 2017-12-20T07:23:38  <gmaxwell> echeveria: huh? what are you talking about
 334 2017-12-20T07:23:46  <Sentineo> echeveria: my node when restarted fails to import the mempool saved anyway
 335 2017-12-20T07:23:48  <gmaxwell> echeveria: mempool restore is entirely non-invasive and in the background.
 336 2017-12-20T07:24:25  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
 337 2017-12-20T07:24:45  <echeveria> gmaxwell: yes, it’s very much not a problem, it’s just a reason that changing the debug level is a great feature to have.
 338 2017-12-20T07:25:16  *** Amuza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 339 2017-12-20T07:25:21  <echeveria> if I want to debug=mempoolrej it needs to have the mempool.dat loaded :)
 340 2017-12-20T07:26:00  <Sentineo> having other stuff like turning on rpc/rest on the fly would be neat
 341 2017-12-20T07:27:16  <gmaxwell> Sentineo: gonna use the rpc to turn on RPC?
 342 2017-12-20T07:27:46  <Sentineo> did not put much thought into it apearantly gmaxwell :P
 343 2017-12-20T07:27:46  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 344 2017-12-20T07:27:55  <wumpus> hahahahah yes that would be really neat
 345 2017-12-20T07:28:11  <Sentineo> but yeh, that would be really neat :D
 346 2017-12-20T07:28:46  <wumpus> non-causal RPC switching, powered by flux capacitor
 347 2017-12-20T07:28:52  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
 348 2017-12-20T07:29:25  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 349 2017-12-20T07:29:26  <Sentineo> the switch could be called "Delorien" :)
 350 2017-12-20T07:30:05  <Sentineo> delorean - sorry .. typo
 351 2017-12-20T07:30:36  <fanquake> gmaxwell if you're going to be on GH again soon, you might be interested in #11359 or 11630
 352 2017-12-20T07:30:38  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11359 | Add a pruning high water mark to reduce the frequency of pruning events by esotericnonsense · Pull Request #11359 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 353 2017-12-20T07:31:42  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 354 2017-12-20T07:31:47  <gmaxwell> I know, you could send messages via signals and morse code,  killall -30 bitcoind ; sleep 1 ; killall -30 bitcoind ....
 355 2017-12-20T07:32:05  <gmaxwell> fanquake: OK.
 356 2017-12-20T07:32:15  *** blackbaba has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 357 2017-12-20T07:32:37  <wumpus> ah yes the rumored kill -SHORTBEEP -LONGBEEP
 358 2017-12-20T07:32:44  <gmaxwell> half the reason I haven't been as active is that in the evening I'm using a computer without GH credentials on it, ... which ranks pretty highly for stupid reasons...
 359 2017-12-20T07:34:45  <wumpus> I understand trying to be careful with your gh credentials, but there's got to be a better way
 360 2017-12-20T07:36:22  <eck> perhaps called an ssh key
 361 2017-12-20T07:37:29  <phantomcircuit> eck, cant login to their website with ssh keys sir
 362 2017-12-20T07:37:39  <eck> i'll concede that point
 363 2017-12-20T07:37:46  <fanquake> wumpus does everyone inside the bitcoin org have 2FA turned on?
 364 2017-12-20T07:37:54  <echeveria> phantomcircuit: that’s what x forwarding is for.
 365 2017-12-20T07:38:08  <wumpus> fanquake: let's check, it was the case last ime I looked
 366 2017-12-20T07:38:15  <gmaxwell> this is my only host that I haven't been able to strip intel ME off of, so I'm generally trying to keep security critical things of it.
 367 2017-12-20T07:39:00  <wumpus> I have no intel devices left
 368 2017-12-20T07:39:49  <eck> what year is it from
 369 2017-12-20T07:40:29  <eck> i went through this exercise recently, only to learn that i am pretty much sol if i have any devices made in the last ten years
 370 2017-12-20T07:40:41  <wumpus> I hope I can get rid of the AMD ones too before a similar backdoor in AMD to show up
 371 2017-12-20T07:41:17  <Sentineo> what backdoor?
 372 2017-12-20T07:42:20  <wumpus> but intel's reaction to the whole ME debacle - instead of offering the option to disable it, try to make it even more difficult to disable it - was enough to dump them completely
 373 2017-12-20T07:42:53  <eck> too bad there are no credible aarch64 systems
 374 2017-12-20T07:43:25  <Sentineo> so I need to use abacus!
 375 2017-12-20T07:43:43  <wumpus> yes it's why I'm using AMD for the moment, waiting for ARM and eventually RISCV
 376 2017-12-20T07:43:51  <gmaxwell> eck: it's pretty easy to lobotomize ME out of most moderately new systems, thanks to MEcleaner
 377 2017-12-20T07:44:21  <gmaxwell> wumpus: I dunno if you saw, but the next gen of intel cpus will contain efuse based downgrade resistance for the me firmware.
 378 2017-12-20T07:44:56  <eck> i don't know much about mecleaner, but this doesn't help me use e.g. coreboot, does it?
 379 2017-12-20T07:45:05  <phantomcircuit> well that's just blatantly admitting it's a backdoor
 380 2017-12-20T07:45:09  <eck> that's the project i was looking at most recently
 381 2017-12-20T07:45:20  <gmaxwell> right now you can reflash with a spi programmer to downgrade me firmware (e.g. to undo a possible upgrade that disables the HAP bit) since the cpu has no external truth on what ME firmware is the most recent.
 382 2017-12-20T07:45:20  <wumpus> gmaxwell: yes I heard, that's what maded me so angry
 383 2017-12-20T07:45:44  <wumpus> why not give your customers the choice?
 384 2017-12-20T07:45:51  <gmaxwell> eck: coreboot alone isn't enough, e.g. you can run coreboot on a lenovo x230 but unless you run mecleaner it has the hidden second operating system still.
 385 2017-12-20T07:46:25  <eck> i have more recent hardware but since that is news to me, i'll take a second look anyway, thanks
 386 2017-12-20T07:47:16  <gmaxwell> coreboot is nice, but not as important as getting rid of ME. other than some ACPI handling stuff the bios is out of the picture once the OS is running.
 387 2017-12-20T07:47:42  <gmaxwell> ME = whole seperate quasi-pentium cpu that runs all the time in the background (even with computer suspended) and has access to everything.
 388 2017-12-20T07:48:09  <gmaxwell> separate meaning still inside the cpu package, however.
 389 2017-12-20T07:48:22  <eck> the whole point of coreboot from my pov is to know for sure that IME is disabled
 390 2017-12-20T07:48:41  <eck> otherwise how would you be sure?
 391 2017-12-20T07:48:50  *** anditto has quit IRC
 392 2017-12-20T07:49:03  <gmaxwell> eck: because you physically rewrote the flash chip and took most of the me data out of it.
 393 2017-12-20T07:49:10  <gmaxwell> which is what me cleaner does.
 394 2017-12-20T07:49:44  <gmaxwell> until me cleaner that wasn't possible for coreboot to disable ME on most hardware that had ME, the issue is on most of those systems the system will shut down after 30 minutes if ME doesn't boot.
