1 2018-04-12T00:00:03  *** weez17 has quit IRC
  2 2018-04-12T00:00:47  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  3 2018-04-12T00:00:49  *** weez17 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2018-04-12T00:01:14  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
  5 2018-04-12T00:01:16  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2018-04-12T00:01:17  <fanquake> dongcarl I think measuring towards the end of every release cycle would be a good start. Likely to be funded out of the pockets of whoever is running the tests. Unless someone donates some servers.
  7 2018-04-12T00:02:22  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  8 2018-04-12T00:02:55  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  9 2018-04-12T00:02:55  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2018-04-12T00:04:47  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 11 2018-04-12T00:05:55  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2018-04-12T00:23:08  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #12956: contrib: Only lint our src files for include guards (master...Mf1804-lintFixups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12956
 13 2018-04-12T00:25:01  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
 14 2018-04-12T00:30:17  *** moneyball has quit IRC
 15 2018-04-12T00:31:59  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 16 2018-04-12T00:32:56  *** rls has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 17 2018-04-12T00:35:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sparpana opened pull request #12957: Update README.md (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12957
 18 2018-04-12T00:36:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #12957: Update README.md (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12957
 19 2018-04-12T00:42:31  *** isis_ is now known as isis
 20 2018-04-12T00:43:02  *** dafuq_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 21 2018-04-12T00:46:14  *** ken2812221 has quit IRC
 22 2018-04-12T00:46:21  *** murrayn has quit IRC
 23 2018-04-12T00:47:17  *** ken2812221 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 24 2018-04-12T00:50:08  * dongcarl nods
 25 2018-04-12T00:50:08  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 26 2018-04-12T00:50:49  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2018-04-12T00:51:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Empact opened pull request #12959: Drop IsCompressedOrUncompressedPubKey and IsCompressedPubKey (master...is-compressed-or-uncompressed) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12959
 28 2018-04-12T00:56:19  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 29 2018-04-12T01:01:06  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
 30 2018-04-12T01:04:23  *** rls0 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2018-04-12T01:07:49  *** rls has quit IRC
 32 2018-04-12T01:08:57  *** Randolf has quit IRC
 33 2018-04-12T01:24:23  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 34 2018-04-12T01:25:48  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 35 2018-04-12T01:30:49  *** Samdney has quit IRC
 36 2018-04-12T01:32:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #12960: doc: Revert to previous header include policy (master...Mf1804-docIncludes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12960
 37 2018-04-12T01:40:26  *** tryphe_ is now known as tryphe
 38 2018-04-12T01:42:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12956: contrib: Only lint our src files for include guards (master...Mf1804-lintFixups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12956
 39 2018-04-12T01:46:05  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 40 2018-04-12T01:49:37  *** tiboclan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 41 2018-04-12T01:52:24  *** tiboclan has quit IRC
 42 2018-04-12T01:52:49  *** dafuq_ has quit IRC
 43 2018-04-12T01:54:30  *** zautomata1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 44 2018-04-12T01:56:09  *** zautomata has quit IRC
 45 2018-04-12T01:57:59  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #12433: [qt] move SendCoinsRecipient to its own file (master...2018/02/qt-send-coins-recipient) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12433
 46 2018-04-12T02:01:39  *** moneyball has quit IRC
 47 2018-04-12T02:01:44  *** zigen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 48 2018-04-12T02:02:17  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 49 2018-04-12T02:08:38  *** murrayn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2018-04-12T02:10:24  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 51 2018-04-12T02:21:02  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
 52 2018-04-12T02:21:48  *** moneyball has quit IRC
 53 2018-04-12T02:22:26  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2018-04-12T02:25:04  *** zigen has quit IRC
 55 2018-04-12T02:25:37  *** zigen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 56 2018-04-12T02:27:17  *** zigen has quit IRC
 57 2018-04-12T02:27:29  *** zigen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2018-04-12T02:30:18  <fanquake> Is there an easy way to comment on an issue like #12961 inline?
 59 2018-04-12T02:30:19  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12961 | 979f598: Clang Static Analyzer Report · Issue #12961 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 60 2018-04-12T02:32:06  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
 61 2018-04-12T02:32:23  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 62 2018-04-12T02:32:35  <aj> fanquake: don't think so. you can copy a bit and quote it with a ">" prefix, eg "> what they said \n\n helpful response from you" ?
 63 2018-04-12T02:32:54  <kallewoof> fanquake: Maybe I should've made a PR with 'no-merge:'. That would let you inline comment.
 64 2018-04-12T02:33:17  <kallewoof> No/limited formatting though..
 65 2018-04-12T02:33:23  <fanquake> Yes that's normally what I'd do, but copying out of an issue like that which has heaps of markdown is always a bit of a nightmare.
 66 2018-04-12T02:33:38  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2018-04-12T02:33:44  <fanquake> kallewoof, I'll have a go at adding some comments to the issue first.
 68 2018-04-12T02:33:53  <kallewoof> OK
 69 2018-04-12T02:53:48  *** moneyball has quit IRC
 70 2018-04-12T02:55:03  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 71 2018-04-12T02:55:59  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 72 2018-04-12T02:56:54  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 73 2018-04-12T03:01:21  *** moneyball has quit IRC
 74 2018-04-12T03:09:23  *** boblee has quit IRC
 75 2018-04-12T03:09:31  *** boblee has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 76 2018-04-12T03:10:00  *** cryptojanitor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 77 2018-04-12T03:10:04  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 78 2018-04-12T03:13:41  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 79 2018-04-12T03:16:24  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 80 2018-04-12T03:17:11  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 81 2018-04-12T03:18:29  <mryandao> ok, i've rebased #12240 and it finally passed all the build jobs
 82 2018-04-12T03:18:31  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12240 | [rpc] Introduced a new `fees` structure that aggregates all sub-field fee types denominated in BTC by mryandao · Pull Request #12240 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 83 2018-04-12T03:27:25  *** fanquake has quit IRC
 84 2018-04-12T03:29:57  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
 85 2018-04-12T03:35:57  <wumpus> dongcarl: funding is hardly ever the issue
 86 2018-04-12T03:37:51  <mryandao> while most open source project struggle with funding, bitcoin-core has a funny situation where there simply enough human resources to spend funding? :/
 87 2018-04-12T03:37:54  <wumpus> if you have a good plan for that, but the problem is servers to run it on, I'm sure something can be agreed on
 88 2018-04-12T03:38:09  <wumpus> yes the problem is people
 89 2018-04-12T03:46:04  <kallewoof> Does anyone have any objections to extending the WIF format with types, so that wallet software can know what kind of key it corresponds to (P2WPKH, P2WPKH-P2SH, etc)? BIP proposal here: https://github.com/kallewoof/bips/blob/bip-typed-wif/bip-extended-privkey.mediawiki
 90 2018-04-12T03:46:28  <wumpus> kallewoof: sounds like a good idea to me
 91 2018-04-12T03:47:31  <kallewoof> luke-jr: Would you mind assigning a BIP number? I've had this on the ML for awhile, and no one replied (= no one objected).
 92 2018-04-12T03:51:28  <wumpus> kallewoof:I think non-compressed should not be suffix 0, but simply 'no suffix byte', that's better for backward compatibility
 93 2018-04-12T03:51:48  <wumpus> (you mention that yourself in Compatibility so :-)
 94 2018-04-12T03:52:44  <wumpus> looks good to me otherwise
 95 2018-04-12T03:54:48  <kallewoof> wumpus: Hm. I thought 0x00 was the same as 'no suffix byte', compatibility wise...
 96 2018-04-12T03:55:04  <wumpus> kallewoof: a lot of implementations just check the length
 97 2018-04-12T03:55:05  <kallewoof> wumpus: I mean, 0x00 is the same as 'no suffix' which means uncompressed.
 98 2018-04-12T03:55:09  <kallewoof> wumpus: Geh. Okay.
 99 2018-04-12T03:56:42  <wumpus> well I don't know about 'a lot' but I've seen it done, and I don't think there's a good reason to introduce a new encoding for P2PKH_UNCOMPRESSED - the current one is unambigious!
100 2018-04-12T03:57:15  <kallewoof> wumpus: Yeah, makes sense. So either have no suffix byte (=P2PKH_UNCOMPRESSED), or have one that is non-zero
101 2018-04-12T03:57:16  <luke-jr> well, then it suddenly becomes a bug to interpret it as compressed/etc
102 2018-04-12T03:57:21  <luke-jr> kallewoof: is there a PR?
103 2018-04-12T03:57:39  <wumpus> "all types with a suffix byte are compressed"
104 2018-04-12T03:57:58  <kallewoof> luke-jr: There's a branch, no PR yet. Can make one easily enough.
105 2018-04-12T03:58:10  <kallewoof> luke-jr: Will fix wumpus feedback and then make PR
106 2018-04-12T03:58:12  <luke-jr> kallewoof: PR for the BIP I mean
107 2018-04-12T03:58:18  <kallewoof> luke-jr: Yes
108 2018-04-12T03:58:29  <luke-jr> that goes before # assignment these days
109 2018-04-12T04:01:05  <kallewoof> luke-jr: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/673
110 2018-04-12T04:01:38  <kallewoof> wumpus: I did a first draft on switching to uncompressed = no suffix.
111 2018-04-12T04:02:58  *** zautomata2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
112 2018-04-12T04:03:02  <luke-jr> kallewoof: I suggest making type 0 always p2pk or p2pkh
113 2018-04-12T04:03:33  <luke-jr> "Legacy public key format" should be "p2pkh"
114 2018-04-12T04:04:27  <kallewoof> luke-jr: Isn't type 0 ambiguous with 'not compressed'? Or is 'not compressed' *always* a missing suffix byte?
115 2018-04-12T04:05:05  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
116 2018-04-12T04:05:10  *** zautomata1 has quit IRC
117 2018-04-12T04:05:12  <kallewoof> luke-jr: I forgot about P2PK though...
118 2018-04-12T04:05:21  <luke-jr> might want to ask thomasv to co-author the BIP
119 2018-04-12T04:05:33  <kallewoof> Yeah, good idea
120 2018-04-12T04:06:08  <wumpus> yes, the important part is that other wallet authors agree
121 2018-04-12T04:06:31  <wumpus> if they're not on one page, it's not much of a standard :)
122 2018-04-12T04:08:04  <kallewoof> Yeah, I was sort of assuming they'd be on the ML and object if they found it offensive, but asking directly is definitely a good idea
123 2018-04-12T04:09:04  <wumpus> that would be the ideal situation, but in practice most people are probably very busy and don't pay much attention to the mailing list day to day - a common practice would be to CC: people that should absolutely see it
124 2018-04-12T04:10:10  <kallewoof> wumpus: I don't really know who to CC though, aside from thomasv, who is already in the thread. In fact, he's the author of it.
125 2018-04-12T04:10:20  <wumpus> ok
126 2018-04-12T04:10:38  <wumpus> (me neither, just have the same experience with ignored messages on MLs :-)
127 2018-04-12T04:14:29  <wumpus> in open source projects you shouldn't be afraid to poke people, if necessarily repeatedly (after some time passed)
128 2018-04-12T04:15:24  <kallewoof> wumpus: Haha, yeah I'm trying to get used to that idea.
