12018-07-26T00:04:09  *** intcat has quit IRC
  22018-07-26T00:05:47  *** intcat has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  32018-07-26T00:20:20  *** kallewoof has quit IRC
  42018-07-26T00:47:55  *** drexl has quit IRC
  52018-07-26T00:56:04  *** brighton36 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  62018-07-26T00:56:18  <brighton36> What's up party people
  72018-07-26T00:57:34  *** leishman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82018-07-26T01:06:40  *** jpe__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  92018-07-26T01:09:10  *** jpe_ has quit IRC
 102018-07-26T01:13:25  *** tryphe_ has quit IRC
 112018-07-26T01:13:50  *** tryphe_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 122018-07-26T01:19:48  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 132018-07-26T01:20:30  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 142018-07-26T01:21:22  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 152018-07-26T01:24:35  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 162018-07-26T01:26:48  <brighton36> hello aaronvanw :)
 172018-07-26T01:30:28  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 182018-07-26T01:31:40  <brighton36> Anyone home?
 192018-07-26T01:35:06  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 202018-07-26T01:35:32  *** unixb0y has quit IRC
 212018-07-26T01:41:58  *** dqx has quit IRC
 222018-07-26T01:42:19  *** dqx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 232018-07-26T02:24:22  *** treyzania has quit IRC
 242018-07-26T02:26:07  *** kallewoof has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 252018-07-26T02:31:15  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 262018-07-26T02:35:58  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 272018-07-26T03:12:56  *** leishman has quit IRC
 282018-07-26T03:20:14  *** justan0theruser has quit IRC
 292018-07-26T03:21:20  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 302018-07-26T03:22:29  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 312018-07-26T03:25:02  *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 322018-07-26T04:32:01  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 332018-07-26T04:36:57  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 342018-07-26T06:27:29  *** ken2812221 has quit IRC
 352018-07-26T06:41:29  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 362018-07-26T06:44:45  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
 372018-07-26T06:45:08  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 382018-07-26T06:47:59  *** BillSmith4lyfe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 392018-07-26T06:52:17  *** BillSmith4lyfe has quit IRC
 402018-07-26T08:04:24  *** Orion3k has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 412018-07-26T08:09:23  *** promag has quit IRC
 422018-07-26T08:26:26  *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 432018-07-26T08:29:37  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 442018-07-26T08:34:24  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 452018-07-26T08:39:19  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
 462018-07-26T09:06:35  *** polydin has quit IRC
 472018-07-26T09:06:47  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 482018-07-26T09:58:42  <provoostenator> Could someone tag #13426 for a Gitian build?
 492018-07-26T09:58:44  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13426 | [bugfix] Fix encoding issue for Windows by ken2812221 · Pull Request #13426 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
 502018-07-26T09:59:24  <jonasschnelli> provoostenator: will do..
 512018-07-26T09:59:26  <provoostenator> (I haven't given up on cross-compiling, but it's often a hit or miss for me)
 522018-07-26T10:00:52  <jonasschnelli> provoostenator: https://bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch/build/715
 532018-07-26T10:07:28  *** SopaXT has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 542018-07-26T10:09:57  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
 552018-07-26T10:13:42  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
 562018-07-26T10:14:55  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 572018-07-26T10:15:39  *** ken2812221 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 582018-07-26T10:21:36  *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 592018-07-26T10:22:28  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 602018-07-26T10:34:11  *** ren0v0 has quit IRC
 612018-07-26T10:47:49  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
 622018-07-26T10:53:25  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 632018-07-26T11:00:05  *** osue has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 642018-07-26T11:04:22  <jonasschnelli> gitian: is there a solution if make-base-vm complains with "E: Couldn't find these debs: git-core"?
 652018-07-26T11:04:39  <jonasschnelli> Is that an Apt-Cacher-NG issue?
 662018-07-26T11:06:19  <Fuzzbawls> jonasschnelli: AFAIK all references to "git-core" have been replaced with just "git" in the gitian descriptors. could be a local caching issue (though I myself have never encountered such a thing).
 672018-07-26T11:09:02  <ken2812221> jonasschnelli: Use the latest version of gitian-builder
 682018-07-26T11:09:11  *** osue has quit IRC
 692018-07-26T11:09:21  <jonasschnelli> Thanks... will try
 702018-07-26T11:10:21  <jonasschnelli> ken2812221: updating gitian-builder fixed the issue. Thanks
 712018-07-26T11:10:44  <jonasschnelli> I didn't updated since I'm pretty sure I added some local modifications. :)
 722018-07-26T11:11:50  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 732018-07-26T11:12:00  <Fuzzbawls> did you ever get a self-compile of LXC 3 working on debian? think i saw it was you that was trying to use version 3...or maybe a later version 2 that wasn't supplied by the distro packages
 742018-07-26T11:18:42  <ken2812221> IIRC make-base-vm does not use apt so it may not know about package alias.
 752018-07-26T11:21:21  <jonasschnelli> Fuzzbawls. I self compiled 2.1.1
 762018-07-26T11:23:14  *** SopaXT has quit IRC
 772018-07-26T11:25:41  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 782018-07-26T11:27:24  <provoostenator> jonasschnelli: got it, thanks
 792018-07-26T11:29:54  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 802018-07-26T11:35:02  <ken2812221> bitcoin-git is dead?