 395 2017-12-20T07:50:00  <eck> i will have to read more about ME and coreboot and mecleaner to comment
 396 2017-12-20T07:50:12  <eck> what you said makes sense though
 397 2017-12-20T07:50:18  <gmaxwell> so the coreboot instructions basically have you avoid rewriting the ME partition so the computer will keep working.
 398 2017-12-20T07:50:20  <Sentineo> so what are the implications of not removing it for a noob? :)
 399 2017-12-20T07:51:00  <gmaxwell> Sentineo: maybe nothing, or maybe intel and anyone who controls them or compromised them or found bugs in their code has full backdoor access to the computers running it.
 400 2017-12-20T07:51:00  <wumpus> there's a parallel OS running on your CPU, running a fairly insecure software stack, network connected
 401 2017-12-20T07:51:17  <wumpus> -> you can work out the rest of the details
 402 2017-12-20T07:51:34  *** Murch has quit IRC
 403 2017-12-20T07:51:47  <Sentineo> yeah ...
 404 2017-12-20T07:51:57  <wumpus> oh yes it happens to have ring -infinite access over anything else your CPU might be doing, so any access controls in your OS mean nothing
 405 2017-12-20T07:52:00  <eck> the assumption here though is that the me requires external flash memory to run, since it's some bloated c/c++ program, right?
 406 2017-12-20T07:52:08  <Sentineo> so you were refering to arm ... e.g. running stuff on rasberry pi sounds more secure than? or I got it wrong?
 407 2017-12-20T07:52:42  <eck> what if the ME was coded directly into the silicon? or is that not likely due to its complexity?
 408 2017-12-20T07:52:46  <gmaxwell> eck: the flash on current motherboards is ~32 MB in size in total.
 409 2017-12-20T07:53:21  <fanquake> Good thing there isn't a torrent of bugs found in ME :)
 410 2017-12-20T07:53:23  <gmaxwell> eck: it's not so much of a mystery now, it runs minix. people how have jtag access to it.
 411 2017-12-20T07:53:38  <wumpus> Sentineo: RPI is a bad example because it also has a proprietary core glued to the CPU; but something like i.mx6 which can run blobless would be more secure, everything else the same
 412 2017-12-20T07:53:53  <gmaxwell> you can also run arbritary code on it now and bypass the code signing, at least if you can write to the flash.
 413 2017-12-20T07:54:14  <eck> wild
 414 2017-12-20T07:54:25  <eck> and it's all undocumented, right?
 415 2017-12-20T07:54:25  <gmaxwell> I don't think anyone has targeted it with a compiler yet, its instruction set is non-standard.
 416 2017-12-20T07:54:46  <gmaxwell> it's a 486 with some pentium features added and some legacy features dropped.
 417 2017-12-20T07:54:53  <gmaxwell> eck: right.
 418 2017-12-20T07:55:09  <gmaxwell> but with jtag access people can reverse engineer things.
 419 2017-12-20T07:55:10  <eck> wait can it access the host os memory
 420 2017-12-20T07:55:12  <Sentineo> ah insane
 421 2017-12-20T07:55:13  <eck> what memory mode is it in
 422 2017-12-20T07:55:50  <Sentineo> so doing dice for privkeys and paper wallet does not sound that a bad idea now :D
 423 2017-12-20T07:56:30  <eck> i wonder how you would synchronize between the me processor and  ring 0/-1
 424 2017-12-20T07:56:35  <gmaxwell> eck: presumably you use some kind of IO functionality to access the host memory, it's not direct mapped to the host memory.
 425 2017-12-20T07:56:44  <wumpus> it would have been fairly ok if they just allowed reprogramming it, targetting it with custom software from now on, from now on, but no, they had to clamp down on it more
 426 2017-12-20T07:56:51  <gmaxwell> which probably also avoids having to make it cache cohearent.
 427 2017-12-20T07:57:37  <eck> not that i (or anyone else) is running such code, but if there was synchronization between the kernel and some ME processor, surely you could tell from timing
 428 2017-12-20T07:58:35  <eck> i've written a bunch of ptrace stuff, and from userspace it's pretty obvious when you're being traced due to the clock slowdowns
 429 2017-12-20T07:58:40  <wumpus> and then, you're going to measure every single memory operation to catch an ME backdoor in the act?
 430 2017-12-20T07:58:46  <gmaxwell> heh
 431 2017-12-20T07:58:51  <eck> depends what the overhead is
 432 2017-12-20T07:59:21  <wumpus> I can't wait for such security theatre in operating systems </s>
 433 2017-12-20T07:59:25  <gmaxwell> of course the problem is that all it needs to do is snoop your network, which it might do for free, then when triggered push a single write into kernel memory to open up a backdoor.
 434 2017-12-20T08:00:10  <gmaxwell> and of course mystical power management on recent cpus makes timing kind of a mystery. :)
 435 2017-12-20T08:00:25  <eck> for sure
 436 2017-12-20T08:01:16  <wumpus> it's clearly not the solution, certainly not on long term, all those parameters would have to be figured out again for every new chip
 437 2017-12-20T08:01:25  <eck> on a numa system you can't even depend on time being coherent across threads on the same cpu, much less in the presence of a management engine
 438 2017-12-20T08:03:16  <wumpus> the ME will just be one of the many DMA streams going on
 439 2017-12-20T08:03:58  <eck> gmaxwell: curious if you had to deal with this kind of thing at all at xiph
 440 2017-12-20T08:04:16  <eck> one could easily imagine hardware to block certain content
 441 2017-12-20T08:04:42  <gmaxwell> intel does use ME in some windows DRM stuff, but that isn't a think that comes up for free codecs.
 442 2017-12-20T08:05:02  <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, hdcp stuff?
 443 2017-12-20T08:05:26  <gmaxwell> no idea. I don't care because DRM and because windows. :P
 444 2017-12-20T08:06:10  <gmaxwell> apparently the SGX monotone counter stuff uses ME too, some presumably e.g. teechains is class broken now.
 445 2017-12-20T08:07:07  <wumpus> hdcp is specific to hdmi compression, but I'd assume it's used to create a 'trusted video path' (puke) between the video decoder and graphics/scanout
 446 2017-12-20T08:07:15  <wumpus> s/compression/encryption
 447 2017-12-20T08:07:51  <eck> clearly i have 0% of the knowledge in this space as you, but the adversarial attack i was thinking of would be fingerprinting decoding or *encoding* somehow, so you could figure out who decoded/encoded a video
 448 2017-12-20T08:08:09  <eck> although clearly that would be dependent on the encoder at least using hardware primitives
 449 2017-12-20T08:13:46  <wumpus> DRM is never about encoding, always about decoding
 450 2017-12-20T08:16:40  *** Kozuch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 451 2017-12-20T08:18:20  <wumpus> it's rooted in a world where every client is a consumer, and there's a few "premium" producers whose content has to be protected. But ok, this is getting off topic, sorry.