129 2018-04-12T04:20:05  *** zigen has quit IRC
130 2018-04-12T04:20:37  *** zigen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2018-04-12T04:23:21  <wumpus> kallewoof: uh oh, looking at python-bitcoinlib's WIF decoder: https://github.com/petertodd/python-bitcoinlib/blob/master/bitcoin/wallet.py#L253 they treat only keys with suffix byte AND suffix byte=1 as compressed and the rest as uncompressed
132 2018-04-12T04:24:13  <kallewoof> wumpus: Wow... okay. Wonder why they chose that approach.
133 2018-04-12T04:24:24  <wumpus> accidentally, I think
134 2018-04-12T04:25:14  *** zigen has quit IRC
135 2018-04-12T04:25:27  <wumpus> we can fix that at the same time as implementing your BIP - just a data point
136 2018-04-12T04:26:17  <wumpus> though at some point it would be safer to create a completely new WIF format
137 2018-04-12T04:26:45  <wumpus> especially if we find more examples of handling the suffix byte differently
138 2018-04-12T04:26:47  <kallewoof> wumpus: I'm gonna look around at other implementations and see how they're doing it.
139 2018-04-12T04:26:51  <kallewoof> wumpus: Yeah.
140 2018-04-12T04:26:52  <wumpus> yes, good idea
141 2018-04-12T04:32:05  <luke-jr> Could Bech32 it
142 2018-04-12T04:32:50  <wumpus> luke-jr: I had that in my mind as well
143 2018-04-12T04:34:31  <kallewoof> Yeah, that would be nice. I know sipa has talked about it in the past.
144 2018-04-12T04:35:13  <kallewoof> btcd seems to do the "right" thing (ignoring the suffix byte, actually.. I think.. so they should be 100% compatible): https://github.com/btcsuite/btcutil/blob/501929d3d046174c3d39f0ea54ece471aa17238c/wif.go#L90-L102
145 2018-04-12T04:35:41  <kallewoof> Oh wait, nevermind. They do check that it's 0x01 for compressed.
146 2018-04-12T04:35:56  <luke-jr> a Bech32 format would be a clean break of compatibility
147 2018-04-12T04:36:57  <wumpus> I've downgraded my ACK to Concept ACK for now
148 2018-04-12T04:37:08  <kallewoof> luke-jr: I was hoping we could get a fix in for WIF soonish, as I don't believe sipa is done with the params for the private key bech32 variant.
149 2018-04-12T04:37:46  <kallewoof> wumpus: I'll note the bech32 alternative on the BIP
150 2018-04-12T04:38:10  <wumpus> I'm a bit afraid that this might result in funds loss in some edge cases
151 2018-04-12T04:38:40  <wumpus> e.g. importing one of the new key types into an old wallet, there's no error, but as it is interpreted wrongly, nothing happens either
152 2018-04-12T04:38:59  <kallewoof> That would be a display error, not a fund loss
153 2018-04-12T04:39:08  <luke-jr> ^
154 2018-04-12T04:39:23  <luke-jr> even if the user throws away the WIF, you could still export the key and fix it later
155 2018-04-12T04:39:36  <wumpus> ok
156 2018-04-12T04:40:08  <luke-jr> kallewoof: what's the need for an interim format? WIF is fine..
157 2018-04-12T04:41:36  <kallewoof> luke-jr: It's fine, except you need to import every possible type of public key as you don't know what kind it is. See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12705#issuecomment-373973741
158 2018-04-12T04:41:45  *** wolfspraul has quit IRC
159 2018-04-12T04:42:15  <kallewoof> sipa said: "Relatedly, we don't have an encoding for "private key whose address is supposed to be P2SH-P2WPKH". My suggestion would be to add one (I believe Electrum has some sort of standard for this). importprivkey can't really use these, because it already has to assume it can be any type, but importmulti does not need to repeat this. It could assume just P2PKH for a legacy WIP encoding, and
160 2018-04-12T04:42:18  <kallewoof> P2SH/P2WPKH when one of those novel encodings is used."
161 2018-04-12T04:43:24  <wumpus> right, the problem is mostly one of inefficiency due to aspecificity
162 2018-04-12T04:44:30  <kallewoof> *nods*
163 2018-04-12T04:45:52  <luke-jr> kallewoof: minor enough I'd just prefer to wait for Bech32
164 2018-04-12T04:46:12  <luke-jr> users shouldn't be touching private keys by hand anyway
165 2018-04-12T04:51:21  <kallewoof> luke-jr: perhaps they shouldn't, but it's a pressing enough issue that wallets are making their own formats up for this, so it doesn't feel completely unwarranted. It depends of course on how far away we are from bech32-style format.
166 2018-04-12T04:51:47  <luke-jr> I'd say let them make the BIP then ;)
167 2018-04-12T04:53:37  <wumpus> I still think this is a good idea in itself
168 2018-04-12T04:53:49  <kallewoof> That puts us back at square 1 on other projects, like importmulti.
169 2018-04-12T04:54:18  <kallewoof> I agree with sipa that we should address the private key ambiguity before updating importmulti (#12705)
170 2018-04-12T04:54:20  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12705 | [WIP] Importmulti private key support by kallewoof · Pull Request #12705 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
171 2018-04-12T04:55:08  <wumpus> right
172 2018-04-12T04:55:39  <sipa> kallewoof, luke-jr, wumpus: i think we should see the existing WIF format as *just* a key with no information about associated addresses; it has to be clear from the context or irrelevant
173 2018-04-12T04:56:08  <sipa> while the new format can be a combined key + implicit associated address
174 2018-04-12T04:56:44  <sipa> kallewoof: i haven't worked on an extended bech32 in a while; i could pick it up again, but the design space is so big :)
175 2018-04-12T04:56:47  <wumpus> yes
176 2018-04-12T04:56:59  <kallewoof> sipa: Would it make sense to use bech32 as is for private keys?
177 2018-04-12T04:57:22  <sipa> kallewoof: bech32 itself? it can only correct two errors
178 2018-04-12T04:58:02  <kallewoof> Right. I know you were looking into optimizing that. I guess what I wonder is, does it make sense to do something without an optimized extended bech32 or should we just sit tight?
179 2018-04-12T04:58:05  <sipa> i would expect that for private ieys you want to be able to correct more
180 2018-04-12T04:59:25  <wumpus> you'd want to propose a completely new encoding for private keys?
181 2018-04-12T04:59:43  <sipa> and things like extended pubkeys etc
182 2018-04-12T04:59:54  <sipa> anything that's not specifically optimized to be short
183 2018-04-12T05:00:03  <wumpus> right
184 2018-04-12T05:01:12  <sipa> but again, i haven't worked on that in a while
185 2018-04-12T05:02:02  <sipa> i believe with 13 checksum characters you can correct 4 errors easily
186 2018-04-12T05:02:13  <wumpus> it seems a long-term thing, and there seems to be some demandfrom wallet authors for an intermediate format, I think that's what motivated the BIP
187 2018-04-12T05:02:56  <sipa> yup
188 2018-04-12T05:07:42  <wumpus> but yes having a robust, error correcting private key format would be very nice
189 2018-04-12T05:10:17  <sipa> maybe i'll post a summary of the options on the ml
190 2018-04-12T05:10:30  <kallewoof> sipa: That would be great
191 2018-04-12T05:10:58  <kallewoof> sipa: I'd love to work on the extended bech32 format, but to be honest, I don't think I'd find an optimal solution on my own. :)
192 2018-04-12T05:12:54  <sipa> i'll post a list of options
193 2018-04-12T05:14:36  <sipa> i don't have the knowledge/computation to find an optimal solution either
194 2018-04-12T05:14:48  <sipa> for bech32 it was doable due to limited search space
195 2018-04-12T05:16:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
196 2018-04-12T05:17:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
197 2018-04-12T05:19:43  *** cryptojanitor has quit IRC
198 2018-04-12T05:23:54  *** zigen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
199 2018-04-12T05:29:35  *** jtimon has quit IRC
200 2018-04-12T05:31:09  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2018-04-12T05:57:46  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202 2018-04-12T06:01:16  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
203 2018-04-12T06:01:29  *** shesek has quit IRC
204 2018-04-12T06:15:35  *** arubi has quit IRC
205 2018-04-12T06:20:11  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
206 2018-04-12T06:21:45  *** intcat has quit IRC
207 2018-04-12T06:22:49  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
208 2018-04-12T06:24:07  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
209 2018-04-12T06:30:55  <jonasschnelli> Currently, encodings that use more space may be more cumbersome for seed backups,... though it could be orthogonal (depening on the new concept)
210 2018-04-12T06:30:58  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] practicalswift opened pull request #12963: Fix Clang Static Analyzer warnings (master...issue-12961) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12963
211 2018-04-12T06:31:50  <jonasschnelli> Also, if length is not an issue, why not just use <privkey><privkey><chsm>?
212 2018-04-12T06:32:14  <sipa> ?
213 2018-04-12T06:32:42  <sipa> two privkeys?
214 2018-04-12T06:35:58  <wumpus> could also encode to a passphrase in some dictionary and use the redundancy of e.g. english for error correction (not sure how that compares to other approaches :-)
215 2018-04-12T06:36:16  <jonasschnelli> sipa: the same key twice
216 2018-04-12T06:36:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/979f59850c72...e561cf4fa865
217 2018-04-12T06:36:55  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3450a9b Ben Woosley: Extract consts for WITNESS_V0 hash sizes
218 2018-04-12T06:36:55  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e561cf4 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12939: Extract consts for WITNESS_V0 hash sizes...
219 2018-04-12T06:38:01  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12939: Extract consts for WITNESS_V0 hash sizes (master...hash-size-constants) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12939
220 2018-04-12T06:38:46  <jonasschnelli> Maybe I got a wrong understanding of the use case.
221 2018-04-12T06:39:48  <sipa> jonasschnelli: that's stupid :)
222 2018-04-12T06:40:03  <sipa> you can get far better error correction with that length :)
223 2018-04-12T06:40:19  <sipa> wumpus: you know gramtropy?
224 2018-04-12T06:40:43  <jonasschnelli> Okay. Then I'm better be quite about encoding and error correction. :)
225 2018-04-12T06:41:15  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
226 2018-04-12T06:41:21  <wumpus> sipa: I was just thinking of that, but couldn't find it, I suppose incorporating grammar would create even more redundancy
227 2018-04-12T06:41:34  <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/sipa/gramtropy
228 2018-04-12T06:42:53  <wumpus> though no, that's not as easy to correct for
229 2018-04-12T06:46:06  <sipa> ha, no :)
230 2018-04-12T06:48:54  *** moneyball has quit IRC
231 2018-04-12T06:59:25  <jonasschnelli> sipa: where is your long-term-wallet concept gist/wiki?
232 2018-04-12T06:59:58  <jonasschnelli> Is there a central place for bitcoin core implementation concepts?
