1 2020-05-07T00:00:03  *** alexsuraci has quit IRC
  2 2020-05-07T00:00:33  *** promag_ has quit IRC
  3 2020-05-07T00:02:53  *** mol has quit IRC
  4 2020-05-07T00:03:21  *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  5 2020-05-07T00:05:32  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2020-05-07T00:07:00  *** dfmb_ has quit IRC
  7 2020-05-07T00:12:49  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
  8 2020-05-07T00:13:22  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  9 2020-05-07T00:16:46  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
 10 2020-05-07T00:17:16  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
 11 2020-05-07T00:17:30  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2020-05-07T00:22:01  *** r251d has quit IRC
 13 2020-05-07T00:22:05  *** SchwarzeLocke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 14 2020-05-07T00:31:58  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
 15 2020-05-07T00:32:04  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 16 2020-05-07T00:32:32  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 17 2020-05-07T00:34:12  *** lightlike has quit IRC
 18 2020-05-07T00:37:06  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
 19 2020-05-07T00:58:57  *** promag_ has quit IRC
 20 2020-05-07T01:03:57  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
 21 2020-05-07T01:04:09  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 22 2020-05-07T01:04:26  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 23 2020-05-07T01:08:28  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
 24 2020-05-07T01:09:06  *** promag_ has quit IRC
 25 2020-05-07T01:10:51  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 26 2020-05-07T01:13:31  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2020-05-07T01:19:00  *** promag has quit IRC
 28 2020-05-07T01:19:33  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 29 2020-05-07T01:23:55  *** promag has quit IRC
 30 2020-05-07T01:30:34  *** SiAnDoG has quit IRC
 31 2020-05-07T01:36:41  *** tryphe_ is now known as tryphe
 32 2020-05-07T01:39:59  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 33 2020-05-07T01:44:28  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
 34 2020-05-07T01:47:55  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 35 2020-05-07T01:47:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #18902: Bugfix: Only use git for build info if the repository is actually the right one (master...fix_gitdir_again) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18902
 36 2020-05-07T01:47:56  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 37 2020-05-07T01:53:03  *** Emcy has quit IRC
 38 2020-05-07T01:59:23  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 39 2020-05-07T02:17:34  *** mol has quit IRC
 40 2020-05-07T02:50:02  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 41 2020-05-07T02:57:20  *** surja795 has quit IRC
 42 2020-05-07T03:00:01  *** SchwarzeLocke has quit IRC
 43 2020-05-07T03:00:32  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 44 2020-05-07T03:20:19  *** surja795 has quit IRC
 45 2020-05-07T03:21:17  *** carldani1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 46 2020-05-07T03:30:47  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 47 2020-05-07T03:35:50  *** surja795 has quit IRC
 48 2020-05-07T03:35:54  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 49 2020-05-07T03:35:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #18903: test: fix TEST_PREVIOUS_RELEASES check (master...getenv_defaults_to_None) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18903
 50 2020-05-07T03:35:55  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 51 2020-05-07T03:39:16  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
 52 2020-05-07T03:45:22  *** SiAnDoG has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 53 2020-05-07T03:54:53  *** geeker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2020-05-07T04:01:16  *** SiAnDoG has quit IRC
 55 2020-05-07T04:01:36  *** SiAnDoG has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 56 2020-05-07T04:10:32  *** per has quit IRC
 57 2020-05-07T04:15:17  *** per has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 58 2020-05-07T04:18:40  *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 59 2020-05-07T04:19:37  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 60 2020-05-07T04:19:55  *** vasild_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 61 2020-05-07T04:23:03  *** vasild has quit IRC
 62 2020-05-07T04:23:04  *** vasild_ is now known as vasild
 63 2020-05-07T04:24:02  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
 64 2020-05-07T04:24:47  *** stackingcore21 has quit IRC
 65 2020-05-07T04:24:57  *** stackingcore21 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 66 2020-05-07T04:32:37  *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 67 2020-05-07T04:35:10  *** jarthur_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 68 2020-05-07T04:35:58  *** mol has quit IRC
 69 2020-05-07T04:38:07  *** jarthur has quit IRC
 70 2020-05-07T04:44:39  *** jarthur_ has quit IRC
 71 2020-05-07T04:51:30  *** molz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 72 2020-05-07T04:53:43  *** per has quit IRC
 73 2020-05-07T04:54:37  *** mol_ has quit IRC
 74 2020-05-07T04:58:59  *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 75 2020-05-07T04:59:08  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 76 2020-05-07T05:00:21  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
 77 2020-05-07T05:00:52  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 78 2020-05-07T05:02:26  *** molz_ has quit IRC
 79 2020-05-07T05:03:18  *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 80 2020-05-07T05:03:43  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
 81 2020-05-07T05:06:53  *** mol_ has quit IRC