 452 2017-12-20T08:18:44  <fanquake> wumpus save it for twitter :p
 453 2017-12-20T08:19:21  <wumpus> :p
 454 2017-12-20T08:21:20  *** yoctopede has quit IRC
 455 2017-12-20T08:22:08  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 456 2017-12-20T08:22:45  *** yoctopede has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 457 2017-12-20T08:23:27  *** Kozuch has quit IRC
 458 2017-12-20T08:28:10  *** promag has quit IRC
 459 2017-12-20T08:29:25  *** yoctopede has quit IRC
 460 2017-12-20T08:30:20  *** yoctopede has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 461 2017-12-20T08:31:05  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
 462 2017-12-20T08:38:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/18a1bbad98bd...cfd99ddc3c19
 463 2017-12-20T08:38:00  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master be9a13c MeshCollider: Add configuration/argument testing
 464 2017-12-20T08:38:01  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cfd99dd Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11883: Add configuration file/argument testing...
 465 2017-12-20T08:38:35  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11883: Add configuration file/argument testing (master...201712_datadir_tests) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11883
 466 2017-12-20T08:39:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11482: Use CPrivKey typedef for keydata in CKey (master...patch-3) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11482
 467 2017-12-20T08:43:52  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 468 2017-12-20T08:50:24  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 469 2017-12-20T08:54:56  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 470 2017-12-20T09:00:33  *** yoctopede is now known as intcat
 471 2017-12-20T09:01:53  *** danib31 has quit IRC
 472 2017-12-20T09:02:05  *** danib31 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 473 2017-12-20T09:09:20  *** intcat has quit IRC
 474 2017-12-20T09:11:16  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 475 2017-12-20T09:26:38  *** Kozuch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 476 2017-12-20T09:26:41  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 477 2017-12-20T09:26:57  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 478 2017-12-20T09:28:01  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 479 2017-12-20T09:31:11  *** alfa has quit IRC
 480 2017-12-20T09:35:24  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
 481 2017-12-20T09:37:22  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 482 2017-12-20T09:38:48  *** blackbaba has quit IRC
 483 2017-12-20T09:42:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/cfd99ddc3c19...1fb34e0d1f58
 484 2017-12-20T09:42:05  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 62e7c04 Matt Corallo: Remove dead feeest-file read code for old versions...
 485 2017-12-20T09:42:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1fb34e0 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11951: Remove dead feeest-file read code for old versions...
 486 2017-12-20T09:42:34  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11951: Remove dead feeest-file read code for old versions (master...2017-12-dead-feeest-load) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11951
 487 2017-12-20T09:42:55  <sipa> feeest sounds like a really big party in dutch
 488 2017-12-20T09:43:34  <kallewoof> Haha, same in swedish.
 489 2017-12-20T09:43:55  <wumpus> yes I also wondered when I first saw that PR title why it was such a big celebration :)
 490 2017-12-20T09:45:27  <wumpus> although the 'dead' before it makes it a bit of a mixed feeling
 491 2017-12-20T09:48:21  <kallewoof> Maybe like the Bon festival in Japan (honor the spirits of one's ancestors).
 492 2017-12-20T09:53:37  <sipa> that even sounds good in French
 493 2017-12-20T09:55:04  *** dabura667 has quit IRC
 494 2017-12-20T09:55:13  <wumpus> heh
 495 2017-12-20T09:59:13  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 496 2017-12-20T10:09:19  *** jing has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 497 2017-12-20T10:14:45  *** go1111111 has quit IRC
 498 2017-12-20T10:15:30  *** go1111111 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 499 2017-12-20T10:16:39  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 500 2017-12-20T10:23:02  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 501 2017-12-20T10:24:36  *** intcat has quit IRC
 502 2017-12-20T10:25:30  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 503 2017-12-20T10:26:30  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 504 2017-12-20T10:29:26  *** intcat has quit IRC
 505 2017-12-20T10:29:45  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 506 2017-12-20T10:30:47  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 507 2017-12-20T10:34:14  *** larafale has quit IRC
 508 2017-12-20T10:34:55  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 509 2017-12-20T10:37:26  *** jing has quit IRC
 510 2017-12-20T10:38:06  *** Cory has quit IRC
 511 2017-12-20T10:38:57  *** larafale has quit IRC
 512 2017-12-20T10:51:14  *** promag has quit IRC
 513 2017-12-20T11:01:24  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 514 2017-12-20T11:02:31  *** intcat has quit IRC
 515 2017-12-20T11:02:59  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 516 2017-12-20T11:08:00  *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 517 2017-12-20T11:15:46  *** intcat has quit IRC
 518 2017-12-20T11:16:37  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 519 2017-12-20T11:17:05  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 520 2017-12-20T11:21:06  *** dcousens has quit IRC
 521 2017-12-20T11:21:30  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 522 2017-12-20T11:23:36  *** promag has quit IRC
 523 2017-12-20T11:25:28  *** davec has quit IRC
 524 2017-12-20T11:28:58  *** preet has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 525 2017-12-20T11:31:25  *** intcat has quit IRC
 526 2017-12-20T11:32:29  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 527 2017-12-20T11:32:54  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 528 2017-12-20T11:38:55  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 529 2017-12-20T11:42:46  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 530 2017-12-20T11:46:29  *** larafale has quit IRC
 531 2017-12-20T11:46:56  *** GoldenBear has quit IRC
 532 2017-12-20T11:47:08  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 533 2017-12-20T11:50:00  *** GoldenBear has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 534 2017-12-20T11:51:27  *** larafale has quit IRC
 535 2017-12-20T11:52:48  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 536 2017-12-20T11:53:10  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 537 2017-12-20T11:54:52  *** promag has quit IRC
 538 2017-12-20T11:58:33  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 539 2017-12-20T11:59:40  *** contrapumpkin has quit IRC
 540 2017-12-20T12:03:10  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 541 2017-12-20T12:05:21  *** preet has quit IRC
 542 2017-12-20T12:05:26  *** larafale has quit IRC
 543 2017-12-20T12:06:05  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 544 2017-12-20T12:10:27  *** larafale has quit IRC
 545 2017-12-20T12:14:17  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 546 2017-12-20T12:27:22  *** intcat has quit IRC
 547 2017-12-20T12:28:44  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 548 2017-12-20T12:31:54  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 549 2017-12-20T12:37:48  *** promag has quit IRC
 550 2017-12-20T12:40:15  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 551 2017-12-20T12:42:47  *** promag has quit IRC
 552 2017-12-20T12:43:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laudaa opened pull request #11960: [Doc] Fix link to installation script (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11960
 553 2017-12-20T12:48:01  <wumpus> can anyone please test #11945 on macosx
 554 2017-12-20T12:48:03  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11945 | Improve BSD compatibility of contrib/install_db4.sh by laanwj · Pull Request #11945 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 555 2017-12-20T12:48:36  <wumpus> we replaced the bdb4 patch with a newer one, to accomodate freebsd/openbsd's clang, so need to know if this still works ok for macosx
 556 2017-12-20T12:55:16  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 557 2017-12-20T12:55:47  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
 558 2017-12-20T13:04:46  <provoostenator> wumpus: I'll try it now
 559 2017-12-20T13:06:26  <provoostenator> Any configure flags you need me to use?