233 2018-04-12T07:03:27  *** Randolf has quit IRC
234 2018-04-12T07:03:37  <kallewoof> jonasschnelli: Don't think so. We could make a page on the wiki and link to stuff as we see it maybe.
235 2018-04-12T07:03:53  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Maybe a topic for today
236 2018-04-12T07:03:58  *** nullptr| has quit IRC
237 2018-04-12T07:04:12  *** nullptr| has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
238 2018-04-12T07:07:27  <sipa> jonasschnelli: https://gist.github.com/sipa/125cfa1615946d0c3f3eec2ad7f250a2
239 2018-04-12T07:07:31  <jonasschnelli> thx!
240 2018-04-12T07:10:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] lutangar closed pull request #12736: [RPC][Refactoring] Meaningful error code when called with wrong number of arguments (master...error-code-for-param-number) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12736
241 2018-04-12T07:12:58  *** zigen has quit IRC
242 2018-04-12T07:13:35  *** zigen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
243 2018-04-12T07:18:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e561cf4fa865...39439e5ab419
244 2018-04-12T07:18:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 72ec5b7 Gregory Sanders: debug log number of unknown wallet records on load
245 2018-04-12T07:18:12  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 39439e5 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12888: debug log number of unknown wallet records on load...
246 2018-04-12T07:18:22  *** zigen has quit IRC
247 2018-04-12T07:18:35  *** anome has quit IRC
248 2018-04-12T07:19:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12888: debug log number of unknown wallet records on load (master...unknownrec) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12888
249 2018-04-12T07:21:57  *** DMTcrypto has quit IRC
250 2018-04-12T07:25:02  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
251 2018-04-12T07:27:16  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
252 2018-04-12T07:30:46  <kallewoof> So, I've now heard several people express positive things about "<type literal>:<WIF>" as a way to specify key types. So if you had a bech32 public key, you would express its private key as p2wpkh:<Base58WIF>. This is apparently what Electrum is/did switch(ing) to.
253 2018-04-12T07:32:15  <kallewoof> My only concern is if people start manually prefixing previously dumped privkeys and getting the type wrong, but that should never cause a loss of funds as discussed earlier.
254 2018-04-12T07:37:44  <sipa> well... humans shouldn't be dealing with private keys directly, in general
255 2018-04-12T07:37:46  <stevenroose> sipa: about the coins cache, AddCoin only checks if a new entry doesn't overwrite a non-spent entry *in the cache*. what prevents overwriting a non-spent entry that is not cached?
256 2018-04-12T07:38:00  <sipa> stevenroose: bip30
257 2018-04-12T07:38:27  <sipa> and bip34
258 2018-04-12T07:39:42  <sipa> stevenroose: the checks there are consistency checks (= they protect against bugs in the code), they're not what prevents actual blocks from performing such uodates
259 2018-04-12T07:39:52  <sipa> those are dealt with in consensus code
260 2018-04-12T07:41:13  <kallewoof> sipa: Sure, but this encourages that behavior by being human readable, as opposed to a binary byte value embedded in the format itself.
261 2018-04-12T07:43:44  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262 2018-04-12T07:45:29  *** rls0 has quit IRC
263 2018-04-12T07:46:12  *** Amuza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
264 2018-04-12T07:47:04  *** zarez has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
265 2018-04-12T07:48:14  *** drizztbsd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
266 2018-04-12T07:48:17  <stevenroose> sipa: that makes sense
267 2018-04-12T07:48:44  *** timothy has quit IRC
268 2018-04-12T07:52:04  *** zigen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
269 2018-04-12T07:52:09  *** drizztbsd is now known as timothy
270 2018-04-12T07:55:20  <sipa> kallewoof: fair point
271 2018-04-12T07:55:24  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
272 2018-04-12T07:55:35  <sipa> kallewoof: but then again, why do we have a concise format anyway?
273 2018-04-12T07:56:38  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
274 2018-04-12T07:59:35  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
275 2018-04-12T07:59:51  <kallewoof> sipa: well, in my case I realized I had an old GUI wallet with bitcoin in it, and it allowed me to export the private keys. I just imported those into bitcoin core, rather than sending the amount (it was tiny). In the future, this will probably be done using the HD master key instead, but I don't know. Anyway, I may not always want to import the entire wallet, just a specific key...
276 2018-04-12T08:03:27  *** Amuza has quit IRC
277 2018-04-12T08:03:39  <jonasschnelli> kallewoof: IMO "transporting" private keys is non-ideal security practice
278 2018-04-12T08:04:10  *** Varunram_ has quit IRC
279 2018-04-12T08:04:10  *** Varunram_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
280 2018-04-12T08:04:10  *** Varunram_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
281 2018-04-12T08:05:44  <kallewoof> jonasschnelli: It may not be ideal, but I think people will be tempted to do it between their own wallets, esp if the amounts are smallish.
282 2018-04-12T08:06:04  *** Varunram_ is now known as Varunram
283 2018-04-12T08:11:09  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
284 2018-04-12T08:12:24  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
285 2018-04-12T08:15:23  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
286 2018-04-12T08:16:40  *** anome has quit IRC
287 2018-04-12T08:17:28  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
288 2018-04-12T08:19:38  *** jarthur has quit IRC
289 2018-04-12T08:19:54  *** Samdney has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
290 2018-04-12T08:37:40  *** Amuza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
291 2018-04-12T08:46:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #12965: Add RPC call setscriptthreadsenabled: allow to temp. throttle CPU usage (master...2018/04/svt) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12965
292 2018-04-12T08:55:15  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
293 2018-04-12T08:58:26  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
294 2018-04-12T09:02:45  *** zigen has quit IRC
295 2018-04-12T09:19:14  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
296 2018-04-12T09:29:09  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof opened pull request #12966: [WIP] Mempool optimized feerate (master...mempool-optimized-feerate) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12966
297 2018-04-12T09:42:07  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
298 2018-04-12T09:55:13  *** anome has quit IRC
299 2018-04-12T09:55:38  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
300 2018-04-12T10:08:11  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
301 2018-04-12T10:09:22  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302 2018-04-12T10:12:11  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Empact closed pull request #12459: Assert compressed keys are strictly shorter than regular (master...assert-compressed-smaller) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12459
303 2018-04-12T10:16:29  *** tryphe has quit IRC
304 2018-04-12T10:19:50  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
305 2018-04-12T10:20:14  <fanquake> wumpus I opened #12955 for the weird travis failures. I'd like to know what's happening before we merge 12899..
306 2018-04-12T10:20:15  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12955 | travis: Windows build failing after -pie changes · Issue #12955 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
307 2018-04-12T10:21:02  <wumpus> fanquake: I agree, certainly don't plan to merge it unless it passes travis
308 2018-04-12T10:22:52  <fanquake> wumpus I'm also putting together a PR for most of the 0.16 backports. Any thoughts on a 0.16.1 release? Looks like there is 1 PR left which needs a rebase.
309 2018-04-12T10:23:29  <wumpus> fanquake: is there a trigger for a 0.16.1 release?
310 2018-04-12T10:23:33  <fanquake> *1 PR that should be merged before 0.16.1 that is
311 2018-04-12T10:23:41  *** DMTcrypto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312 2018-04-12T10:23:50  <wumpus> (apart from that it's a good idea to already backport some things, but just wondering)
313 2018-04-12T10:24:31  <fanquake> wumpus no particular trigger at the moment
314 2018-04-12T10:28:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #12967: backport: #12626, #12650, #12487 (0.16...backport-12626) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12967
315 2018-04-12T10:28:27  *** DMTcrypto has quit IRC
316 2018-04-12T10:36:03  <promag> someone knows why assert(CWallet::GetConflicts(txid).count(txid) == 0) can fail??
317 2018-04-12T10:36:28  <promag> can a txid conflict with itself?
318 2018-04-12T10:40:48  *** DMTcrypto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
319 2018-04-12T10:45:50  *** promag has quit IRC
320 2018-04-12T10:54:06  *** ghost43 has quit IRC
321 2018-04-12T10:54:21  *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
322 2018-04-12T11:02:48  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
323 2018-04-12T11:02:52  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
324 2018-04-12T11:08:01  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
325 2018-04-12T11:09:35  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
326 2018-04-12T11:12:12  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
327 2018-04-12T11:12:16  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
328 2018-04-12T11:14:33  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
329 2018-04-12T11:28:19  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
330 2018-04-12T11:28:20  *** shesek has quit IRC
331 2018-04-12T11:28:20  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332 2018-04-12T11:31:11  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
333 2018-04-12T11:40:02  *** rls has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
334 2018-04-12T11:41:21  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
335 2018-04-12T11:42:38  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
336 2018-04-12T11:48:17  <instagibbs> jonasschnelli, also writing down a key twice means correlated errors. sad!
337 2018-04-12T11:48:35  <instagibbs> if im writing down a key, get a character wrong, super likely ill do it twice
338 2018-04-12T12:12:03  *** fanquake has quit IRC
339 2018-04-12T12:19:56  <wumpus> instagibbs: just munge the second time w/ some xor key *ducks*
340 2018-04-12T12:23:32  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
341 2018-04-12T12:27:05  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
342 2018-04-12T12:27:31  *** Samdney has quit IRC
343 2018-04-12T12:29:16  *** cryptojanitor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
344 2018-04-12T12:32:57  *** zautomata2 has quit IRC
345 2018-04-12T12:34:09  *** promag has quit IRC
346 2018-04-12T12:34:57  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
347 2018-04-12T12:35:12  *** zautomata2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
348 2018-04-12T12:38:55  *** Krellan has quit IRC
349 2018-04-12T12:39:58  *** promag has quit IRC
350 2018-04-12T12:40:19  *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
351 2018-04-12T12:40:39  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352 2018-04-12T12:41:38  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
353 2018-04-12T12:42:23  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
354 2018-04-12T12:45:53  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
355 2018-04-12T12:47:00  *** harding_ is now known as harding
356 2018-04-12T12:48:24  *** harding has quit IRC
357 2018-04-12T12:48:37  *** harding has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
358 2018-04-12T12:50:46  *** DMTcrypto has quit IRC
359 2018-04-12T12:57:44  *** rls has quit IRC
360 2018-04-12T12:58:31  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
361 2018-04-12T13:01:52  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362 2018-04-12T13:03:36  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
363 2018-04-12T13:04:38  *** promag has quit IRC
364 2018-04-12T13:07:27  *** propumpkin is now known as contrapumpkin
365 2018-04-12T13:22:23  *** DMTcrypto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
366 2018-04-12T13:24:55  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
367 2018-04-12T13:26:57  *** DMTcrypto has quit IRC
368 2018-04-12T13:32:08  *** fanquake has quit IRC
369 2018-04-12T13:34:35  *** rabidus has quit IRC
370 2018-04-12T13:34:53  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
371 2018-04-12T13:38:26  *** shesek has quit IRC
372 2018-04-12T13:38:50  *** DMTcrypto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
373 2018-04-12T14:02:59  *** zarez has quit IRC
374 2018-04-12T14:03:11  <jamesob> anyone have any good workarounds for the github-unicorn-of-death effect for prs with many comments? I'm basically unable to continue review on #11857 because the page won't load
375 2018-04-12T14:03:16  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11857 | Build tx index in parallel with validation by jimpo · Pull Request #11857 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
376 2018-04-12T14:05:06  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
377 2018-04-12T14:05:21  <fanquake> jamesob Pretty sure that's just GitHub having a sad
378 2018-04-12T14:05:30  *** musou has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
379 2018-04-12T14:05:30  <fanquake> I'm also seeing unicorns
380 2018-04-12T14:05:46  <jamesob> fanquake: yeah it's been pretty bad for the last 24 hours
381 2018-04-12T14:05:53  <aj> huh, it's working fine here :-/
382 2018-04-12T14:06:18  *** musou has quit IRC
383 2018-04-12T14:06:19  <jamesob> of course their status page reports 100% uptime :)
384 2018-04-12T14:07:03  *** zarez has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
385 2018-04-12T14:24:29  <sipa> kallewoof: my goal here is to make sure there exists a compact description of your wallet that's human readable to the extent it has structure that matters (see my wallet design gist)... but it doesn't need to be a single string or collection thereof
386 2018-04-12T14:36:14  *** wvr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
387 2018-04-12T14:36:58  *** DMTcrypto has quit IRC
388 2018-04-12T14:39:06  <promag_> jnewbery: hi, did you understand my point?