 812018-07-26T11:38:19  *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 822018-07-26T11:39:22  *** tryphe_ has quit IRC
 832018-07-26T11:41:34  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
 842018-07-26T11:43:07  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 852018-07-26T11:43:55  *** osue has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 862018-07-26T11:45:42  *** Krellan has quit IRC
 872018-07-26T11:48:54  *** osue has quit IRC
 882018-07-26T11:57:04  <provoostenator> jonasschnelli: the Windows build thinks it's version b591ece04 rather than 5ca74904
 892018-07-26T11:57:12  <achow101> ken2812221: sipa killed it by setting +n
 902018-07-26T11:57:34  <achow101> to prevent spamming that was happening
 912018-07-26T11:58:35  <provoostenator> I guess it makes a merge commit first
 922018-07-26T11:59:49  <ken2812221> achow101: thanks
 932018-07-26T12:04:34  *** promag has quit IRC
 942018-07-26T12:07:05  <jonasschnelli> ken2812221: any idea how to fix "E: Package 'curl' has no installation candidate" (inside the gitian VM) during gbuild?
 952018-07-26T12:07:32  <jonasschnelli> gbuild exists with: ./bin/gbuild:21:in `system!': failed to run on-target -u root -e DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive apt-get --no-install-recommends -y install ca-certificates curl g++ git pkg-config autoconf librsvg2-bin libtiff-tools libtool automake faketime bsdmainutils cmake imagemagick libcap-dev libz-dev libbz2-dev python python-dev python-setuptools fonts-tuffy > var/install.log 2>&1 (RuntimeError)
 962018-07-26T12:14:32  <ken2812221> I haven't seen that error message before, is that a network issue?
 972018-07-26T12:15:58  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 982018-07-26T12:23:28  *** osue has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 992018-07-26T12:25:35  *** tryphe_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002018-07-26T12:28:10  *** tryphe has quit IRC
1012018-07-26T12:28:20  *** osue has quit IRC
1022018-07-26T12:32:50  *** Sinclair6 has quit IRC
1032018-07-26T12:39:58  *** Sinclair6 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1042018-07-26T12:57:14  *** ken2812221 has quit IRC
1052018-07-26T13:01:47  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062018-07-26T13:16:21  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1072018-07-26T13:20:43  *** ken2812221 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1082018-07-26T13:27:15  *** promag has quit IRC
1092018-07-26T13:34:09  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1102018-07-26T13:49:03  *** opdenkamp has quit IRC
1112018-07-26T14:05:30  *** csknk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122018-07-26T14:10:12  <wumpus> any objections to adding "skeees" to the github orgs? -- he's been fairly active as a contributor
1132018-07-26T14:12:11  *** ChanServ sets mode: -o wumpus
1142018-07-26T14:12:33  <fanquake> wumpus +1
1152018-07-26T14:16:43  *** opdenkamp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162018-07-26T14:23:53  *** fanquake has quit IRC
1172018-07-26T14:24:39  *** osue has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1182018-07-26T14:29:17  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
1192018-07-26T14:29:46  *** osue has quit IRC
1202018-07-26T14:37:04  *** farmerwampum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212018-07-26T14:39:55  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1222018-07-26T14:46:35  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
1232018-07-26T14:53:06  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242018-07-26T14:53:42  *** Aaronva__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252018-07-26T14:54:46  *** csknk has quit IRC
1262018-07-26T14:57:13  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1272018-07-26T14:57:54  *** Aaronvan_ has quit IRC
1282018-07-26T14:59:31  <BlueMatt> Ugh, ok, poll time, what are peoples' thoughts on what to call the witness version of the redeemScript? https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/issues/581 and https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin/pull/109 for debate context
1292018-07-26T15:01:11  *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302018-07-26T15:01:45  <jamesob> wumpus: +1
1312018-07-26T15:03:41  *** TheRec has quit IRC
1322018-07-26T15:12:20  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332018-07-26T15:21:01  <Chris_Stewart_5> wumpus: +1
1342018-07-26T15:21:30  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
1352018-07-26T15:22:57  <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: it's called the redeemScript.
1362018-07-26T15:23:55  <gmaxwell> Or witnessScript.
1372018-07-26T15:24:01  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382018-07-26T15:27:02  <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: hmm witnessScript is confusing af, imo
1392018-07-26T15:29:54  <arubi> redeemscript is even more confusing when it's say a p2sh-p2wsh transaction
1402018-07-26T15:30:37  <achow101> it's been called the witnessScript. Changing it now would probably introduce more confusion
1412018-07-26T15:30:39  <arubi> DDG first result for "scriptWitness" is the transaction.h file in the repo, and for "witnessScript bitcoin" the first result is is the core-dev docs site
1422018-07-26T15:30:49  <arubi> +1 witnessScript
1432018-07-26T15:34:28  <arubi> (posted on the issue)
1442018-07-26T15:36:26  <BlueMatt> arubi: well you could call it "witness redeem script" pretty easily
1452018-07-26T15:36:44  <BlueMatt> scriptWitness already refers to the full witness
1462018-07-26T15:36:52  <BlueMatt> so now scriptWitness and witnessScript are different things?