 560 2017-12-20T13:06:29  *** dcousens has quit IRC
 561 2017-12-20T13:06:54  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 562 2017-12-20T13:07:30  <wumpus> I'm not sure; just following the osx build guide would be best
 563 2017-12-20T13:08:10  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 564 2017-12-20T13:12:03  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum2 has quit IRC
 565 2017-12-20T13:12:25  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 566 2017-12-20T13:12:25  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 567 2017-12-20T13:12:26  *** contrapumpkin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 568 2017-12-20T13:15:27  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
 569 2017-12-20T13:15:43  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 570 2017-12-20T13:16:44  <fanquake> wumpus I'm fairly certain it is ok, because the new patch does the same thing we do patch bd4 in depends.
 571 2017-12-20T13:17:09  <wumpus> fanquake: I've just tested on linux and gcc and it's ok at least
 572 2017-12-20T13:17:40  <fanquake> I'm just running though the basics on osx
 573 2017-12-20T13:17:48  <provoostenator> Related (?) question: does --with-incompatible-bdb still do something?
 574 2017-12-20T13:17:52  <wumpus> I should probably bite the bullet at some point and get it to work on freebsd
 575 2017-12-20T13:18:04  <wumpus> it's two lines of script or so...
 576 2017-12-20T13:18:15  <wumpus> provoostenator: yes, it makes the configure accept bdb 5+
 577 2017-12-20T13:18:45  <provoostenator> Ok, so I shoulnd't use that in this case I assume, because your changes relates to bdb 4?
 578 2017-12-20T13:19:02  <wumpus> it would be unnecessary but not do harm
 579 2017-12-20T13:19:34  <provoostenator> It actually wouldn't even do anything if you don't have berkeley-db5 installed?
 580 2017-12-20T13:19:37  *** Pavle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 581 2017-12-20T13:20:56  <wumpus> right, it just removes the bdb 4.8 version check, if you want to point it at a different bdb installation you can use LDFLAGS="-L${BDB_PREFIX}/lib/" CPPFLAGS="-I${BDB_PREFIX}/include/"
 582 2017-12-20T13:21:26  <provoostenator> Ok, TIL...
 583 2017-12-20T13:22:08  <wumpus> the use of with/enable in our build system is quite inconsistent
 584 2017-12-20T13:22:52  <provoostenator> Yes, I also found out that it happily continues if QR reader dependencies are missing, which could cause someone to not even know that feature exists.
 585 2017-12-20T13:23:00  <wumpus> from what I remember officially --with is for specifying dependencies, and enable for features
 586 2017-12-20T13:23:08  <fanquake> 11960 can go in.
 587 2017-12-20T13:23:18  <wumpus> fanquake: thanks
 588 2017-12-20T13:24:21  <wumpus> provoostenator: it's not considered a critical feature that you have to explicitly disable; it should print it in the summary though
 589 2017-12-20T13:24:26  <fanquake> wumpus are you only using clang on openbsd now?
 590 2017-12-20T13:25:03  <provoostenator> Yes, it does show in the summary.
 591 2017-12-20T13:25:07  <wumpus> fanquake: yes; I think from 6.2 on we should be encouraging people to just use the built-in clang CC=cc CXX=c++
 592 2017-12-20T13:26:22  <wumpus> fanquake: I haven't tried with any other compilers
 593 2017-12-20T13:29:21  <fanquake> wumpus Ok, that can be an update to the build instructions after 11945
 594 2017-12-20T13:29:53  <wumpus> fanquake: yes, could do that in the same PR, but I think it's somewhat orthogonal
 595 2017-12-20T13:29:58  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 596 2017-12-20T13:30:21  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
 597 2017-12-20T13:30:24  *** intcat has quit IRC
 598 2017-12-20T13:30:28  <fanquake> It might also depend on what happens in 11921, so can wait for cory to comment there
 599 2017-12-20T13:31:45  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 600 2017-12-20T13:31:49  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 601 2017-12-20T13:36:06  <wumpus> I think 11921 is unncessary with 11945
 602 2017-12-20T13:37:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1fb34e0d1f58...4307062ee2c2
 603 2017-12-20T13:37:50  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3d3e58e laudaa: [Doc] Fix link to installation script
 604 2017-12-20T13:37:51  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4307062 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11960: [Doc] Fix link to installation script...
 605 2017-12-20T13:38:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11960: [Doc] Fix link to installation script (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11960
 606 2017-12-20T13:39:53  <fanquake> wumpus Did you want to drop the gcc instructions as part of 11945 then? Might as well do the Clang switch in there.
 607 2017-12-20T13:40:15  <fanquake> clang feels like it's just tacked on the end at the moment heh
 608 2017-12-20T13:40:18  <wumpus> fanquake: I think we should keep the current doc, just add new instructions for version 6.2+
 609 2017-12-20T13:40:35  <wumpus> fanquake: people might still want to build for older openbsd, for now
 610 2017-12-20T13:40:57  <wumpus> not sure
 611 2017-12-20T13:41:29  <fanquake> I'm not even sure how many people are building on openbsd, given how often the instructions seem to be *broken*
 612 2017-12-20T13:41:43  <wumpus> great, I have it working on freebsd
 613 2017-12-20T13:41:59  <fanquake> found a new sha256 tool>
 614 2017-12-20T13:42:33  <wumpus> well it tends to get detected quite quickly when they're broken
 615 2017-12-20T13:42:45  <wumpus> bsd users don't tend to be so noisy otherwise
 616 2017-12-20T13:43:34  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum2 has quit IRC
 617 2017-12-20T13:43:46  <fanquake> fair enough, add a 6.2+ section which is clang specific? That document is fairly short anyways.
 618 2017-12-20T13:43:53  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 619 2017-12-20T13:43:53  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 620 2017-12-20T13:44:13  <wumpus> yep
 621 2017-12-20T13:44:50  *** larafale has quit IRC
 622 2017-12-20T13:45:29  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 623 2017-12-20T13:49:57  *** larafale has quit IRC
 624 2017-12-20T13:51:37  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 625 2017-12-20T13:52:39  *** Pavle has quit IRC
 626 2017-12-20T13:59:55  <Lauda> After running make check, where should the binaries be built?
 627 2017-12-20T13:59:56  <Lauda> I'm going through the build docs. After make check completed, I'm having trouble finding them
 628 2017-12-20T14:01:49  <wumpus> make builds the binaries in the build directory, which is where you invoke make. This will be src/bitcoin, src/qt/bitcoin-qt, src/test/test_bitcoin etc
 629 2017-12-20T14:02:02  *** intcat has quit IRC
 630 2017-12-20T14:03:16  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 631 2017-12-20T14:05:01  *** alfa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 632 2017-12-20T14:05:30  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 633 2017-12-20T14:08:22  *** intcat has quit IRC
 634 2017-12-20T14:09:46  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 635 2017-12-20T14:10:07  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 636 2017-12-20T14:12:16  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
 637 2017-12-20T14:13:21  *** intcat has quit IRC
 638 2017-12-20T14:13:51  <Lauda> Does that also build bitcoind by default?
 639 2017-12-20T14:14:31  <wumpus> I'm not sure. 'make check' is to run the unit tests, which don't need bitcoind
 640 2017-12-20T14:14:42  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 641 2017-12-20T14:15:19  <Lauda> Alright, I'll redo make. I also wonder why 'make check' was used in the build example for Arch Linux
 642 2017-12-20T14:15:21  <Lauda> and not just make?