389 2018-04-12T14:40:23  *** fanquake has quit IRC
390 2018-04-12T14:43:46  *** promag_ is now known as promag
391 2018-04-12T14:44:21  <promag> jnewbery: saw your relpy in gh, ty
392 2018-04-12T14:45:27  *** str4d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
393 2018-04-12T14:46:07  <jnewbery> promag: i don't think I fully understand! I've answered as best I can, but perhaps you can elaborate in the PR
394 2018-04-12T14:46:47  <promag> jnewbery: I thought 0.18 won't have those dummy args
395 2018-04-12T14:49:05  *** DMTcrypto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
396 2018-04-12T14:49:09  <jnewbery> It's possible to remove the dummy args in a future version, but not necessary. Removing dummy args is an API break.
397 2018-04-12T14:49:27  *** str4d has quit IRC
398 2018-04-12T14:50:01  <jnewbery> Other RPCs have had dummy args for many releases. See priorisetransaction and move for example.
399 2018-04-12T14:54:05  *** promag has quit IRC
400 2018-04-12T15:03:57  *** Amuza has quit IRC
401 2018-04-12T15:24:04  *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
402 2018-04-12T15:24:09  *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
403 2018-04-12T15:30:18  *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
404 2018-04-12T15:32:40  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
405 2018-04-12T15:33:19  *** CubicEarths has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
406 2018-04-12T15:34:24  <wumpus> how careful to be with RPC API breakage depends on how much the RPC is used (uncommon and debugging RPCs should just be changed, but e.g. not sendtoaddress), as well as the consequences when running old code and the dummy argument is provided anyway
407 2018-04-12T15:36:39  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
408 2018-04-12T15:41:17  *** NicolasDorier has quit IRC
409 2018-04-12T15:41:29  *** NicolasDorier has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
410 2018-04-12T15:50:34  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
411 2018-04-12T15:53:33  *** dermoth has quit IRC
412 2018-04-12T15:53:56  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
413 2018-04-12T15:54:00  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
414 2018-04-12T15:54:19  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
415 2018-04-12T15:57:45  *** CubicEarths has quit IRC
416 2018-04-12T16:14:35  *** arubi has quit IRC
417 2018-04-12T16:14:59  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
418 2018-04-12T16:17:21  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
419 2018-04-12T16:24:30  *** rls has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
420 2018-04-12T16:30:22  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
421 2018-04-12T16:31:37  *** Samdney has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
422 2018-04-12T16:42:43  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
423 2018-04-12T16:42:44  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
424 2018-04-12T16:44:08  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
425 2018-04-12T16:44:09  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
426 2018-04-12T16:45:12  *** timothy has quit IRC
427 2018-04-12T16:52:25  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
428 2018-04-12T16:52:32  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
429 2018-04-12T16:53:44  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
430 2018-04-12T16:57:59  *** Krellan has quit IRC
431 2018-04-12T16:58:04  *** instagibbs has quit IRC
432 2018-04-12T16:59:42  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
433 2018-04-12T17:00:01  *** so has quit IRC
434 2018-04-12T17:04:05  *** anome has quit IRC
435 2018-04-12T17:06:20  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
436 2018-04-12T17:10:26  *** belcher_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
437 2018-04-12T17:11:32  *** rls0 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
438 2018-04-12T17:15:32  *** rls has quit IRC
439 2018-04-12T17:20:49  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
440 2018-04-12T17:22:16  <promag> meeting at 20 utc?
441 2018-04-12T17:22:43  <wumpus> 19 utc
442 2018-04-12T17:22:48  <promag> ok ty
443 2018-04-12T17:23:11  <wumpus> which should be 1 hour and ~38 minutes from now
444 2018-04-12T17:23:45  <promag> :+1:
445 2018-04-12T17:31:20  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
446 2018-04-12T17:31:53  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
447 2018-04-12T17:37:02  *** promag has quit IRC
448 2018-04-12T17:37:21  *** jnewbery has quit IRC
449 2018-04-12T17:38:21  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #12968: leveldb: Add ARMv8 CRC32C support (master...2018_04_armv8_crc32c) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12968
450 2018-04-12T17:38:35  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
451 2018-04-12T17:46:13  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
452 2018-04-12T17:47:09  *** jnewbery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
453 2018-04-12T17:48:07  *** zarez has quit IRC
454 2018-04-12T17:48:23  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: what ARM v8 machine do you use for testing/develpoing?
455 2018-04-12T17:48:56  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: a server at mininodes that crashes all the time! I have a i.mx8 boards that I should set up though
456 2018-04-12T17:49:04  *** cryptojanitor has quit IRC
457 2018-04-12T17:50:13  <wumpus> (https://www.nxp.com/support/developer-resources/run-time-software/i.mx-developer-resources/evaluation-kit-for-the-i.mx-8m-applications-processor:MCIMX8M-EVK)
458 2018-04-12T17:50:34  <jonasschnelli> The Cortex A53 is also v8 and should have the crc32 ext, right?
459 2018-04-12T17:51:25  <jonasschnelli> (RPi3, Pine64, Ordoid-C2)
460 2018-04-12T17:51:39  <wumpus> ah yes good idea, I have an odroid C2 here which has it
461 2018-04-12T17:52:35  <jonasschnelli> My HC2/XU4 have an A15 (v7)... will report about performance soon
462 2018-04-12T17:53:00  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: what tool do/did you use for performance measuring, gperf?
463 2018-04-12T17:53:04  <wumpus> thanks!
464 2018-04-12T17:53:48  <wumpus> I didn't measure performance of bitcoind at all yet, just crcbench independently: https://github.com/laanwj/crcbench
465 2018-04-12T17:54:02  <jonasschnelli> ok
466 2018-04-12T17:56:05  <wumpus> (which was impressive; about 6x faster on C2)
467 2018-04-12T17:56:50  <cfields> wumpus: nice :)
468 2018-04-12T18:02:27  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
469 2018-04-12T18:07:50  *** moneyball has quit IRC
470 2018-04-12T18:07:58  *** drexl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
471 2018-04-12T18:10:27  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472 2018-04-12T18:10:33  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
473 2018-04-12T18:11:09  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
474 2018-04-12T18:11:42  <jonasschnelli> bitcoin_bench should have some verification benchmarks (simulate connectblock() or something with -par=0[auto])
475 2018-04-12T18:11:54  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
476 2018-04-12T18:12:45  *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
477 2018-04-12T18:15:57  <wumpus> I think that's the only one out of the couple of benchmarks I proposed that never got implemented; it's difficult to do without setting up a lot of context
478 2018-04-12T18:18:40  *** arbitrary_guy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
479 2018-04-12T18:25:42  *** moneyball has quit IRC
480 2018-04-12T18:28:21  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
481 2018-04-12T18:29:01  *** moneyball has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
482 2018-04-12T18:33:17  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
483 2018-04-12T18:34:48  <drexl> is a compressed public key valid for a P2PK scriptPubKey?
484 2018-04-12T18:35:30  <wumpus> yes
485 2018-04-12T18:36:56  <drexl> cheers
486 2018-04-12T18:37:37  *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
487 2018-04-12T18:37:47  *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
488 2018-04-12T18:37:47  *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
489 2018-04-12T18:38:12  <midnightmagic> wonder when it'll be time to pick up a sifive thingy..
490 2018-04-12T18:40:03  <wumpus> the sifive unleashed board seems really nice
491 2018-04-12T18:40:21  <midnightmagic> bunny crapped on it :-/
492 2018-04-12T18:40:50  <wumpus> oh? just the closed bootloader thing or more?
493 2018-04-12T18:40:54  <midnightmagic> dunno why, ultimately. Are you picking one up for porting?
494 2018-04-12T18:41:09  <midnightmagic> wumpus: just the closed initial boot stuff, yes, so far.
495 2018-04-12T18:41:27  <wumpus> well that's no worse than NXP then at least...
496 2018-04-12T18:41:33  <wumpus> midnightmagic: yes :)
497 2018-04-12T18:41:49  <midnightmagic> nice, I'm glad. that makes me want one now.
498 2018-04-12T18:42:22  <wumpus> would be more worried if e.g. the performance was really bad, or worse it crashed randomly
499 2018-04-12T18:43:32  *** ProfMac has quit IRC
500 2018-04-12T18:43:57  <jonasschnelli> Our gitian -debug builds -O2 -g, right? They should be okay for performance profiling?
501 2018-04-12T18:44:48  <wumpus> yes -O2 -g is fine for performance profiling, -g itself doesn't make your code slower, make sure the lock debugging and such is not enabled though
502 2018-04-12T18:45:21  <jonasschnelli> I once remember reading something about -g3 for gcc... anyway, thanks wumpus
503 2018-04-12T18:46:12  <jonasschnelli> cfields: do you know why the dependency download on OSX is timing out on gitian/master: https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/builds/564/build_osx.log
504 2018-04-12T18:46:18  <jonasschnelli> +?
505 2018-04-12T18:46:56  <wumpus> -g is additive, it adds metadata, -g2 -g3 (potentially, depending on the compiler) adds more metadata. But that's all separate from the .text segments afaik
506 2018-04-12T18:47:28  <jonasschnelli> thanks
507 2018-04-12T18:48:51  <cfields> jonasschnelli: looking
508 2018-04-12T18:49:32  <cfields> jonasschnelli: curl: (28) Resolving timed out after 10542 milliseconds
509 2018-04-12T18:49:41  <cfields> dns issues?
510 2018-04-12T18:49:52  <jonasschnelli> let me check
511 2018-04-12T18:50:24  <jonasschnelli> dig dig bitbucket.org works perfect...
512 2018-04-12T18:51:04  <jonasschnelli> maybe an LXC container thing
513 2018-04-12T18:51:08  <cfields> jonasschnelli: are you sure your gitian machine has dns/net access?