1472018-07-26T15:38:35  <arubi> "witness redeem script" might be better than "witness redeemScript" if it's going to be called that then.  and yea I see your point about this but at least these two terms are easily distinguishable in search
1482018-07-26T15:39:22  <BlueMatt> from my github comment: "Also, further confusing is that its easy to see the witness as a replacement for the scriptSig (though that's not entirely accurate due to it being a list of pushes, not an executed script), at which point scriptWitness/witnessScript would be easy to assume referred to the full witness."
1492018-07-26T15:39:58  <BlueMatt> funny that people had been calling it witnessScript and I'd never actually seen that anywhere lol
1502018-07-26T15:41:40  <arubi> maybe "witnessSource" ?  sort of the source code for the witness program? :)
1512018-07-26T15:42:03  <BlueMatt> I mean I dont hugely care, I just think witnessscript/scriptwitness is absolutely a terrible idea
1522018-07-26T15:46:20  <sipa> awww i'm sorry :)
1532018-07-26T15:46:32  *** sipa sets mode: -o sipa
1542018-07-26T15:46:59  <sipa> witnessscript = script in the witmess
1552018-07-26T15:47:09  <sipa> scriptwitness = witne for a script
1562018-07-26T15:47:27  <BlueMatt> ok, so given there's already like three terms to describe witnessscript, lets stop calling it witnessscript :p
1572018-07-26T15:48:36  <sipa> witness redeemscript sgtm
1582018-07-26T16:02:34  *** Aaronva__ is now known as AaronvanW
1592018-07-26T16:05:51  *** grafcaps has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602018-07-26T16:08:15  *** Sinclair6 has quit IRC
1612018-07-26T16:11:46  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1622018-07-26T16:15:15  *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632018-07-26T16:16:18  *** promag has quit IRC
1642018-07-26T16:16:28  <satwo> Hi all. BIP-141 defines 4 ways to measure the size of a transaction: weight, virtual size, base size, and total size. Bitcoin-cli decoderawtransaction returns weight, vsize ("virtual size" - obvious), and size (“total size" - not obvious). I must not be the only one to have found it nontrivial to figure out how base size, total size in BIP141 and “size” in RPC are related. Even once one figures out that “BIP 141
1652018-07-26T16:16:28  <satwo>  total size” = “RPC size”, base size and witness data size must be calculated with a little backwards-engineered DIY algebra. Is there room for improvement in documentation/RPC fields here, or am I missing something?
1662018-07-26T16:19:37  <BlueMatt> sipa: plz2comment on bitcoincore.org issue, then
1672018-07-26T16:23:39  <gmaxwell> satwo: "base size" is basically completely meaningless in the protocol. It's not used for anything.
1682018-07-26T16:24:36  <sipa> BlueMatt: what issue?
1692018-07-26T16:24:45  <gmaxwell> (okay, it's used in the minimum size standardness rule, but I think nowhere else)
1702018-07-26T16:25:45  <satwo> gmaxwell: That was my intuition, but some things threw me off; i.e. its being used as a tx field in BlockSci, and the fact that many block explorers seem to refer to the base size of a tx in their size field (other explorers refer to total size)
1712018-07-26T16:25:48  *** osue has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722018-07-26T16:26:17  <sipa> satwo: explorers should only show vsize
1732018-07-26T16:26:36  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
1742018-07-26T16:26:37  *** timothy has quit IRC
1752018-07-26T16:26:51  <sipa> all the rest are technical details that most users won't care about
1762018-07-26T16:27:04  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1772018-07-26T16:27:15  <gmaxwell> satwo: unfortunately people have promoted a lot of crazy misunderstandings that make people think things that matter don't.
1782018-07-26T16:27:52  <gmaxwell> e.g. people saying that the limit is "1mb base + 3mb witness", which is not at all how it works, but if it did it would make sense to print two size figures.
1792018-07-26T16:28:11  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
1802018-07-26T16:28:41  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812018-07-26T16:30:58  *** osue has quit IRC
1822018-07-26T16:31:48  <satwo> sipa: very few do, it seems. For example the tx 88d87642bc1534b9d6f8d62e6e9ae55e5971c0efec30d9139f817eb55c307c71 has a "size" of 381 on Blockchair, blockchain.info, btc.com, and smartbit.au, and a "size" of 126 on Blockcypher, Blocktrail and blockexplorer.com. 381 is the total size and 126 is the base size. So clearly there's some confusion with nomenclature
1832018-07-26T16:32:20  <satwo> Of course vsize is nowhere to be found except on smartbit
1842018-07-26T16:34:41  <sipa> satwo: i'm aware
1852018-07-26T16:34:46  <sipa> i've contacted a few
1862018-07-26T16:36:20  <sipa> it was probably a mistake to introduce a new namw.for it; we should jusr have replaced size everywhere with vsize
1872018-07-26T16:36:50  <sipa> but that would have run into issues with people who assumed size = len(serialization)
1882018-07-26T16:40:46  <satwo> Would modifying bitcoin-rpc to say something like "size (total):" or "total size:" be messy overkill? At the very least it would bring RPC and BIP 141 in harmony, potentially reducing some confusion
1892018-07-26T16:41:15  <gmaxwell> We should probably drop size out of the rpcs.
1902018-07-26T16:41:27  *** Urgo has quit IRC
1912018-07-26T16:50:01  <BlueMatt> sipa: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/issues/581
1922018-07-26T16:52:24  <satwo> gmaxwell: makes sense. Easier said than done I assume?