 82 2020-05-07T05:18:23  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 83 2020-05-07T05:23:46  *** geeker_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 84 2020-05-07T05:23:47  *** geeker has quit IRC
 85 2020-05-07T05:30:48  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 86 2020-05-07T05:31:04  *** geeker_ has quit IRC
 87 2020-05-07T05:40:11  *** frosted_bird has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 88 2020-05-07T05:45:23  *** jarthur has quit IRC
 89 2020-05-07T05:46:04  *** frosted_bird has quit IRC
 90 2020-05-07T06:00:02  *** carldani1 has quit IRC
 91 2020-05-07T06:02:43  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 92 2020-05-07T06:12:55  *** guest534543 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 93 2020-05-07T06:16:58  *** Kiminuo has quit IRC
 94 2020-05-07T06:19:12  *** promag has quit IRC
 95 2020-05-07T06:20:58  *** jarthur has quit IRC
 96 2020-05-07T06:22:10  *** panda1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 97 2020-05-07T06:24:29  *** emilengler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 98 2020-05-07T06:26:59  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 99 2020-05-07T06:38:01  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
100 2020-05-07T06:38:16  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
101 2020-05-07T06:46:54  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
102 2020-05-07T06:47:03  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
103 2020-05-07T06:47:33  *** jarthur has quit IRC
104 2020-05-07T06:48:25  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
105 2020-05-07T06:48:28  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
106 2020-05-07T06:48:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] bvbfan opened pull request #18904: Don't call lsn_reset in periodic flush (master...lsn_reset_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18904
107 2020-05-07T06:48:29  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
108 2020-05-07T06:56:02  *** jarthur has quit IRC
109 2020-05-07T06:59:54  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
110 2020-05-07T07:02:38  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
111 2020-05-07T07:04:34  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
112 2020-05-07T07:04:40  *** jarthur has quit IRC
113 2020-05-07T07:05:15  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2020-05-07T07:09:58  *** jarthur has quit IRC
115 2020-05-07T07:30:42  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
116 2020-05-07T07:32:11  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
117 2020-05-07T07:38:46  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
118 2020-05-07T07:38:46  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #14046: net: Refactor message parsing (CNetMessage), adds flexibility (master...2018/08/bip151_pre_refactor) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14046
119 2020-05-07T07:38:47  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
120 2020-05-07T07:42:36  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
121 2020-05-07T07:42:36  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7bcc42b4035b...3b1e289248dc
122 2020-05-07T07:42:37  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a029805 fanquake: build: remove -Qunused-arguments workaround for clang + ccache
123 2020-05-07T07:42:38  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3b1e289 fanquake: Merge #18535: build: remove -Qunused-arguments workaround for clang + ccac...
124 2020-05-07T07:42:39  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
125 2020-05-07T07:43:05  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2020-05-07T07:43:06  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #18535: build: remove -Qunused-arguments workaround for clang + ccache (master...dont_quash_unused_driver_arguments) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18535
127 2020-05-07T07:43:07  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
128 2020-05-07T07:43:48  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
129 2020-05-07T07:46:38  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
130 2020-05-07T07:54:33  *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
131 2020-05-07T07:56:31  *** inpharmaticist[m has quit IRC
132 2020-05-07T07:56:32  *** peltre has quit IRC
133 2020-05-07T07:56:32  *** endogenic has quit IRC
134 2020-05-07T07:56:32  *** NicolasDorier has quit IRC
135 2020-05-07T07:56:32  *** _flow_ has quit IRC
136 2020-05-07T07:56:32  *** jkczyz has quit IRC
137 2020-05-07T07:56:33  *** mr_burdell has quit IRC
138 2020-05-07T07:57:53  *** mol has quit IRC
139 2020-05-07T07:58:23  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
140 2020-05-07T08:01:28  *** inpharmaticist[m has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
141 2020-05-07T08:01:28  *** peltre has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142 2020-05-07T08:01:28  *** endogenic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
143 2020-05-07T08:01:28  *** NicolasDorier has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
144 2020-05-07T08:01:28  *** jkczyz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
145 2020-05-07T08:01:28  *** _flow_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
146 2020-05-07T08:01:28  *** mr_burdell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
147 2020-05-07T08:02:38  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
148 2020-05-07T08:02:42  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
149 2020-05-07T08:07:24  *** marcoagner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
150 2020-05-07T08:23:01  *** roconnor has quit IRC
151 2020-05-07T08:23:24  *** peltre has quit IRC
152 2020-05-07T08:23:53  *** peltre has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