 643 2017-12-20T14:15:38  <wumpus> because running the tests is always recommended
 644 2017-12-20T14:17:14  <wumpus> and maybe they assume 'make check' builds the non-tests too. I really don't know if that's the case or not.
 645 2017-12-20T14:18:45  <Lauda> Well, for ARM example only 'make' is used and in the Arch one 'make check'. Just got me wondering
 646 2017-12-20T14:19:07  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
 647 2017-12-20T14:23:52  <wumpus> ok
 648 2017-12-20T14:23:59  <provoostenator> Note to self: actually checkout the correct branch before running make...
 649 2017-12-20T14:31:36  <Lauda> https://i.imgur.com/A4g8Erm.png
 650 2017-12-20T14:31:36  <Lauda> I take it that this warning is not expected behavior?
 651 2017-12-20T14:35:17  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 652 2017-12-20T14:37:32  <wumpus> I don't remember seeing it
 653 2017-12-20T14:38:14  <wumpus> it's something in leveldb though, likely part of some inline assembly they added
 654 2017-12-20T14:40:06  <Lauda> Alright, thanks
 655 2017-12-20T14:55:22  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 656 2017-12-20T14:56:31  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 657 2017-12-20T15:02:53  *** timothy has quit IRC
 658 2017-12-20T15:04:23  *** intcat has quit IRC
 659 2017-12-20T15:05:45  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 660 2017-12-20T15:05:55  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 661 2017-12-20T15:08:19  <jouke> Hmm, fee of a sendmany with a lot of outputs also gets maxed out to some hardcoded 0.1 btc?
 662 2017-12-20T15:11:11  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 663 2017-12-20T15:13:11  <instagibbs> jouke, there's a maxtxfee setting
 664 2017-12-20T15:14:48  <jouke> instagibbs: thanks
 665 2017-12-20T15:15:33  <wumpus> but yes, all transactions are checked against that
 666 2017-12-20T15:19:33  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 667 2017-12-20T15:21:24  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 668 2017-12-20T15:21:33  *** intcat has quit IRC
 669 2017-12-20T15:22:40  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 670 2017-12-20T15:23:02  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
 671 2017-12-20T15:24:11  *** fanquake has quit IRC
 672 2017-12-20T15:36:15  *** JK^ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 673 2017-12-20T15:36:58  *** BTC^ has quit IRC
 674 2017-12-20T15:42:19  *** larafale has quit IRC
 675 2017-12-20T15:42:51  *** pkx2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 676 2017-12-20T15:45:54  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 677 2017-12-20T15:46:33  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 678 2017-12-20T15:47:20  *** goatpig has quit IRC
 679 2017-12-20T15:47:20  *** cireful has quit IRC
 680 2017-12-20T15:48:01  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 681 2017-12-20T15:50:03  *** Guyver2_ has quit IRC
 682 2017-12-20T15:50:15  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 683 2017-12-20T15:51:21  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
 684 2017-12-20T15:51:28  *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
 685 2017-12-20T15:52:04  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/4307062ee2c2...9ab9963386ed
 686 2017-12-20T15:52:05  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 88411e9 MarcoFalke: Squashed 'src/univalue/' changes from fe805ea74f..07947ff2da...
 687 2017-12-20T15:52:05  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fad349c MarcoFalke: univalue: Bump subtree
 688 2017-12-20T15:52:06  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9ab9963 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11952: [qa] univalue: Bump subtree...
 689 2017-12-20T15:52:39  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11952: [qa] univalue: Bump subtree (master...Mf1712-univalueBump) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11952
 690 2017-12-20T15:53:47  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9ab9963386ed...d4e404a3afa8
 691 2017-12-20T15:53:47  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2862b56 John Newbery: [tests] remove redundant univalue_tests.cpp
 692 2017-12-20T15:53:48  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d4e404a Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11879: [tests] remove redundant univalue_tests.cpp...
 693 2017-12-20T15:54:00  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11879: [tests] remove redundant univalue_tests.cpp (master...remove_univalue_test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11879
 694 2017-12-20T15:55:44  *** Amuza has quit IRC
 695 2017-12-20T15:56:48  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 696 2017-12-20T15:57:30  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 697 2017-12-20T15:58:40  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 698 2017-12-20T16:02:05  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 699 2017-12-20T16:02:06  *** cireful has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 700 2017-12-20T16:04:49  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d4e404a3afa8...bc6676514429
 701 2017-12-20T16:04:50  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f455a24 Sjors Provoost: [net] add seed.testnet.bitcoin.sprovoost.nl to testnet DNS seeds
 702 2017-12-20T16:04:50  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master bc66765 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #11917: Add testnet DNS seed:  seed.testnet.bitcoin.sprovoost.nl...
 703 2017-12-20T16:05:22  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #11917: Add testnet DNS seed:  seed.testnet.bitcoin.sprovoost.nl (master...testnet-dns-seed-sjors) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11917
 704 2017-12-20T16:08:12  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 705 2017-12-20T16:08:45  *** owowo has quit IRC
 706 2017-12-20T16:08:59  *** jamesob has quit IRC
 707 2017-12-20T16:09:23  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 708 2017-12-20T16:12:03  <Lauda> wumpus was this the file that you were talking about? https://i.imgur.com/TP8jc18.png
 709 2017-12-20T16:14:00  <wumpus> well it's one of the generated executables
 710 2017-12-20T16:16:50  *** intcat has quit IRC
 711 2017-12-20T16:17:03  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 712 2017-12-20T16:17:23  <Lauda> How does one compile executables for Windows on Unix as well?