1932018-07-26T16:54:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1942018-07-26T16:55:09  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1952018-07-26T16:56:25  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
1962018-07-26T16:58:19  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1972018-07-26T17:15:19  *** dqx_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1982018-07-26T17:28:00  *** promag has quit IRC
1992018-07-26T17:28:34  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2002018-07-26T17:31:36  *** promag has quit IRC
2012018-07-26T17:39:56  *** dqx__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2022018-07-26T17:42:27  *** dqx_ has quit IRC
2032018-07-26T17:54:49  <skeees> wumpus: thanks for the org invite :)
2042018-07-26T17:54:49  <skeees> also,
2052018-07-26T17:54:49  <skeees> AMAZING NEWS TODAY!!! I'm giving away ....
2062018-07-26T17:55:53  <sipa> /report skeees
2072018-07-26T18:02:07  *** osue has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2082018-07-26T18:03:10  <wumpus> skeees: welcome to the org!
2092018-07-26T18:06:25  *** osue has quit IRC
2102018-07-26T18:23:18  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2112018-07-26T18:23:19  *** polydin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2122018-07-26T18:33:13  *** masonicboom has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132018-07-26T18:41:34  *** nmnkgl has quit IRC
2142018-07-26T18:50:03  *** nmnkgl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2152018-07-26T19:01:08  <jonasschnelli> DING / DONG
2162018-07-26T19:01:30  <wumpus> #startmeeting
2172018-07-26T19:01:30  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Jul 26 19:01:30 2018 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
2182018-07-26T19:01:30  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
2192018-07-26T19:01:35  <jnewbery> hi
2202018-07-26T19:01:38  <achow101> hi
2212018-07-26T19:01:39  <jamesob> hi
2222018-07-26T19:01:39  <nmnkgl> hi
2232018-07-26T19:01:44  <jonasschnelli> hi
2242018-07-26T19:01:45  <provoostenator> hi
2252018-07-26T19:01:46  <sipa> hi
2262018-07-26T19:01:59  <cfields> hi
2272018-07-26T19:02:04  <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr btcdrak sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark mi
2282018-07-26T19:02:08  <wumpus> chagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator
2292018-07-26T19:02:18  <kanzure> hi.
2302018-07-26T19:02:32  <BlueMatt> I have a somewhat strange topic: what to call the witness version of the p2sh redeemScript...not quite the right venue to discuss it, but there's not a much better one and we have to pick something for bitcoincore.org, sooooo
2312018-07-26T19:02:56  <wumpus> #topic naming of witness version of the p2sh redeemScript
2322018-07-26T19:02:59  <achow101> hasn't this been called "witnessScript" for a while?
2332018-07-26T19:03:04  <sipa> yes
2342018-07-26T19:03:21  <achow101> that's what i have used for bip 174 at least
2352018-07-26T19:03:31  <BlueMatt> I had never seen that
2362018-07-26T19:03:34  <BlueMatt> though I admit it was in the BIP
2372018-07-26T19:03:42  <BlueMatt> and I know people who've called it the witness redeem script or so
2382018-07-26T19:03:51  <BlueMatt> which is also confusing cause of p2sh-wrapped segwit
2392018-07-26T19:04:02  <BlueMatt> but witnessScript is confusing given scriptWitness refers to the whole witness :(
2402018-07-26T19:04:03  <jonasschnelli> how is this important to define?
2412018-07-26T19:04:06  <BlueMatt> so every option is shit
2422018-07-26T19:04:18  <sipa> perhaps it should be called P2WSH redeemscript, as it's arguably specific to P2WSH (P2WPKH doesn't have it, and future witness versions may not either)
2432018-07-26T19:04:19  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: well we need to call it *something* and it seems everyone has a different one
2442018-07-26T19:04:45  <kanzure> using ambiguous jargon will cause errors and bugs
2452018-07-26T19:05:01  <sipa> BlueMatt: scriptWitness is just in bitcoin core's source code though; is it called that way anywhere else?
2462018-07-26T19:05:17  <BlueMatt> sipa: I'm not sure that it is, but that was MarcoFalke's comment to me
2472018-07-26T19:05:20  <jonasschnelli> IMO it's specified in the BIP, but people are free to form a new term. I don't think there is need to an authoriity to define it.
2482018-07-26T19:05:27  *** leishma__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2492018-07-26T19:05:39  *** leishma__ is now known as leishman__
2502018-07-26T19:05:45  <BlueMatt> but, given the witness can be seen as a "scriptSig replacement" calling it that I could see being incredibly confusing to some people
2512018-07-26T19:06:07  <sipa> yes, i agree it's confusing and we could have picked a better name
2522018-07-26T19:06:17  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: well I ask because there is debate about what to write in some docs in rust-bitcoin, and also what to call it on bitcoincore.org docs
2532018-07-26T19:06:18  <sipa> the cat may also already be out of the bag since 2 years ago
2542018-07-26T19:06:27  <BlueMatt> jonasschnelli: so this is the right venue to discuss bitcoincore.org
2552018-07-26T19:06:38  <BlueMatt> sipa: sure, but I've seen it referred to as other things too already :(
2562018-07-26T19:06:42  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2572018-07-26T19:06:45  <promag> hi
2582018-07-26T19:06:53  <gmaxwell> I think this discussion is a waste of time for this venue.
2592018-07-26T19:06:55  <provoostenator> For now, maybe just explain that it's confusing and someone should propose a BIP to deconfuse it?