514 2018-04-12T18:51:12  <cfields> right, that's what I was thinking
515 2018-04-12T18:51:29  <jonasschnelli> the machine has,... not sure about LXC<-HOST->NET
516 2018-04-12T18:51:52  <cfields> jonasschnelli: can you download sources as a prior step?
517 2018-04-12T18:52:31  <jonasschnelli> cfields: Yes. But that is outside of the VM/LXC
518 2018-04-12T18:52:45  <cfields> right
519 2018-04-12T18:53:20  <jonasschnelli> need to check how I can get the LXC shell again...
520 2018-04-12T18:54:08  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
521 2018-04-12T18:55:34  *** meshcollider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522 2018-04-12T18:55:44  <cfields> jonasschnelli: if you've got the right candles burning and say the right incantation, "libexec/on-target" might work.
523 2018-04-12T18:55:55  <jonasschnelli> heh
524 2018-04-12T18:57:14  *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
525 2018-04-12T18:57:45  *** arbitrary_guy has quit IRC
526 2018-04-12T19:00:43  <BlueMatt> mtg?
527 2018-04-12T19:01:04  <sdaftuar> ack
528 2018-04-12T19:01:16  <Randolf> Ack.
529 2018-04-12T19:01:26  <BlueMatt> whereforartthou wumpus
530 2018-04-12T19:01:49  <wumpus> #startmeeting
531 2018-04-12T19:01:49  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Apr 12 19:01:49 2018 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
532 2018-04-12T19:01:49  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
533 2018-04-12T19:02:04  <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr btcdrak sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator
534 2018-04-12T19:02:09  <promag> hi
535 2018-04-12T19:02:12  <Randolf> Hello.
536 2018-04-12T19:02:13  <achow101> hi
537 2018-04-12T19:02:15  <sipa> hi
538 2018-04-12T19:02:16  <jonasschnelli> hi
539 2018-04-12T19:02:27  <kanzure> hi.
540 2018-04-12T19:02:36  <cfields> hi
541 2018-04-12T19:02:39  <meshcollider> hi
542 2018-04-12T19:02:40  <wumpus> any proposed topics?
543 2018-04-12T19:02:42  <luke-jr> o hai
544 2018-04-12T19:02:59  <sipa> #12874 What to do with IsMine of bare multisig?
545 2018-04-12T19:03:01  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12874 | Only accept bare multisig outputs after addmultisigaddress by sipa · Pull Request #12874 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
546 2018-04-12T19:03:18  <wumpus> thanks
547 2018-04-12T19:03:29  <jimpo> hi
548 2018-04-12T19:03:29  <promag> dynamic wallet load/unload
549 2018-04-12T19:03:37  <luke-jr> I don't know why we would *ever* accept bare multisig
550 2018-04-12T19:03:41  <wumpus> let's start with "high priority for review" as usual
551 2018-04-12T19:03:44  <wumpus> #topic high priority for review
552 2018-04-12T19:03:55  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
553 2018-04-12T19:04:14  <jimpo> Waiting on BlueMatt to rereview #11857 after revision
554 2018-04-12T19:04:17  <wumpus> #11857 #12560 #11775
555 2018-04-12T19:04:17  <BlueMatt> #11775 should probably removed and replaced with the forthcoming split of it into multiple pr's
556 2018-04-12T19:04:18  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11857 | Build tx index in parallel with validation by jimpo · Pull Request #11857 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
557 2018-04-12T19:04:23  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11857 | Build tx index in parallel with validation by jimpo · Pull Request #11857 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
558 2018-04-12T19:04:28  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12560 | [wallet] Upgrade path for non-HD wallets to HD by achow101 · Pull Request #12560 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
559 2018-04-12T19:04:29  <BlueMatt> though the first few commits could still use eyeballs
560 2018-04-12T19:04:29  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11775 | Move fee estimator into validationinterface/cscheduler thread by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #11775 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
561 2018-04-12T19:04:31  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11775 | Move fee estimator into validationinterface/cscheduler thread by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #11775 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
562 2018-04-12T19:04:40  <sdaftuar> BlueMatt: i'll give you my comments after you split it :P
563 2018-04-12T19:04:43  <BlueMatt> as for 11857, yes, thats my fault :/
564 2018-04-12T19:05:17  <jtimon> hi
565 2018-04-12T19:05:37  <jimpo> #12560 still has one unaddressed comment by me I think
566 2018-04-12T19:05:39  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12560 | [wallet] Upgrade path for non-HD wallets to HD by achow101 · Pull Request #12560 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
567 2018-04-12T19:05:40  <wumpus> BlueMatt: ok
568 2018-04-12T19:05:41  <BlueMatt> as for 12560...why no reivew? :/
569 2018-04-12T19:06:09  <wumpus> dunno github gives me the unicorn now
570 2018-04-12T19:06:14  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
571 2018-04-12T19:06:48  <Randolf> The "unicorn?"
572 2018-04-12T19:06:48  <jtimon> I guess https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10757 is not a priority, but review beg either way now that there's many people
573 2018-04-12T19:06:59  <sipa> #10757
574 2018-04-12T19:07:02  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10757 | RPC: Introduce getblockstats to plot things by jtimon · Pull Request #10757 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
575 2018-04-12T19:07:27  <wumpus> Randolf: the "This page is taking way too long to load." unicorn
576 2018-04-12T19:07:43  <BlueMatt> lol, cancel meeting cause github broken?
577 2018-04-12T19:07:54  <Randolf> wumpus:  I haven't seen that one yet.
578 2018-04-12T19:07:58  <Randolf> That's hilarious.
579 2018-04-12T19:07:58  <wumpus> looks like the bot still can use the API
580 2018-04-12T19:08:05  <jtimon> works for me just fine...
581 2018-04-12T19:08:24  <jtimon> I got a unicorn the other day though, I reloaded and it worked
582 2018-04-12T19:08:55  <wumpus> usually it takes a few minutes and then it works again
583 2018-04-12T19:09:10  <promag> jtimon: I'll take a look
584 2018-04-12T19:09:19  <jtimon> promag: awesome, thanks
585 2018-04-12T19:09:28  <wumpus> I'll add 10757
586 2018-04-12T19:09:59  * Randolf wonders if "Unicorns" is going to be listed as one of the topics in the log afterwards
587 2018-04-12T19:10:18  <achow101> i believe i addressed all comments for 12560, but i could have missed one or two
588 2018-04-12T19:10:30  <jtimon> great, I had it kind of abandoned for some time but aj helped me with the tests and I got "unstuck"
589 2018-04-12T19:11:10  <promag> I can also look 12560, at least code wise
590 2018-04-12T19:11:10  <jimpo> achow101: I requested that HaveKey be moved out of the RPC file and into keystore
591 2018-04-12T19:11:15  <jimpo> not sure if others agree
592 2018-04-12T19:12:27  <wumpus> might want to discuss that outside the meeting?
593 2018-04-12T19:12:41  <achow101> oh, I missed that comment
594 2018-04-12T19:12:54  *** plorark has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
595 2018-04-12T19:12:58  <jnewbery> hi
596 2018-04-12T19:13:04  <plorark> hey
597 2018-04-12T19:13:05  <plorark> omg
598 2018-04-12T19:13:10  <plorark> I've found people alive
599 2018-04-12T19:13:12  <jimpo> yeah, we can discuss offline (well, still online, but yeah)
600 2018-04-12T19:13:31  <plorark> watshapenin
601 2018-04-12T19:13:32  <wumpus> #topic What to do with IsMine of bare multisig? (sipa)
602 2018-04-12T19:13:46  <sipa> hi
603 2018-04-12T19:13:48  <wumpus> plorark: after the meeting please
604 2018-04-12T19:13:50  <Randolf> plorark:  You've joined this channel during a meeting.
605 2018-04-12T19:14:04  <plorark> omg sorry
606 2018-04-12T19:14:05  <sipa> so currently (and since forever) we accept bare multisig outputs to us
607 2018-04-12T19:14:08  *** instagibbs_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
608 2018-04-12T19:14:25  <sipa> this is stupid, annoying, pointless, and hard to maintain
609 2018-04-12T19:14:33  <achow101> are there any wallets that can even make bare multisig?
610 2018-04-12T19:14:42  <sipa> BIP70, technically :)
611 2018-04-12T19:14:48  <achow101> ew
612 2018-04-12T19:14:52  <sipa> because it only works when you have all the public keys
613 2018-04-12T19:15:00  <sipa> eh, all the private keys
614 2018-04-12T19:15:12  <wumpus> sounds completely useless
615 2018-04-12T19:15:12  <sipa> so generally i think this is a feature that nobody should ever want
616 2018-04-12T19:15:19  <luke-jr> we don't act as BIP70 server ever though
617 2018-04-12T19:15:26  <sipa> however, there may be existing outputs to it
618 2018-04-12T19:15:33  <sipa> i don't know if this is the case or not
619 2018-04-12T19:15:38  <jtimon> do people use bip70 ?
620 2018-04-12T19:15:39  <sipa> but it sounds scary to just stop supporting it
621 2018-04-12T19:15:47  <wumpus> so  that needs some chain analysis I suppose
622 2018-04-12T19:15:55  <echeveria>  bitpay uses bip70 exclusively.
623 2018-04-12T19:16:06  <BlueMatt> sipa: we'd not "stop supporting it", you'd still be able to sign for them in rawtransaction rpcs
624 2018-04-12T19:16:14  <BlueMatt> so write up a five-sentence release not and stop supporting it :p
625 2018-04-12T19:16:20  * luke-jr wonders how much overhead there'd be to supporting it up to a certain height
626 2018-04-12T19:16:24  <achow101> sipa: is it possible to just prevent new bare multisig?
627 2018-04-12T19:16:25  <jtimon> sipa: perhaps deperecate it on the next release ?
628 2018-04-12T19:16:25  <sipa> BlueMatt: i have no intention to stop supporting signing for it
629 2018-04-12T19:16:29  <jtimon> echeveria: thanks
630 2018-04-12T19:16:34  <BlueMatt> sipa: yes, thats my point
631 2018-04-12T19:16:36  <sipa> this is just about IsMine
632 2018-04-12T19:16:46  <wumpus> just stop supporting it for receiving to our wallet
633 2018-04-12T19:16:58  <sipa> yes, that's the easy part
634 2018-04-12T19:17:07  <jtimon> BlueMatt: sounds fair enough
635 2018-04-12T19:17:08  <sipa> but what if there are existing outputs in people's wallet
636 2018-04-12T19:17:09  <BlueMatt> I mean step back a minute, if we're still talking about doing another hd split to move to a address model instead of a pubkey model in the wallet, why not do it then
637 2018-04-12T19:17:19  <BlueMatt> and keep doing the default-add of the scripts from the original keys?
638 2018-04-12T19:17:28  <BlueMatt> incl all the stuff we support today
639 2018-04-12T19:17:37  <sipa> BlueMatt: ah, because it's impossible to remain compatible with it in an address model
640 2018-04-12T19:17:46  <jonasschnelli> if one has already detected bar multisig txns, they will not disappear (unless rescan)?