 713 2017-12-20T16:17:55  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/build-windows.md
 714 2017-12-20T16:17:58  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 715 2017-12-20T16:19:07  <Lauda> On it, thanks
 716 2017-12-20T16:20:02  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 717 2017-12-20T16:22:19  *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
 718 2017-12-20T16:23:07  *** intcat has quit IRC
 719 2017-12-20T16:23:15  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 720 2017-12-20T16:24:13  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 721 2017-12-20T16:24:19  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 722 2017-12-20T16:25:03  *** larafale has quit IRC
 723 2017-12-20T16:34:19  *** jamesob has quit IRC
 724 2017-12-20T16:36:37  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 725 2017-12-20T16:39:06  *** j has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 726 2017-12-20T16:39:16  *** j has quit IRC
 727 2017-12-20T16:47:32  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 728 2017-12-20T16:49:15  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 729 2017-12-20T16:51:04  *** Murch has quit IRC
 730 2017-12-20T16:51:04  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 731 2017-12-20T16:51:56  *** intcat has quit IRC
 732 2017-12-20T16:53:18  *** mrfrasha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 733 2017-12-20T16:54:48  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 734 2017-12-20T16:56:13  *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
 735 2017-12-20T16:57:55  *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 736 2017-12-20T17:00:25  *** propumpkin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 737 2017-12-20T17:01:05  *** contrapumpkin has quit IRC
 738 2017-12-20T17:01:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 8 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/bc6676514429...79399c8cd0b6
 739 2017-12-20T17:01:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a3603ac Jack Grigg: Fix potential overflows in ECDSA DER parsers
 740 2017-12-20T17:01:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e181dbe Jack Grigg: Add comments
 741 2017-12-20T17:01:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e4a1086 Jack Grigg: Update Debian copyright list
 742 2017-12-20T17:01:24  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10657: Utils: Improvements to ECDSA key-handling code (master...libsecp256k1-patches) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10657
 743 2017-12-20T17:05:34  *** `bob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 744 2017-12-20T17:06:34  *** propumpkin is now known as contrapumpkin
 745 2017-12-20T17:09:57  *** intcat has quit IRC
 746 2017-12-20T17:11:01  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 747 2017-12-20T17:12:03  *** larafale has quit IRC
 748 2017-12-20T17:12:39  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 749 2017-12-20T17:13:24  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 750 2017-12-20T17:14:14  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 751 2017-12-20T17:14:59  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 752 2017-12-20T17:15:27  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 753 2017-12-20T17:15:44  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 754 2017-12-20T17:16:44  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 755 2017-12-20T17:17:25  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 756 2017-12-20T17:18:09  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 757 2017-12-20T17:18:59  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 758 2017-12-20T17:19:12  *** larafale has quit IRC
 759 2017-12-20T17:19:44  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 760 2017-12-20T17:20:34  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 761 2017-12-20T17:21:20  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 762 2017-12-20T17:21:37  *** larafale has quit IRC
 763 2017-12-20T17:22:12  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 764 2017-12-20T17:23:27  *** StopAndDecrypt_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 765 2017-12-20T17:23:31  *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
 766 2017-12-20T17:24:13  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 767 2017-12-20T17:25:59  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 768 2017-12-20T17:31:22  *** intcat has quit IRC
 769 2017-12-20T17:31:31  *** moctos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 770 2017-12-20T17:32:48  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 771 2017-12-20T17:33:17  *** larafale has quit IRC
 772 2017-12-20T17:33:54  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 773 2017-12-20T17:34:47  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 774 2017-12-20T17:35:35  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 775 2017-12-20T17:36:15  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 776 2017-12-20T17:39:16  *** moctos has quit IRC
 777 2017-12-20T17:40:55  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 778 2017-12-20T17:46:34  <Lauda> is RBF supposed to be rejected if you specify a custom change output?
 779 2017-12-20T17:53:06  <Lauda> i.e. from the same wallet
 780 2017-12-20T17:53:57  *** marcel_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 781 2017-12-20T18:01:33  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 782 2017-12-20T18:05:11  *** ExtraCrispy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 783 2017-12-20T18:06:47  *** larafale has quit IRC
 784 2017-12-20T18:08:12  *** `bob has quit IRC
 785 2017-12-20T18:13:30  *** alcipir has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 786 2017-12-20T18:13:39  *** photonclock_ has quit IRC
 787 2017-12-20T18:14:23  *** kenois has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 788 2017-12-20T18:14:35  *** photonclock_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 789 2017-12-20T18:22:19  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 790 2017-12-20T18:24:33  *** alfa has quit IRC
 791 2017-12-20T18:24:36  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 792 2017-12-20T18:26:23  *** intcat has quit IRC
 793 2017-12-20T18:27:22  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 794 2017-12-20T18:27:44  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 795 2017-12-20T18:32:19  <provoostenator> Regarding production DNS seeds, "// Note that of those with the service bits flag, most only support a subset of possible options": sipa does your tool support all of those out of the box or just a subset?
 796 2017-12-20T18:35:47  *** Bruce__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 797 2017-12-20T18:36:45  <sipa> provoostenator: you can configure it
 798 2017-12-20T18:37:17  <sipa> i think the default is fine
 799 2017-12-20T18:38:02  <provoostenator> Ok, I'm using the default. Should I clarify anything in the comment in that case?
 800 2017-12-20T18:38:57  *** ExtraCrispy has quit IRC
 801 2017-12-20T18:40:22  <provoostenator> Also, is your script able to keep the airdrop coin nodes away? Or is that not really a problem?
 802 2017-12-20T18:41:55  <wumpus> they tend to have their own DNS seeds
 803 2017-12-20T18:43:21  <jonasschnelli> provoostenator: default filters: https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin-seeder/blob/master/main.cpp#L150
 804 2017-12-20T18:43:23  <provoostenator> Right, but how does script prevent Bitcoin Core nodes from bootstrapping with a BCash peer and then getting stuck in August 2017 if none of those peers know of any Bitcoin Core peers? Not sure what the odds of that are.
 805 2017-12-20T18:43:31  <jonasschnelli> 1, 5, 9, 13...
 806 2017-12-20T18:43:38  <jonasschnelli> I guess we should add NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED there soon
 807 2017-12-20T18:43:44  <jonasschnelli> though... not sure
 808 2017-12-20T18:43:57  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: would there be any reason for nodes to search out NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED peers?
 809 2017-12-20T18:44:09  <wumpus> (I mean specifically)
 810 2017-12-20T18:44:50  <jonasschnelli> That is questionable, but maybe to improve network "health"... but yeah. maybe you don't need that
 811 2017-12-20T18:45:08  <jonasschnelli> Also,... it would have to hide out in non filtering and other filter flags..
 812 2017-12-20T18:45:19  <jonasschnelli> so,... nm, NODE_NETWORK_LIMITED needs not to be there
 813 2017-12-20T18:45:28  <wumpus> yes I understand that as argument to also connect to them, but not to seek them specifically
 814 2017-12-20T18:46:09  <jonasschnelli> indeed. Though you can't mix them with NODE_NETWORK on the seed-db... so peers lern only over getaddr LIMITED nodes
 815 2017-12-20T18:46:24  <jonasschnelli> (once this has been implemented)
 816 2017-12-20T18:47:20  <wumpus> right, true
 817 2017-12-20T18:47:38  *** maaku has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 818 2017-12-20T18:47:45  <maaku> I've moved some discussion regarding implementation of BIPs 98, 116, and 117 to #bitcoin-mast
 819 2017-12-20T18:50:12  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Sjors opened pull request #11962: [net] add seed.bitcoin.sprovoost.nl to DNS seeds (master...dns-seed-sjors) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11962
 820 2017-12-20T18:50:50  <MarcoFalke> jonasschnelli: Think of the tests as a layer around bitcoin-core, not the other way round ;)
 821 2017-12-20T18:51:07  *** kenois has quit IRC
 822 2017-12-20T18:51:18  <jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: yes. that indeed true.
 823 2017-12-20T18:51:48  *** maaku has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 824 2017-12-20T18:51:54  *** larafale has quit IRC
 825 2017-12-20T18:52:04  <jonasschnelli> Though, I think test environments need to be practical, thats why we have almost no difficulty in regtest,.. and without a static fallback fee, regtests gets pretty unusable
 826 2017-12-20T18:52:28  <jonasschnelli> We could also inject deterministic fee estmation data
 827 2017-12-20T18:53:00  <jonasschnelli> But disabling on regtest means regtest-wallet is only useful with -fallbackfee... this leads me to think it should be there by default
 828 2017-12-20T18:53:07  <jonasschnelli> (no on testnet though)
 829 2017-12-20T18:53:27  <jonasschnelli> Not sure about others, but I use regtest quite often
 830 2017-12-20T18:53:36  <jonasschnelli> (more then mainnet *duck*)
 831 2017-12-20T18:55:33  <jonasschnelli> bloody fee spam on github,.. all during the same time of bcash pump and mempool spam.