2602018-07-26T19:06:55  <kanzure> cfields: are the poll results due today?
2612018-07-26T19:07:22  <jonasschnelli> Can we also rename "wallet"? *duck*
2622018-07-26T19:07:32  <cfields> kanzure: ah, thanks for the reminder. poll closed at the end of yesterday's meeting. winner: current time
2632018-07-26T19:07:46  <cfields> er, last week's meeting
2642018-07-26T19:07:54  <wumpus> #topic meeting time
2652018-07-26T19:08:08  <provoostenator> Even just pointing out that something_is_ confusing, helps the reader pay attention, otherwise they might think they just don't get it.
2662018-07-26T19:08:26  <cfields> poll results: https://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_a80f9a69d20aab2a
2672018-07-26T19:08:37  <kanzure> cfields: is that a selection effect of mostly current-meeting participants answering the survey?
2682018-07-26T19:09:10  <provoostenator> So was the idea still to alternate between two times?
2692018-07-26T19:09:15  <cfields> kanzure: possibly, but I'm not sure how else to get the word out.
2702018-07-26T19:09:29  <gmaxwell> cfields: what was the runner up time?
2712018-07-26T19:09:49  <cfields> gmaxwell: see link above
2722018-07-26T19:09:49  <sipa> gmaxwell: one hour earlier
2732018-07-26T19:10:01  <gmaxwell> oh sorry.
2742018-07-26T19:11:32  <promag> quick question, when 0.17 branch?
2752018-07-26T19:11:48  <achow101> promag: August 1st or so
2762018-07-26T19:11:55  <wumpus> #12624
2772018-07-26T19:11:57  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12624 | Release schedule for 0.17.0 · Issue #12624 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2782018-07-26T19:12:06  <achow101> according to the release schedule
2792018-07-26T19:12:14  <wumpus> 2018-08-13
2802018-07-26T19:12:18  <wumpus> is the plan
2812018-07-26T19:12:31  <sipa> also w.r.t. scantxoutset, are we going to mark it experimental?
2822018-07-26T19:12:47  <wumpus> I think everyone agreed on that
2832018-07-26T19:13:00  <jonasschnelli> Yes. I can PR that.
2842018-07-26T19:13:00  <promag> +1
2852018-07-26T19:13:11  <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: thanks.
2862018-07-26T19:13:28  <jonasschnelli> Sorry for the delayed review on sipas descriptor work... will comment soon on the PR
2872018-07-26T19:14:52  *** LeMiner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2882018-07-26T19:15:20  <wumpus> #topic 0.16.2 final
2892018-07-26T19:15:28  <BlueMatt> ack
2902018-07-26T19:15:37  <wumpus> rc2 was tagged ~a week ago, I don't think any issues came up
2912018-07-26T19:15:42  <gmaxwell> I haven't seen or heard any issues with the RC.
2922018-07-26T19:15:51  <wumpus> so I think it's time to tag final
2932018-07-26T19:15:55  <jonasschnelli> agree
2942018-07-26T19:15:58  <cfields> +1
2952018-07-26T19:16:15  <wumpus> ok, will do so after the meeting
2962018-07-26T19:16:20  <gmaxwell> not have any OMG-must-fix-now bugs cropped up that I'm aware of.
2972018-07-26T19:16:21  <promag> +1
2982018-07-26T19:16:23  <achow101> yay
2992018-07-26T19:16:41  <wumpus> any other topics?
3002018-07-26T19:17:11  <cfields> quick personal announcement: A small health issue has been taking up a good amount of my time lately, and I've been struggling to keep up with review, let alone writing new code. I've decided to take a week or two to try to finish up outstanding things, then take a month away to try to get back to 100%. I'll try to at least keep up with emails and pings during that time.
3012018-07-26T19:17:35  <wumpus> as for high priority for review, please review everything under the 0.17 milestone: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/33
3022018-07-26T19:17:44  <kanzure> cfields: good luck with your health.
3032018-07-26T19:17:46  <sipa> cfields: take all the time you need
3042018-07-26T19:17:46  <jamesob> rest up, cfields!
3052018-07-26T19:17:48  <cfields> so if I owe anyone review on something, please give me a ping!
3062018-07-26T19:17:49  <jonasschnelli> sad to hear and hope you will recover soon cfields!
3072018-07-26T19:17:50  <gmaxwell> #13756 might want to have some coordination on the UI/GUI side. (or someone to come yell at me to not creep the scope)
3082018-07-26T19:17:51  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13756 | wallet: -avoidreuse feature for improved privacy by kallewoof · Pull Request #13756 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3092018-07-26T19:18:24  <wumpus> cfields: yes, just take the rest you need
3102018-07-26T19:18:33  <provoostenator> gmaxwell I'll try that one.
3112018-07-26T19:19:07  <jonasschnelli> thanks provoostenator
3122018-07-26T19:19:09  <promag> re 13756, I have some too
3132018-07-26T19:19:13  <cfields> thanks, all, but ping away.
3142018-07-26T19:19:14  <promag> *questions :/
3152018-07-26T19:20:34  <wumpus> is kallewoof there to answer them?