641 2018-04-12T19:17:47  <sipa> (you get a cubic explosion of combinations)
642 2018-04-12T19:17:58  <BlueMatt> I though we only supported about 4 different script types?
643 2018-04-12T19:18:02  <instagibbs_> sipa: sorry give an example?
644 2018-04-12T19:18:07  <BlueMatt> raw multisig, p2ph, p2pubkey, and...?
645 2018-04-12T19:18:15  <achow101> isn't the plan to move to a script model?
646 2018-04-12T19:18:20  <sipa> BlueMatt: yes, but raw multisig up to 3-of-3
647 2018-04-12T19:18:30  <BlueMatt> ouch
648 2018-04-12T19:18:31  <sipa> which means N^3 combinations if you have N private keys
649 2018-04-12T19:18:32  <plorark> ehh... I know I was not supposed to interrupt the meeting, but it's pointless for me to wait if this is not the channel i'm looking for. Is altcoins development discussions allowed here?
650 2018-04-12T19:18:39  <Randolf> I thought Multisig could support more than 3 signatures.
651 2018-04-12T19:18:39  <sipa> plorark: no
652 2018-04-12T19:18:44  <sipa> Randolf: not standard
653 2018-04-12T19:18:50  <instagibbs_> plorark: no
654 2018-04-12T19:18:55  <plorark> oh, ok, sorry
655 2018-04-12T19:18:56  <plorark> see ya
656 2018-04-12T19:18:59  <Randolf> plorark:  Join the ##altcoins channel.
657 2018-04-12T19:19:01  <plorark> thx
658 2018-04-12T19:19:10  <plorark> thx
659 2018-04-12T19:19:10  <luke-jr> ##altcoin-dev *
660 2018-04-12T19:19:12  <plorark> oops
661 2018-04-12T19:19:19  <plorark> thx and bye
662 2018-04-12T19:19:19  <BlueMatt> I mean, anyway, does it matter much? I'd default to "dont support with release notes indicating you can use signrawtransaction"
663 2018-04-12T19:19:31  <sipa> so the #1 reason to fix this now is because I'd like to remain compatible with whatever the wallet already supports
664 2018-04-12T19:19:34  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1 | JSON-RPC support for mobile devices ("ultra-lightweight" clients) · Issue #1 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
665 2018-04-12T19:19:35  <sipa> except for bare multisig
666 2018-04-12T19:19:46  <BlueMatt> if we really care, add an option to include them when we move to address-based
667 2018-04-12T19:19:51  <BlueMatt> with a note indicating it will eat all your memory
668 2018-04-12T19:19:54  <Randolf> sipa:  Maintaining compatibility seems like a very good justification.
669 2018-04-12T19:20:09  <sipa> BlueMatt: by default our keypool is 2000 keys
670 2018-04-12T19:20:14  <sipa> the cube of that is 8 billion
671 2018-04-12T19:20:15  <BlueMatt> yes, I know
672 2018-04-12T19:20:19  <sipa> that's just not feasible
673 2018-04-12T19:20:24  <jimpo> Is there a way to register bare multisigs as some sort of key-thing?
674 2018-04-12T19:20:31  <BlueMatt> meh, so dont support it at all without manual key-adds, then
675 2018-04-12T19:20:46  <BlueMatt> jimpo: you could register the scripts as watch only
676 2018-04-12T19:20:49  <instagibbs_> jimpo: manual import isn't out of question i assume
677 2018-04-12T19:20:49  <sipa> BlueMatt: that's what #12874 does!
678 2018-04-12T19:20:51  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12874 | Only accept bare multisig outputs after addmultisigaddress by sipa · Pull Request #12874 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
679 2018-04-12T19:20:52  <jimpo> So that IsMine is true only if you explicitly watch the script
680 2018-04-12T19:21:05  <sipa> jimpo: yes, that is the PR i have open
681 2018-04-12T19:21:07  <BlueMatt> sipa: I dont even think we need to match IsMine/accept them at that point
682 2018-04-12T19:21:10  <jimpo> Oh, cool
683 2018-04-12T19:21:13  <BlueMatt> sipa: would prefer we get rid of it completely
684 2018-04-12T19:21:19  <BlueMatt> and just let people mark it watchonly
685 2018-04-12T19:21:22  <sipa> i want to bring up is: is this overkill, and should we instead just remove it
686 2018-04-12T19:21:22  <BlueMatt> then signrawtransaction it
687 2018-04-12T19:21:31  <sipa> can you watchonly it?
688 2018-04-12T19:21:40  <sipa> you can only watchonly addresses, not scripts, afaik
689 2018-04-12T19:21:54  <sipa> ok i will investigate
690 2018-04-12T19:21:55  <sdaftuar> importmulti lets you, i thought?
691 2018-04-12T19:21:56  <instagibbs_> does it not sneak under redeemscript field or somesuch?
692 2018-04-12T19:21:59  <jonasschnelli> just stop supporting it and mention it in the release notes... this seems safe and okay to me.
693 2018-04-12T19:22:00  <instagibbs_> yeah check it out
694 2018-04-12T19:22:45  <jimpo> sipa: Do you think there's a large burden to maintaining #12874?
695 2018-04-12T19:22:46  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12874 | Only accept bare multisig outputs after addmultisigaddress by sipa · Pull Request #12874 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
696 2018-04-12T19:23:13  <sipa> jimpo: no, but it'd be better not to
697 2018-04-12T19:23:21  <jonasschnelli> bar-multisig use-cases are data-services only IMO... we could analyze the utxos first to get a idea about how many potentail users would be affected...
698 2018-04-12T19:23:29  <jonasschnelli> but right,.. existing bare multisig wtx would not disapear, right?
699 2018-04-12T19:23:47  <sipa> they would
700 2018-04-12T19:23:57  <jonasschnelli> ah.. isMine(), right
701 2018-04-12T19:24:20  <jonasschnelli> but we could detect that and warn
702 2018-04-12T19:24:43  <jimpo> If there's not a big downside to #12874, I'd prefer that approach, but don't care much if it's deprecated
703 2018-04-12T19:24:45  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12874 | Only accept bare multisig outputs after addmultisigaddress by sipa · Pull Request #12874 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
704 2018-04-12T19:25:24  <sipa> BlueMatt: it seems we can indeed watch scripts
705 2018-04-12T19:25:35  <sipa> i think that's my preferred approach then
706 2018-04-12T19:25:55  <sipa> remove support entirely and note a workaround for the highly unlikely case in the release notes
707 2018-04-12T19:26:07  <BlueMatt> yes
708 2018-04-12T19:26:07  <jonasschnelli> ack
709 2018-04-12T19:26:08  <wumpus> yes
710 2018-04-12T19:26:09  <BlueMatt> agreed
711 2018-04-12T19:26:12  <sipa> end topic
712 2018-04-12T19:26:28  <wumpus> #topic dynamic wallet load/unload (promag)
713 2018-04-12T19:26:34  <Randolf> Ack.
714 2018-04-12T19:26:50  <promag> not sure what you guys think
715 2018-04-12T19:26:56  <instagibbs_> what's the controversy in this topic :)
716 2018-04-12T19:27:01  <jonasschnelli> #10740
717 2018-04-12T19:27:02  <sipa> it should happen, duh
718 2018-04-12T19:27:04  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10740 | [WIP] [wallet] dynamic loading/unloading of wallets by jnewbery · Pull Request #10740 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
719 2018-04-12T19:27:06  <wumpus> seems like something we want to have at some point...
720 2018-04-12T19:27:07  <promag> but I think luke agrees that wallet management should be with shared pointers
721 2018-04-12T19:27:08  <sipa> how and when is another :)
722 2018-04-12T19:27:26  <luke-jr> indeed, using names just asks for chaos with runtime-changing wallets
723 2018-04-12T19:28:19  <promag> please read #11402 for some reasons to switch
724 2018-04-12T19:28:20  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11402 | Use shared pointer for wallet instances by promag · Pull Request #11402 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
725 2018-04-12T19:28:54  <jonasschnelli> IMO 10740 can't create wallets, IMO first step would be to add a createwallet RPC call
726 2018-04-12T19:29:21  <jonasschnelli> the whole creation/configuration setup if flawed since multiwallet
727 2018-04-12T19:29:29  <jonasschnelli> stuff like -keypool should be per wallet
728 2018-04-12T19:29:35  *** isis is now known as isis_
729 2018-04-12T19:29:40  <jnewbery> jonasschnelli: you think createwallet should go in *before* load/unload?
730 2018-04-12T19:29:43  <jonasschnelli> and persisted in the wallet file (as configuration section)
731 2018-04-12T19:29:55  <jonasschnelli> jnewbery: not sure,.. just thinking
732 2018-04-12T19:30:05  <jnewbery> seems reasonable to me
733 2018-04-12T19:30:25  <jonasschnelli> createwallet could also *not* load the wallet in the first step (not ideal, but maybe reduces complexity)
734 2018-04-12T19:30:25  <sipa> that seems strange... you could create a new wallet at run time but not use it?
735 2018-04-12T19:30:29  *** instagibbs_ has quit IRC
736 2018-04-12T19:30:41  <jonasschnelli> sipa: createwallet could also directly load/use the wallet
737 2018-04-12T19:30:46  <jnewbery> I think createwallet would also load the new wallet, no?
738 2018-04-12T19:30:48  <promag> create implies loading
739 2018-04-12T19:30:52  <luke-jr> sipa: iow, 0 to 1 only.
740 2018-04-12T19:31:06  <sipa> jonasschnelli: well then you need to have loading functionality first!
741 2018-04-12T19:31:14  <sipa> and if you have it, why not expose it
742 2018-04-12T19:31:36  *** plorark has left #bitcoin-core-dev
743 2018-04-12T19:31:53  <jonasschnelli> sipa: yes. That's a point.
744 2018-04-12T19:31:54  <jnewbery> createwallet could also be done by bitcoin-wallet-tool
745 2018-04-12T19:32:23  <jnewbery> (#8745)
746 2018-04-12T19:32:25  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8745 | [PoC] Add wallet inspection and modification tool "bitcoin-wallet-tool" by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #8745 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
747 2018-04-12T19:32:35  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Would be possible...
748 2018-04-12T19:32:55  <jonasschnelli> I just think the create-during-startup approach is not good
749 2018-04-12T19:33:06  <promag> also related #10973
750 2018-04-12T19:33:07  <jnewbery> jonasschnelli: I agree
751 2018-04-12T19:33:09  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10973 | Refactor: separate wallet from node by ryanofsky · Pull Request #10973 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
752 2018-04-12T19:33:10  <sipa> jonasschnelli: agree
753 2018-04-12T19:33:24  <jonasschnelli> And as a first step I though createwallet would make sense.. but not loading it seems after a strange use-case
754 2018-04-12T19:33:29  <luke-jr> load -> create -> unload
755 2018-04-12T19:33:33  <jonasschnelli> but a nice first code/impl. step
756 2018-04-12T19:33:36  <luke-jr> unload is the complex part tbh
757 2018-04-12T19:33:49  <jnewbery> luke-jr: agree
758 2018-04-12T19:34:05  <jonasschnelli> Agree with luke-jr. Maybe split unload away from the existing PR jnewbery ?