 832 2017-12-20T18:57:19  *** arubi has quit IRC
 833 2017-12-20T18:58:46  <wumpus> at least I banned the neo-nazi with his secret society nonsense from the org today, anything more?
 834 2017-12-20T18:59:27  <jonasschnelli> No.. the rest is just normal nonblockable spam
 835 2017-12-20T19:02:27  *** intcat has quit IRC
 836 2017-12-20T19:03:45  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 837 2017-12-20T19:04:45  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 838 2017-12-20T19:05:38  *** YellowSphere has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 839 2017-12-20T19:06:57  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 840 2017-12-20T19:07:11  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 841 2017-12-20T19:09:43  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 842 2017-12-20T19:14:15  <jonasschnelli> Is there no different way of losing tests into the test_runner.py that would not rais a git conflict all the time? Like autoloading them via readdir()?
 843 2017-12-20T19:14:20  <jonasschnelli> *loading
 844 2017-12-20T19:14:49  <wumpus> yes, that could work
 845 2017-12-20T19:15:05  <wumpus> well except for the order of execution
 846 2017-12-20T19:15:23  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 847 2017-12-20T19:15:26  <wumpus> you'd have to add metadata for every test as well, in a separate file
 848 2017-12-20T19:15:38  <wumpus> so that they can be sorted by +/- size
 849 2017-12-20T19:15:47  <wumpus> eh s/size/execution time/
 850 2017-12-20T19:16:00  <jonasschnelli> or filename based
 851 2017-12-20T19:16:08  <jonasschnelli> 1-flag-testname.py
 852 2017-12-20T19:16:11  <jonasschnelli> (where 1 is the oder)
 853 2017-12-20T19:16:13  <jonasschnelli> *order
 854 2017-12-20T19:16:24  <wumpus> nah
 855 2017-12-20T19:16:33  <wumpus> I'd really prefer not to encode anything into the file name
 856 2017-12-20T19:17:20  <wumpus> we don't want to be renaming tests all the time, that's awfully inconvenient if you want to execute them seprately to test something
 857 2017-12-20T19:17:21  <jonasschnelli> Or directly include the meta in the python file?
 858 2017-12-20T19:17:28  <wumpus> yes, exactly
 859 2017-12-20T19:17:31  <jonasschnelli> Yeah.. that true
 860 2017-12-20T19:17:40  <wumpus> just a comment in a certain format at the top
 861 2017-12-20T19:18:16  <jonasschnelli> Yeah.. ping MarcoFalke ^
 862 2017-12-20T19:18:26  <jonasschnelli> Let me do an issue
 863 2017-12-20T19:20:32  <sipa> or what about a test that checks every functional test is listed in test_runner.py?
 864 2017-12-20T19:21:35  <wumpus> we already have that
 865 2017-12-20T19:22:28  <sipa> oh.
 866 2017-12-20T19:22:50  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 867 2017-12-20T19:23:30  <wumpus> check_script_list() in test_runner.py
 868 2017-12-20T19:23:38  <sipa> then what's the problem?
 869 2017-12-20T19:23:44  <wumpus> merge conflicts
 870 2017-12-20T19:23:55  <sipa> that seems to solve the risk of accidentally lose things in the list
 871 2017-12-20T19:24:26  <wumpus> yes, that it does, it's just that it doesn't prevent having to rebase, jonasschnelli's comment was more about avoiding the hotspot
 872 2017-12-20T19:24:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 873 2017-12-20T19:25:17  <sipa> ah, i see
 874 2017-12-20T19:25:44  <jonasschnelli> I did at least 5 rebases the last two weeks because of the test_runner hotspot
 875 2017-12-20T19:26:02  <jonasschnelli> Not problematic,... but maybe it can be solved in a way where things get even more simple
 876 2017-12-20T19:26:18  <jonasschnelli> (just placing a test script into the right directory seems more elegant)
 877 2017-12-20T19:27:24  <wumpus> yes, I agree
 878 2017-12-20T19:28:22  <jonasschnelli> Though it would be another larger change in the test framework. Everytime I write a new test, something is new,... :)
 879 2017-12-20T19:28:44  <wumpus> lots of changes to the test framework lately
 880 2017-12-20T19:29:03  *** vh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 881 2017-12-20T19:31:24  *** intcat has quit IRC
 882 2017-12-20T19:32:45  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 883 2017-12-20T19:33:56  * luke-jr grumbles at GitHub changing all our tarballs again
 884 2017-12-20T19:36:50  <wumpus> what did they change them into this time
 885 2017-12-20T19:38:45  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
 886 2017-12-20T19:40:25  *** vh has quit IRC
 887 2017-12-20T19:42:42  *** Cory has quit IRC
 888 2017-12-20T19:44:34  <MarcoFalke> re: jonasschnelli Place them at random locations
 889 2017-12-20T19:44:47  <MarcoFalke> I don't get why everyone puts them in the last line
 890 2017-12-20T19:45:09  <MarcoFalke> They are supposed to be sorted by approximate run-time, not date of insertion
 891 2017-12-20T19:45:35  <MarcoFalke> We should add a comment in the last line to not put any tests there
 892 2017-12-20T19:45:48  <jonasschnelli> Heh.. yes. Your right,.... but would you not also prefere the auto-loading approach? Or what downsides do you see?
 893 2017-12-20T19:46:20  *** mrfrasha has quit IRC
 894 2017-12-20T19:46:43  *** quantbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 895 2017-12-20T19:46:57  <MarcoFalke> Some of the files that end in ".py" are not test scripts
 896 2017-12-20T19:47:06  <sipa> jonasschnelli: how do you determine the order of auto loaded tests?
 897 2017-12-20T19:47:12  <MarcoFalke> and that
 898 2017-12-20T19:47:56  <sipa> we could move the timing information to the test files themselves, and then use that to determine the order
 899 2017-12-20T19:48:03  <MarcoFalke> And we'd have to write a test for the auto-loader
 900 2017-12-20T19:48:04  <jonasschnelli> sipa: with some metadata in the test script (header)
 901 2017-12-20T19:48:10  <sipa> in that case we could get rid of the hardcoded lists entirely
 902 2017-12-20T19:48:49  <MarcoFalke> Hmm, I am really scared of not running tests
 903 2017-12-20T19:48:56  <MarcoFalke> I.e. the autoloader skips tests
 904 2017-12-20T19:49:00  <jonasschnelli> also, if you change a test, so it will consume more time, you need to shuffle stuff...
 905 2017-12-20T19:49:31  <jonasschnelli> The script list in test_runner seems redundant info to me
 906 2017-12-20T19:49:32  <MarcoFalke> jonasschnelli: Not too important. The time is measured in the order of minutes
 907 2017-12-20T19:49:53  <jonasschnelli> But it's just a though....