3162018-07-26T19:20:47  <wumpus> if not, I don't think it makes sense to ask them during the meeting
3172018-07-26T19:20:51  <sipa> it's 4:20 AM for him
3182018-07-26T19:20:58  <promag> sure, in I'll do in gh
3192018-07-26T19:20:58  <wumpus> right
3202018-07-26T19:21:10  <wumpus> ok
3212018-07-26T19:22:12  <gmaxwell> I brought it up in part because kallewoof doesn't make meetings. :)
3222018-07-26T19:22:41  <jonasschnelli> JP timezone I guess
3232018-07-26T19:23:00  <wumpus> the PR missed the feature freeze so there's not that much hurry
3242018-07-26T19:24:03  <wumpus> any other topics?
3252018-07-26T19:24:43  <luke-jr> steak?
3262018-07-26T19:25:21  <jamesob> did we decide to stop maintaining/pushing a high-prio PR list?
3272018-07-26T19:25:25  <wumpus> steak!
3282018-07-26T19:25:35  <midnightmagic> +1 steak
3292018-07-26T19:25:37  <sipa> jamesob: it's just overshadowed now by the 0.17 milestone
3302018-07-26T19:25:44  <wumpus> jamesob: < wumpus> as for high priority for review, please review everything under the 0.17 milestone: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/33
3312018-07-26T19:25:53  <jamesob> oops, thanks
3322018-07-26T19:26:00  <gmaxwell> because we're near 0.17, its the 0.17 list that is high prio right now.
3332018-07-26T19:26:18  <wumpus> maintainging a separate high priority list is just confusing at the moment, I think
3342018-07-26T19:27:01  *** schmidty_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3352018-07-26T19:27:14  <promag> agree, 0.17 is high priority
3362018-07-26T19:29:04  <wumpus> any other 0.17 PR s that need to be discussed?
3372018-07-26T19:29:48  <ken2812221> #13426
3382018-07-26T19:29:50  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13426 | [bugfix] Fix encoding issue for Windows by ken2812221 · Pull Request #13426 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3392018-07-26T19:30:08  <ken2812221> Is it allowable to add wmain function?
3402018-07-26T19:30:25  <wumpus> #topic encoding issue on windows (ken2812221(
3412018-07-26T19:30:49  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3422018-07-26T19:31:17  <cfields> there are a bunch of current PRs for depends and gitian descriptors. I assume it's no problem to continue working on those for 0.17? There are a few fixes that may be non-trivial that I would greatly prefer over the one-liner fixes.
3432018-07-26T19:31:34  <wumpus> ken2812221: I'd prefer not, I think we had multiple entry points at some point, with special one for windows but this was cleaned up to just main(), if there is really no other way
3442018-07-26T19:31:56  <gmaxwell> i hate strings
3452018-07-26T19:32:21  <wumpus> so do I, but unfortunately they're needed for path names
3462018-07-26T19:32:31  <cfields> windows strings cause 2x developer hate :(
3472018-07-26T19:32:46  <luke-jr> they string us along?
3482018-07-26T19:32:58  <gmaxwell> so the issue here is that windows APIs want UTF16 strings or something?
3492018-07-26T19:32:59  <cfields> luke-jr: i would characterize it that way, hes
3502018-07-26T19:33:13  <wumpus> gmaxwell: yes :-/
3512018-07-26T19:33:18  <ken2812221> Windows does not use utf8
3522018-07-26T19:33:26  <gmaxwell> I'm vaguely aware of that.
3532018-07-26T19:33:39  <wumpus> I think #13426 is too big a change
3542018-07-26T19:33:42  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13426 | [bugfix] Fix encoding issue for Windows by ken2812221 · Pull Request #13426 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3552018-07-26T19:33:57  <gmaxwell> Originally it was UCS2 but then they realized that chinese exists and it became UTF16 to get the worst of all worlds or soemthing like that.
3562018-07-26T19:34:27  <wumpus> is this reallky all necessary? it changes pretty much all uses of paths in the code
3572018-07-26T19:34:35  <sipa> yeah, they adopted unicode very early, and picked a different encoding than what the rest of the world eventually ended up pickin
3582018-07-26T19:34:47  *** LeMiner has quit IRC
3592018-07-26T19:35:23  <gmaxwell> ken2812221: what keeps you from intercepting a couple places at a low level and inserting at UTF8->UTF16 conversion?
3602018-07-26T19:35:39  <wumpus> I hate waltzing over the entire code to accomodate windows' crappyness
3612018-07-26T19:36:08  <ken2812221> The command line argument, I think.
3622018-07-26T19:36:35  <wumpus> most of the changes seem .string() versus .u8string()
3632018-07-26T19:36:51  <gmaxwell> ken2812221: the commandline arguments come in as utf8 strings, right?
3642018-07-26T19:37:12  <ken2812221> no, it is ANSI or UTF-16.
3652018-07-26T19:37:19  <wumpus> on POSIX platforms that's what we assume, in windows they come as utf16 strings
3662018-07-26T19:37:23  <ken2812221> on Windows
3672018-07-26T19:38:05  <sipa> since windows 10 apparently you can select a codepage for the "ansi" encoding that is utf8
3682018-07-26T19:38:14  <wumpus> sipa: oh!
3692018-07-26T19:38:24  <sipa> oh no
3702018-07-26T19:38:30  <gmaxwell> wumpus: so how do we deal with like ua comment coming in and not sticking UTF16 into our network messages?