759 2018-04-12T19:34:11  *** Randolf has quit IRC
760 2018-04-12T19:34:12  <jnewbery> yes
761 2018-04-12T19:34:28  <jnewbery> I intend to pick up 10740 again soon, rebase and rework it
762 2018-04-12T19:34:39  <promag> consider the use case: 1) rpc rescan wallet 2) in parallel unload wallet - should 2) wait for 1) ?
763 2018-04-12T19:34:57  <luke-jr> probably
764 2018-04-12T19:35:01  <jonasschnelli> Great. Dynamic loading/creating is a nice feature that we probably want for 0.17!
765 2018-04-12T19:35:30  <promag> luke-jr: and if the unload is from the UI?
766 2018-04-12T19:35:57  <jnewbery> promag: do you consider 11402 a prereq for load/unload? What about just load?
767 2018-04-12T19:36:01  <jonasschnelli> the wallet-tool is IMO orthogonal to wallet creation
768 2018-04-12T19:36:13  <jonasschnelli> *via RPC
769 2018-04-12T19:36:28  *** anome has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
770 2018-04-12T19:36:39  <luke-jr> promag: probably the same
771 2018-04-12T19:36:43  <promag> jnewbery: IMHO for both
772 2018-04-12T19:36:50  <jonasschnelli> RPC seems to be a must, wallet-tool can be a better place to create some sorts of wallets (or inspect it), .. like encrypted wallets
773 2018-04-12T19:36:52  <luke-jr> promag: at least initially
774 2018-04-12T19:37:40  <jnewbery> promag: want to rebase and put on high priority for review then, if you consider it a blocker?
775 2018-04-12T19:37:50  <promag> luke-jr: my point is that it should not block, you request the unload and go on, when the wallet is not used anymore it gets unloaded
776 2018-04-12T19:38:11  <jonasschnelli> #11402
777 2018-04-12T19:38:13  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11402 | Use shared pointer for wallet instances by promag · Pull Request #11402 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
778 2018-04-12T19:38:15  <luke-jr> promag: you mean leave the wallet loaded, but invisible? that seems worst outcome IMO
779 2018-04-12T19:38:26  <luke-jr> user may unload and just shut off the PC
780 2018-04-12T19:38:44  <wumpus> the unload should probably be in two stages: after requesting it, RPC and the GUI lose access to it. Then it waits for current operations tofinish. Then the thing really gets delted.
781 2018-04-12T19:38:50  <luke-jr> yes
782 2018-04-12T19:38:53  <promag> luke-jr: then the application will wait for wallets to unload
783 2018-04-12T19:38:54  <jnewbery> I don't think we need to worry about unload at this stage. First step is add load functionality, then createwallet functionality
784 2018-04-12T19:38:57  <luke-jr> and make it visible to the user in the meantime
785 2018-04-12T19:39:06  <luke-jr> jnewbery: +1
786 2018-04-12T19:39:17  <promag> wumpus: right, hence shared pointers
787 2018-04-12T19:40:13  <wumpus> ok
788 2018-04-12T19:40:19  <wumpus> any other topics? we've had the proposed ones
789 2018-04-12T19:41:04  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
790 2018-04-12T19:41:05  <luke-jr> gitian updates?
791 2018-04-12T19:41:17  <luke-jr> seems we have at least a few things that need a newer VM
792 2018-04-12T19:41:27  <luke-jr> not sure if there's anything to discuss tho
793 2018-04-12T19:42:33  <wumpus> dunno if cfields is here, if not it makes little sense to discuss this I think
794 2018-04-12T19:42:45  <cfields> sure
795 2018-04-12T19:43:01  <wumpus> #topic gitian update
796 2018-04-12T19:43:38  <wumpus> #12511 I guess
797 2018-04-12T19:43:39  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12511 | Switch to Ubuntu 18.04 for gitian building · Issue #12511 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
798 2018-04-12T19:44:24  <wumpus> not sure what's there to discuss about it
799 2018-04-12T19:44:53  <luke-jr> I guess we need a replacement for vmbuilder or something, since Canonical hasn't updated it to support anything recent :/
800 2018-04-12T19:45:55  <cfields> ah, i didn't realize gitian couldn't handle it :(
801 2018-04-12T19:46:02  <wumpus> debootstrap?
802 2018-04-12T19:46:10  <luke-jr> debootstrap is a step in vmbuilder
803 2018-04-12T19:46:47  <cfields> anyway, concept ack
804 2018-04-12T19:47:36  <achow101> I'm considering adding docker support to gitian so we would use a default ubuntu docker image and then build from there
805 2018-04-12T19:47:37  <wumpus> cool
806 2018-04-12T19:48:20  <cfields> sgtm
807 2018-04-12T19:48:25  <jcorgan> that would be nice
808 2018-04-12T19:49:05  <wumpus> yes
809 2018-04-12T19:49:18  <luke-jr> so KVM would no longer work?
810 2018-04-12T19:49:45  <wumpus> heh if you make it work it will work
811 2018-04-12T19:49:56  <luke-jr> Docker seems to just be a LXC wrapper
812 2018-04-12T19:50:18  <achow101> Docker avoids all of the vm setup because someone else did that for us
813 2018-04-12T19:50:21  <luke-jr> it's also x86-64 only
814 2018-04-12T19:50:24  <wumpus> if vmbuilder or debootstrap does't work you could always manually install ubuntu to a base image I guess...
815 2018-04-12T19:51:04  <jtimon> achow101: please, ping me for review if you do
816 2018-04-12T19:51:07  <wumpus> but in my experience debootstrap works very well, though I've never used it for ubuntu on x86
817 2018-04-12T19:51:19  <wumpus> I
818 2018-04-12T19:52:12  <achow101> jtimon: sure
819 2018-04-12T19:53:19  <wumpus> yes, I'm willing to test the docker stuff as well
820 2018-04-12T19:53:39  <luke-jr> I suppose fixing vmbuilder might be not too unreasonable effort, maybe I will try that :/
821 2018-04-12T19:53:49  <wumpus> though I agree iwht luke-jr it's not a long-term solution, can't be used from other platforms, though cfields is still working on his long-term solution I hope
822 2018-04-12T19:54:28  <cfields> wumpus: yes, very much so.
823 2018-04-12T19:54:55  <wumpus> great!
824 2018-04-12T19:55:30  <wumpus> time to wrap up the meeting I think
825 2018-04-12T19:55:39  <wumpus> unless someone has a quick topic
826 2018-04-12T19:56:11  <wumpus> #endmeeting
827 2018-04-12T19:56:11  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Apr 12 19:56:11 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
828 2018-04-12T19:56:11  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-04-12-19.01.html
829 2018-04-12T19:56:11  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-04-12-19.01.txt
830 2018-04-12T19:56:11  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-04-12-19.01.log.html
831 2018-04-12T19:57:08  <sipa> wumpus: would you like me to not use the lifetime extension of temporaries approach in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12803#discussion_r180788539 ?
832 2018-04-12T19:57:45  <wumpus> sipa: it's fine, I just didn't know about that
833 2018-04-12T19:58:08  <sipa> it's a feature i knew about for years, but always wondered about it usefulness
834 2018-04-12T19:58:53  *** moneyball has quit IRC
835 2018-04-12T19:58:58  <wumpus> well this seems a good reason!
836 2018-04-12T19:59:40  <sipa> i guess the reasoning was "assigning a temporary to a reference never makes any sense! ok, let's give it another meaning that does make sense then..."
837 2018-04-12T20:01:44  <promag> that was new to me too, but could drop the reference no?
838 2018-04-12T20:02:03  <wumpus> I like the fact that this avoids having to export the type
839 2018-04-12T20:03:16  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
840 2018-04-12T20:03:50  <sipa> promag: no
841 2018-04-12T20:04:16  <promag> right, doesn't work with base = extended..
842 2018-04-12T20:04:21  <promag> see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/init.cpp#L90-L92
843 2018-04-12T20:04:31  <promag> sipa: could use your approach there right?
844 2018-04-12T20:04:50  <promag> and turn g_wallet_init_interface to a reference instead?
845 2018-04-12T20:04:55  <sipa> if we write it as "const BaseSignatureCreator dummy_creator = DummySignatureCreator()", a DummySignatureCreator object is created, but then *assigned* (using operator=) to a BaseSignatureCreator object which is exported
846 2018-04-12T20:05:17  <sipa> rather than exporting the DummySignatureCreator object itself (with a hidden type)
847 2018-04-12T20:05:28  <sipa> hmm, perhaps
848 2018-04-12T20:05:46  <wumpus> it will get sliced
849 2018-04-12T20:06:42  <wumpus> if you don't make it a reference or pointer
850 2018-04-12T20:06:52  <promag> I'll try the same with g_wallet_init_interface, don't think a pointer is good for such "central" instances
851 2018-04-12T20:07:14  <wumpus> and a pointer would have the problem of needing a scoped ptr etc
852 2018-04-12T20:07:23  <jonasschnelli> cfields: iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE was missing...
853 2018-04-12T20:07:37  <cfields> jonasschnelli: aha :)
854 2018-04-12T20:07:52  <promag> wumpus: not true, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/init.cpp#L90-L91 workaround
855 2018-04-12T20:08:20  <wumpus> promag: why would that be any better though?
856 2018-04-12T20:08:51  <wumpus> also the initialization/freeing order is less clear that way
857 2018-04-12T20:08:52  <promag> I'm§ ~
858 2018-04-12T20:08:52  <promag> \
859 2018-04-12T20:08:59  <promag> ops, cat..
860 2018-04-12T20:09:02  *** dafunkiz_ has quit IRC
861 2018-04-12T20:09:49  <promag> wumpus: not saying it's better, I prefer sipa approach
862 2018-04-12T20:10:13  *** jtimon has quit IRC
863 2018-04-12T20:10:54  <wumpus> ok, sorry, I misunderstood you then
864 2018-04-12T20:11:35  *** goatpig has quit IRC
865 2018-04-12T20:22:29  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
866 2018-04-12T20:29:29  *** promag has quit IRC
867 2018-04-12T20:32:17  <cfields> sipa: fyi, since you were looking at it earlier... on my slow (mac) laptop, the coin_selection tests spend half of their time formatting the date/time string for the debug print in AddToWallet()
868 2018-04-12T20:32:43  <cfields> wouldn't surprise me if that's even more painful via Wine
869 2018-04-12T20:34:23  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
870 2018-04-12T20:34:47  <sipa> heh
871 2018-04-12T20:36:19  <wumpus> whoops
872 2018-04-12T20:36:44  *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
873 2018-04-12T20:41:13  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
874 2018-04-12T20:43:38  *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
875 2018-04-12T20:46:43  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
876 2018-04-12T20:47:54  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
877 2018-04-12T20:48:53  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Empact opened pull request #12969: Drop dead code CScript::Find (master...cscript-find) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12969
878 2018-04-12T20:49:13  *** anome has quit IRC
879 2018-04-12T20:50:14  *** Murch has quit IRC
880 2018-04-12T20:50:44  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
881 2018-04-12T20:51:58  *** Emcy has quit IRC
882 2018-04-12T20:55:25  *** dafunkiz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
883 2018-04-12T20:56:38  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/39439e5ab419...8480d41e0f9d
884 2018-04-12T20:56:39  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 190b8d2 Pieter Wuille: Make BaseSignatureCreator a pure interface
885 2018-04-12T20:56:40  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master be67831 Pieter Wuille: Make DummySignatureCreator a singleton
886 2018-04-12T20:56:40  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8480d41 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #12803: Make BaseSignatureCreator a pure interface...