 908 2017-12-20T19:50:08  *** quantbot_ has quit IRC
 909 2017-12-20T19:50:21  <MarcoFalke> s/minutes/10s-of-seconds/
 910 2017-12-20T19:51:38  *** quantbot has quit IRC
 911 2017-12-20T19:52:10  <MarcoFalke> So even if we did the autoloader, I'd only feel comfortable doing it if we hardcoded the test list or at least the number of tests that are supposed to be run.
 912 2017-12-20T19:57:14  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #11965: qa: Note on test order in test_runner (master...Mf1712-qaTestRunnerOrder) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11965
 913 2017-12-20T20:02:26  *** intcat has quit IRC
 914 2017-12-20T20:03:58  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 915 2017-12-20T20:04:40  *** intcat has quit IRC
 916 2017-12-20T20:05:22  *** marcel_ has quit IRC
 917 2017-12-20T20:05:56  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 918 2017-12-20T20:08:50  <luke-jr> wumpus: yet another digit added to commit hashes, it appears
 919 2017-12-20T20:10:13  <luke-jr> maybe we should just use the full hash in the code
 920 2017-12-20T20:15:27  *** Murch has quit IRC
 921 2017-12-20T20:19:46  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 922 2017-12-20T20:24:38  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #11918: fees: Remove fallbackfee default (master...Mf1712-NoFallBackFee) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11918
 923 2017-12-20T20:24:54  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 924 2017-12-20T20:28:49  <wumpus> luke-jr: you mean in the embedded version hash? yes, I think that'd make sense
 925 2017-12-20T20:31:33  *** arubi has quit IRC
 926 2017-12-20T20:32:02  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 927 2017-12-20T20:45:49  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 928 2017-12-20T20:47:52  <MarcoFalke> wumpus: Any thoughts on #11517 ?
 929 2017-12-20T20:47:54  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11517 | Tests: Improve benchmark precision by martinus · Pull Request #11517 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 930 2017-12-20T20:48:05  <MarcoFalke> imo, it is ready
 931 2017-12-20T20:48:30  <MarcoFalke> But I wanted to see if you have any opinion, since it is basically a re-write
 932 2017-12-20T20:50:09  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 933 2017-12-20T20:50:19  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 934 2017-12-20T20:51:51  <wumpus> seems it needs rebase again, but no not really have an opinion on it, if manually specifying the number of iterations works better for precious that's ok with me
 935 2017-12-20T20:52:01  <wumpus> precision*
 936 2017-12-20T20:52:52  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 937 2017-12-20T20:53:30  <wumpus> not sure how the changes to check-doc.py belong in there though
 938 2017-12-20T20:54:04  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 939 2017-12-20T20:54:44  <MarcoFalke> bench is also "test", I assume. Since it is a rewrite of bench, might as well fix that up
 940 2017-12-20T20:55:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #11966: clientversion: Use full commit hash for commit-based version descriptions (master...ver_full_commit_hash) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11966
 941 2017-12-20T20:56:09  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 942 2017-12-20T20:57:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #11967: Add script to test the dns seeds (master...2017/12/seed_test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11967
 943 2017-12-20T21:00:02  *** JackH_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 944 2017-12-20T21:02:45  *** laptop__ has quit IRC
 945 2017-12-20T21:05:38  *** intcat has quit IRC
 946 2017-12-20T21:06:43  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 947 2017-12-20T21:22:22  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 948 2017-12-20T21:24:44  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 949 2017-12-20T21:35:48  *** kraeftig has quit IRC
 950 2017-12-20T21:37:29  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
 951 2017-12-20T21:38:04  *** promag has quit IRC
 952 2017-12-20T21:38:39  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 953 2017-12-20T21:54:23  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 954 2017-12-20T21:54:35  *** larafale has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 955 2017-12-20T21:55:59  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 956 2017-12-20T21:56:17  *** jb55 has quit IRC
 957 2017-12-20T22:05:28  *** intcat has quit IRC
 958 2017-12-20T22:06:21  *** spinza has quit IRC
 959 2017-12-20T22:06:46  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 960 2017-12-20T22:07:25  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 961 2017-12-20T22:15:40  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 962 2017-12-20T22:15:58  *** alcipir has quit IRC
 963 2017-12-20T22:28:38  *** intcat has quit IRC
 964 2017-12-20T22:29:42  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 965 2017-12-20T22:29:57  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 966 2017-12-20T22:30:40  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 967 2017-12-20T22:34:15  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 968 2017-12-20T22:35:46  *** pkx2 has quit IRC
 969 2017-12-20T22:39:19  *** YellowSphere has quit IRC
 970 2017-12-20T22:40:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/79399c8cd0b6...604e08c83cf5
 971 2017-12-20T22:40:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b673429 MeshCollider: Cleanups for walletdir PR
 972 2017-12-20T22:40:11  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master aac6b3f MeshCollider: Update files.md for new wallets/ subdirectory
 973 2017-12-20T22:40:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 604e08c MarcoFalke: Merge #11726: Cleanups + nit fixes for walletdir PR...
 974 2017-12-20T22:40:39  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #11726: Cleanups + nit fixes for walletdir PR (master...201711_walletdir) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11726
 975 2017-12-20T22:41:05  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 976 2017-12-20T22:52:15  *** Murch has quit IRC
 977 2017-12-20T22:53:12  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 978 2017-12-20T22:59:25  <cfields> gmaxwell: just to clarify, all that's needed upfront for the threshold signing for apple codesigning is a properly signed csr with the (not-yet-existing) new pubkey shoved in, right?
 979 2017-12-20T23:00:06  <cfields> obviously the pubkey will be shoved in, then the signature generated as a second step
 980 2017-12-20T23:01:33  <cfields> if so, looks straightforward, just need to figure out how the digest is calculated
 981 2017-12-20T23:03:43  *** climjark_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 982 2017-12-20T23:04:25  *** intcat has quit IRC
 983 2017-12-20T23:05:24  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
 984 2017-12-20T23:05:33  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 985 2017-12-20T23:06:35  *** larafale has quit IRC
 986 2017-12-20T23:07:59  *** bule has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 987 2017-12-20T23:13:09  *** harrymm has quit IRC
 988 2017-12-20T23:18:50  *** Murch has quit IRC
 989 2017-12-20T23:19:01  *** arubi has quit IRC
 990 2017-12-20T23:19:01  *** bule has quit IRC
 991 2017-12-20T23:19:26  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 992 2017-12-20T23:19:43  *** bule has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 993 2017-12-20T23:19:55  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 994 2017-12-20T23:21:55  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 995 2017-12-20T23:24:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Raizen opened pull request #11968: Update consensus.h (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11968
 996 2017-12-20T23:25:54  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 997 2017-12-20T23:26:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
 998 2017-12-20T23:26:44  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #11968: Update consensus.h (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11968
 999 2017-12-20T23:27:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1000 2017-12-20T23:36:24  *** Kozuch has quit IRC
1001 2017-12-20T23:36:53  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002 2017-12-20T23:42:10  *** vinirunner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1003 2017-12-20T23:49:10  *** Pavle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1004 2017-12-20T23:53:01  *** Murch has quit IRC
1005 2017-12-20T23:53:35  *** vinirunner has quit IRC
1006 2017-12-20T23:53:42  *** valentinewallace has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1007 2017-12-20T23:57:25  *** laurentmt has quit IRC