3712018-07-26T19:38:40  <sipa> only possible since windows 10 insider build 17035 (November 2017)
3722018-07-26T19:38:47  <cfields> gmaxwell: we sanitize those
3732018-07-26T19:39:17  <gmaxwell> cfields: but given UTF16 wouldn't our sanitizer just corrupt the string? (throw out all characters?)
3742018-07-26T19:39:28  <cfields> (unsure what gets lost in the conversion, but we know what can't go out)
3752018-07-26T19:39:29  <wumpus> gmaxwell: it needs to be converted to UTF8 for the internal use
3762018-07-26T19:39:37  <gmaxwell> okay, I clearly know nothing here so I should probably just go read.
3772018-07-26T19:39:47  <wumpus> so the arguments come in as UTF-16, then are converted to UTF-8 for storage
3782018-07-26T19:39:55  <gmaxwell> wumpus: right I guess I was just assuming the argument processing conerted it all to utf8 before we saw any of it.
3792018-07-26T19:39:59  <wumpus> which makes complete sense in ken2812221 's PR
3802018-07-26T19:40:02  <cfields> gmaxwell: nah, I think you're right. I was just making the point that it at least won't go over the wire that way.
3812018-07-26T19:40:13  <sipa> ok, 17035 was finally released as "April 2018 update"
3822018-07-26T19:40:21  <sipa> that's... a decade too late
3832018-07-26T19:40:28  <wumpus> sipa: yes...
3842018-07-26T19:40:41  <gmaxwell> In which case I'd assume the path issue could be solved by wrapping the file IO with something that converts our internal utf8 to utf16 for windows.
3852018-07-26T19:40:42  <luke-jr> XD
3862018-07-26T19:40:49  <wumpus> though microsoft is twisting people's arms really hard to upgrade to windows 10
3872018-07-26T19:40:59  <sipa> don't we already have the fs space for that?
3882018-07-26T19:41:07  <wumpus> yes, that's what his PR does
3892018-07-26T19:41:22  <sipa> hmm, i would expect it's just changing one or two functions
3902018-07-26T19:41:26  <gmaxwell> ^
3912018-07-26T19:41:40  <sipa> sorry, i'm not very familiar with this part of the code; i should probably go look
3922018-07-26T19:41:45  <wumpus> it makes sense, the only thing is dislike is the size of the diff because he uses .u8string instead of .string in so many places, but it's fairly simple
3932018-07-26T19:43:03  <ken2812221> There are some TODO: leveldb and fstream
3942018-07-26T19:43:07  <wumpus> should probably get over it and review it...
3952018-07-26T19:43:16  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
3962018-07-26T19:43:25  <ken2812221> They are not support utf-8 in this PR.
3972018-07-26T19:44:03  <wumpus> so that will still fail with datadirs with, say, Chinese characters in it?
3982018-07-26T19:44:45  <ken2812221> Yes, still fail, but success if you set your setting to Chinese.
3992018-07-26T19:44:58  <ken2812221> Before this PR, both fail.
4002018-07-26T19:45:55  <wumpus> okay, that's good
4012018-07-26T19:46:33  <ken2812221> Thanks
4022018-07-26T19:47:51  <jtimon> I guess #13311 doesn't deserve to be in the 0.17.0 milestone since it is not a feature nor a bugfix
4032018-07-26T19:47:53  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13311 | Dont edit Chainparams after initialization by jtimon · Pull Request #13311 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHubAsset 1Asset 1
4042018-07-26T19:52:03  <wumpus> it's not really about 'deserve', I don't see a point to add it to the milestone, but if it is ready for merge before branching off 0.17 it can make it into 0.17
4052018-07-26T19:53:01  <jtimon> sure, perhaps not the right word, "I guess there's no point for in to be in the milestone"
4062018-07-26T19:53:47  <wumpus> yes, I agree with that
4072018-07-26T19:54:04  <jtimon> I guess I was just review begging by mentioning it, sorry
4082018-07-26T19:54:11  <wumpus> that's okay
4092018-07-26T19:56:13  <wumpus> I guess we're out of topics
4102018-07-26T19:56:16  <wumpus> #endmeeting
4112018-07-26T19:56:16  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Jul 26 19:56:16 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
4122018-07-26T19:56:16  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-07-26-19.01.html
4132018-07-26T19:56:16  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-07-26-19.01.txt
4142018-07-26T19:56:16  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2018/bitcoin-core-dev.2018-07-26-19.01.log.html
4152018-07-26T19:56:42  *** masonicboom has quit IRC
4162018-07-26T20:05:19  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
4172018-07-26T20:06:39  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4182018-07-26T20:21:01  <gmaxwell> Does anyone have any idea on how we could tell if dbcache flush events are becoming correlated across the network?
4192018-07-26T20:26:12  *** farmerwampum has quit IRC
4202018-07-26T20:38:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
4212018-07-26T20:38:22  <wumpus> no idea how to do that without adding instrumentation and metrics reporting
4222018-07-26T20:39:08  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4232018-07-26T20:39:16  <gmaxwell> I suppose we could check logs from a number of our own long running nodes and see if they line up, but I bet most of us are changing the default dbcache size.
4242018-07-26T20:40:50  <skeees> thats a pretty tricky, but interesting problem, would flushing db cache introduce a measurable delay in responding to a ping?
4252018-07-26T20:41:18  <skeees> how close of an interval becomes problematic in your opinion?