887 2018-04-12T20:57:53  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #12803: Make BaseSignatureCreator a pure interface (master...201803_puresignaturecreator) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12803
888 2018-04-12T21:04:31  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
889 2018-04-12T21:07:06  <cfields> whoa
890 2018-04-12T21:07:23  <cfields> Leaving test case "knapsack_solver_test"; testing time: 358694ms
891 2018-04-12T21:07:36  <cfields> i386 + old wine ^^
892 2018-04-12T21:07:48  <cfields> Leaving test case "knapsack_solver_test"; testing time: 6781ms
893 2018-04-12T21:07:58  <cfields> ^^ same, but with the LogPrint commented out
894 2018-04-12T21:08:19  *** DMTcrypto has quit IRC
895 2018-04-12T21:08:59  <wumpus> now that's optimization
896 2018-04-12T21:09:27  <wumpus> but I don't get it, it's the unit test, aren't all logging categories disabled?
897 2018-04-12T21:09:41  <cfields> so, there's the recent huge slowdown. Probably also addressed in newer wine, hence the speedup in 12931
898 2018-04-12T21:10:09  <cfields> wumpus: it's a LogPrintf :(
899 2018-04-12T21:10:49  <wumpus> should it be in a debug category? sounds like an extremly high volume one
900 2018-04-12T21:11:34  <cfields> wumpus: I think that test just hits it really hard
901 2018-04-12T21:12:10  <cfields> it'd be nice to have an explicit no-logging option for these tests, though
902 2018-04-12T21:13:03  <wumpus> if both log-to-file and log-to-console is disabled, it should probably bypass all logging
903 2018-04-12T21:14:05  <wumpus> even without category
904 2018-04-12T21:15:14  <jnewbery> I think #11862 is now in really good shape (and is well structured and easy to review). Perhaps concept ACKers (jonasschnelli, meshcollider, jtimon) could do some review?
905 2018-04-12T21:15:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11862 | Network specific conf sections by ajtowns · Pull Request #11862 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
906 2018-04-12T21:16:59  <wumpus> so should that one be in high priority for review?
907 2018-04-12T21:19:08  <jtimon> jnewbery: I think aj is right here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11862#issuecomment-379061898 and if not it should be solvable in the other pr after rebase, but I will try to upgrade the concept ack to an ut ack or tested ack
908 2018-04-12T21:19:38  <jnewbery> it's not super important and doesn't block anything, so doesn't really fit high priority. But it has been around for a while and I think it's a well-structured easy review
909 2018-04-12T21:20:24  <jnewbery> I'd like to make some progress on config model. There have been a bunch of PRs around for months
910 2018-04-12T21:20:32  <jtimon> yeah, I had a glance with the concept ack, should have another look
911 2018-04-12T21:21:27  <jnewbery> #10267 is another one, but I think that should rebase on 11862, since 11862 seems like it's closer to merge
912 2018-04-12T21:21:30  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10267 | New -includeconf argument for including external configuration files by kallewoof · Pull Request #10267 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
913 2018-04-12T21:21:57  *** DMTcrypto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
914 2018-04-12T21:22:30  <jnewbery> jtimon: I don't think this interacts badly with your 8994, so it shouldn't be blocked
915 2018-04-12T21:23:23  *** niftynei has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
916 2018-04-12T21:23:45  *** niftynei has quit IRC
917 2018-04-12T21:23:46  <jtimon> no, not at all, I think it interacts pretty well, and that's the part of the pr that I reviewed, just asked for confirmation from the author
918 2018-04-12T21:24:16  <jtimon> and even if it implied a little bit more work on #8994 I don't think that's a blocking reason anyway
919 2018-04-12T21:24:20  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8994 | Testchains: Introduce custom chain whose constructor... by jtimon · Pull Request #8994 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
920 2018-04-12T21:24:32  <jtimon> but I think it doesn't
921 2018-04-12T21:25:28  <jnewbery> great!
922 2018-04-12T21:25:29  <jtimon> btw, I'm not rebasing #8994 very often because I think there's a few open questions I left that haven't been answered
923 2018-04-12T21:25:32  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8994 | Testchains: Introduce custom chain whose constructor... by jtimon · Pull Request #8994 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
924 2018-04-12T21:27:05  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #12970: logging: bypass timestamp formatting when not logging (master...slow-tests) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12970
925 2018-04-12T21:27:57  <jtimon> in particular, is it ok to change regtest's genesis block? if so, all those changes to the python tests that always require rebase wouldn't be needed or could be done later, perhaps while introducting new more intresting tests like making sure regtest and testest2 disconnect from each other and stuff like that
926 2018-04-12T21:28:45  <jtimon> perhaps a topic for another meeting
927 2018-04-12T21:31:45  *** niftynei has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
928 2018-04-12T21:33:53  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
929 2018-04-12T21:34:00  <wumpus> preferably that'd be avoided, as it makes it impossible to have a regtest with two different versions of bitcoind
930 2018-04-12T21:35:33  *** cheese_ has quit IRC
931 2018-04-12T21:36:58  <jtimon> wumpus: ok, thanks but moving all the python tests to custom/regtest2 is fine, right?
932 2018-04-12T21:37:11  <wumpus> why?
933 2018-04-12T21:37:40  <jtimon> ok, I think there's 2 parts to this PR, perhaps I should separate them
934 2018-04-12T21:38:04  <wumpus> but, no, I don't think it's problematic to move th tests to a different kind of chain, though I'm not sure I see why
935 2018-04-12T21:38:05  <jtimon> one is having custom params, but that can be done in regtest without changing the genesis block
936 2018-04-12T21:38:54  <wumpus> for the existing tests, the current params don't need to be changed?
937 2018-04-12T21:39:05  *** Randolf has quit IRC
938 2018-04-12T21:39:07  *** Murch has quit IRC
939 2018-04-12T21:39:40  <jtimon> the sencond is introducing the -chain option, which allows you to create new regtests (well, custom chains) on demand which have different genesis blocks (well, you just need to use a different name on -chain=mycustomchain)
940 2018-04-12T21:40:07  <jtimon> right, but this opens the door to new tests
941 2018-04-12T21:40:37  *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
942 2018-04-12T21:41:09  <jtimon> to me, the second part is more interesting, but I now think that I should probably separate them (since many people seem confused about the purpose)
943 2018-04-12T21:42:01  <jtimon> wumpus: does that make sense to you? (or at least one of the parts)
944 2018-04-12T21:42:45  <wumpus> yes for new tests that make use of different parameters it'd make sense
945 2018-04-12T21:43:06  <jtimon> another recurrent topic is whether the custom params should be loaded from conf and the regular gArgs or only from an independent file
946 2018-04-12T21:44:56  <jtimon> well, I think one point of the custom params is to avoid things like https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/chainparams.cpp#L382 for testing perhaps I should start with that
947 2018-04-12T21:45:04  <wumpus> I'd say regular args would add too many arguments
948 2018-04-12T21:45:47  <wumpus> this is only meant for testing, after all, so by far most will have no business overriding chain parameters
949 2018-04-12T21:47:07  <jtimon> similar things have been proposed multiple times for specific fields, and also an NonConstParams() with individual sets for everything, I think this is "the right way" for any such tests
950 2018-04-12T21:47:22  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
951 2018-04-12T21:47:22  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
952 2018-04-12T21:47:50  <jtimon> this would only override params for regtest and/or customchain, of course
953 2018-04-12T21:48:47  <jtimon> CMainParams should not have an UpdateFromArgs method
954 2018-04-12T21:50:42  <jtimon> anyway, I'm fine with a separate file, I think that's what I implemented first, but I thought it was confusing people and left it for later
955 2018-04-12T21:51:15  <jtimon> or someone preferred regular args and conf file, I don't remember
956 2018-04-12T21:52:19  <jtimon> wumpus: thanks for the feedback, so what do you think about separating it in 2? which part you think makes the most sense?
957 2018-04-12T21:52:42  <jtimon> or can be more useful for tests we lack
958 2018-04-12T22:03:46  <wumpus> yes, I think that makes sense
959 2018-04-12T22:04:09  *** arbitrary_guy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
960 2018-04-12T22:05:41  *** Tennis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
961 2018-04-12T22:12:57  <instagibbs> listtransactions should list all transactions the wallet is involved in, yes? Including self-sends?
962 2018-04-12T22:13:15  <instagibbs> sorry if #bitcoin, just getting odd results and help isn't clear
963 2018-04-12T22:13:51  <sipa> yes
964 2018-04-12T22:15:51  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
965 2018-04-12T22:18:18  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
966 2018-04-12T22:24:11  <instagibbs> thanks
967 2018-04-12T22:34:21  *** arbitrary_guy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
968 2018-04-12T22:34:53  *** rls has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
969 2018-04-12T22:38:09  *** rls0 has quit IRC
970 2018-04-12T22:41:50  *** Cogito_Ergo_Sum has quit IRC
971 2018-04-12T22:44:06  *** cryptojanitor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
972 2018-04-12T22:45:05  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
973 2018-04-12T22:45:23  *** tryphe has quit IRC
974 2018-04-12T22:45:56  *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
975 2018-04-12T22:46:24  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
976 2018-04-12T22:46:53  *** tryphe has quit IRC
977 2018-04-12T22:51:01  *** arbitrary_guy has quit IRC
978 2018-04-12T22:58:51  *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
979 2018-04-12T23:01:01  *** Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
980 2018-04-12T23:04:33  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
981 2018-04-12T23:05:27  *** Randolf has quit IRC
982 2018-04-12T23:06:09  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
983 2018-04-12T23:08:22  <drexl> why does a scriptcode start with a PUSH byte? is it supposed to be pushed on the stack?
984 2018-04-12T23:09:04  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
985 2018-04-12T23:11:05  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
986 2018-04-12T23:11:44  *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
987 2018-04-12T23:22:08  *** lnostdal has quit IRC
988 2018-04-12T23:22:44  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
989 2018-04-12T23:24:03  *** lnostdal has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
990 2018-04-12T23:33:20  *** Murch has quit IRC
991 2018-04-12T23:34:47  *** vydjz88 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
992 2018-04-12T23:38:59  *** vydjz88 has quit IRC
993 2018-04-12T23:39:04  *** isis_ is now known as isis
994 2018-04-12T23:42:05  *** belcher_ has quit IRC
995 2018-04-12T23:45:18  *** meshcollider has quit IRC
996 2018-04-12T23:48:17  *** Tennis has quit IRC
997 2018-04-12T23:55:46  *** yjednmgz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
998 2018-04-12T23:57:47  *** yjednmgz has quit IRC