4262018-07-26T20:41:24  <wumpus> tes but so does validation of blocks
4272018-07-26T20:41:39  <wumpus> gmaxwell: indeed, logs would also be good
4282018-07-26T20:43:03  <gmaxwell> skeees: yes but validating a block does too
4292018-07-26T20:43:20  <gmaxwell> Basically the concern is that if nodes are synchronizing their flushes, it will slow down block propagation somewhat.
4302018-07-26T20:43:40  <gmaxwell> Because you get a block, validate it, flush (if needed), aand relay it.
4312018-07-26T20:44:04  <gmaxwell> if nodes aren't synced propagation will just route around flushing nodes.
4322018-07-26T20:44:27  <gmaxwell> HB mode with forward-before-validate like we have now I'm sure greatly reduces the issue.
4332018-07-26T20:44:57  <kanzure> relay and flush are in same thread?
4342018-07-26T20:45:10  <gmaxwell> I was talking to matt in private about some relay improvements, and we observed that even for relay the stuff we were talking about was probably not the low hanging fruit.
4352018-07-26T20:46:04  <gmaxwell> kanzure: non-oppturnistic realy blocks on validation (as it must per protocol), and validation blocks on flushing (as it kind-of must to avoid excess memory usage)
4362018-07-26T20:46:42  <skeees> well i do have that pr that puts net and validation (/flush) in separate threads - it would still require additional work though to remove cs_main from relay I think
4372018-07-26T20:46:44  <gmaxwell> in theory everything could be rejiggered to make that less bad, but that effort would probably be better spent in making flushing a non-issue via incremental flushing which we changed the design to facilitate a few releases ago.
4382018-07-26T20:46:58  <gmaxwell> skeees: putting it in seperate threads is irrelevant.
4392018-07-26T20:47:39  <skeees> that wouldn't enable you to relay while the flush happened?
4402018-07-26T20:47:40  <gmaxwell> A question of threading isn't the source of delays.
4412018-07-26T20:48:40  <kanzure> it's validation. if you want non-opportunistic relay.
4422018-07-26T20:49:01  <kanzure> hence the mention of a refactor
4432018-07-26T20:49:18  <gmaxwell> skeees: you'd be able to do just the same by moving the flush ahead of the next verification operation, without changing anything with threading.
4442018-07-26T20:50:50  <gmaxwell> in any case, I asked because if they're syncing it's probably a completely safe one line of code change to make them no longer sync up.
4452018-07-26T20:51:27  <gmaxwell> (just make each node randomly make its dbcache zero to four blocks of worth of data smaller.)
4462018-07-26T20:54:05  <wumpus>  * [new tag]                                                                           v0.16.2 -> v0.16.2
4472018-07-26T20:55:39  <gmaxwell> The right bigger change is to make it so that we only flush a small amount, and then flush every block. A few versions ago we relaxed the invarient that the chainstate database has to be consistent with a particular block.
4482018-07-26T20:56:35  <sipa> wumpus: \o/
4492018-07-26T20:56:52  <gmaxwell> But even that isn't worth doing for latency reasons; it's worth doing because it should speed up sync a lot by better overlapping writing.
4502018-07-26T20:57:31  <gmaxwell> (not worth it for latency because esp with oppturnistic sends, latency is already stupid low)
4512018-07-26T20:57:34  <skeees> if you flush every block - won't that affect propagation of blocks that come in very close succession? (i assumed this was why you suggested a randomized flush)
4522018-07-26T20:59:22  <gmaxwell> skeees: if its flushing every block each flush will only take a fraction of a millisecond.
4532018-07-26T21:00:28  <gmaxwell> right now a 'flush' writes out the entire dbcache, not just one block worth of it.
4542018-07-26T21:00:50  <skeees> ah
4552018-07-26T21:01:14  <gmaxwell> that used to be required so that the chainstate on disk would be consistent with a specific block, but we don't require that anymore.
4562018-07-26T21:01:30  <gmaxwell> because on restart we'll just replay the effect recent blocks had on the chainstate.
4572018-07-26T21:03:06  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4582018-07-26T21:08:48  <jtimon> randomly reducing the cachedb a little bit seems like an inofensive temporal fix, also simple to remove when we have the better fix
4592018-07-26T21:09:34  <gmaxwell> if a fix is needed at all.
4602018-07-26T21:09:40  <gmaxwell> which was my question.
4612018-07-26T21:11:27  * jtimon nods
4622018-07-26T21:24:18  *** Squidicuz has quit IRC
4632018-07-26T21:30:49  *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
4642018-07-26T21:30:53  *** savil[m]2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4652018-07-26T21:33:39  *** Squidicuz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4662018-07-26T22:04:02  *** BGL has quit IRC
4672018-07-26T22:07:29  *** tryphe_ is now known as tryphe
4682018-07-26T22:25:44  *** promag has quit IRC
4692018-07-26T22:36:40  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
4702018-07-26T22:38:08  *** Victorsueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4712018-07-26T22:48:22  *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
4722018-07-26T22:50:56  *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4732018-07-26T22:59:07  *** bitbee has quit IRC
4742018-07-26T23:02:57  *** arubi has quit IRC
4752018-07-26T23:05:22  *** bitbee has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4762018-07-26T23:06:49  *** satwo has quit IRC
4772018-07-26T23:08:32  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4782018-07-26T23:27:22  *** vicenteH has quit IRC
4792018-07-26T23:28:09  *** BGL has joined #bitcoin-core-dev