153 2020-05-07T08:34:40  *** sipsorcery has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
154 2020-05-07T08:38:19  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
155 2020-05-07T08:38:34  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
156 2020-05-07T08:38:34  <wumpus> luke-jr: maybe split out the add-prefix commit for now, that one's straightforward
157 2020-05-07T08:49:15  *** guest534543 has quit IRC
158 2020-05-07T09:00:01  *** panda1 has quit IRC
159 2020-05-07T09:00:54  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
160 2020-05-07T09:05:37  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
161 2020-05-07T09:18:46  *** dfmb_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162 2020-05-07T09:20:06  *** promag has quit IRC
163 2020-05-07T09:22:10  *** subdriven1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
164 2020-05-07T09:39:49  *** mrostecki has quit IRC
165 2020-05-07T09:39:49  *** thunderbiscuit[m has quit IRC
166 2020-05-07T09:39:50  *** icota[m] has quit IRC
167 2020-05-07T09:40:00  *** TheFuzzStone[m] has quit IRC
168 2020-05-07T09:40:34  *** inpharmaticist[m has quit IRC
169 2020-05-07T09:49:25  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
170 2020-05-07T09:51:04  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
171 2020-05-07T09:53:58  *** inpharmaticist[m has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172 2020-05-07T09:55:41  *** promag has quit IRC
173 2020-05-07T10:01:22  *** icota[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
174 2020-05-07T10:01:22  *** mrostecki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
175 2020-05-07T10:01:22  *** TheFuzzStone[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
176 2020-05-07T10:01:29  *** thunderbiscuit[m has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
177 2020-05-07T10:14:49  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
178 2020-05-07T10:19:17  *** surja795 has quit IRC
179 2020-05-07T10:19:50  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
180 2020-05-07T10:23:54  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
181 2020-05-07T10:24:18  *** surja795 has quit IRC
182 2020-05-07T10:24:45  *** dfmbbtc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
183 2020-05-07T10:25:40  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
184 2020-05-07T10:27:32  *** dfmb_ has quit IRC
185 2020-05-07T10:32:02  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
186 2020-05-07T10:44:22  *** dfmb_btc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
187 2020-05-07T10:44:41  *** jb55 has quit IRC
188 2020-05-07T10:45:08  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
189 2020-05-07T10:47:25  *** dfmbbtc has quit IRC
190 2020-05-07T10:53:44  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
191 2020-05-07T11:01:26  *** promag has quit IRC
192 2020-05-07T11:03:34  *** molz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
193 2020-05-07T11:04:22  *** dfmbbtc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
194 2020-05-07T11:06:38  *** mol_ has quit IRC
195 2020-05-07T11:07:58  *** dfmb_btc has quit IRC
196 2020-05-07T11:24:20  *** dfmb_btc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
197 2020-05-07T11:27:47  *** dfmbbtc has quit IRC
198 2020-05-07T11:36:34  *** braydonf has quit IRC
199 2020-05-07T11:36:59  *** braydonf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
200 2020-05-07T11:49:13  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
201 2020-05-07T11:50:43  *** jonatack_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202 2020-05-07T11:53:54  *** surja795 has quit IRC
203 2020-05-07T11:54:13  *** jonatack has quit IRC
204 2020-05-07T11:58:14  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
205 2020-05-07T11:58:14  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3b1e289248dc...c1cd2b5a97f4
206 2020-05-07T11:58:15  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa082d0 MarcoFalke: travis: Remove valgrind
207 2020-05-07T11:58:15  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c1cd2b5 MarcoFalke: Merge #18899: travis: Remove valgrind
208 2020-05-07T11:58:17  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
209 2020-05-07T11:58:34  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
210 2020-05-07T11:58:34  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #18899: travis: Remove valgrind (master...2005-RemoveTravis) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18899
211 2020-05-07T11:58:39  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
212 2020-05-07T12:00:00  *** per has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
213 2020-05-07T12:00:02  *** subdriven1 has quit IRC
214 2020-05-07T12:04:27  *** dfmbbtc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
215 2020-05-07T12:06:47  *** theStack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
216 2020-05-07T12:07:27  *** dfmb_btc has quit IRC
217 2020-05-07T12:14:37  *** dfmb_btc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
218 2020-05-07T12:17:26  *** dfmbbtc has quit IRC
219 2020-05-07T12:18:20  *** bpalmer1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
220 2020-05-07T12:18:27  *** Kiminuo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
221 2020-05-07T12:22:51  *** Deacyde has quit IRC
222 2020-05-07T12:23:31  *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
223 2020-05-07T12:24:29  *** dfmbbtc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2020-05-07T12:24:52  *** Kiminuo has quit IRC
225 2020-05-07T12:26:14  *** molz_ has quit IRC
226 2020-05-07T12:27:26  *** dfmb_btc has quit IRC
227 2020-05-07T12:38:47  *** Emcy has quit IRC
228 2020-05-07T12:40:15  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
229 2020-05-07T12:45:10  *** Highway61 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
230 2020-05-07T12:47:33  <luke-jr> wumpus: I'd agree, but in light of the regression to #7522, it looks like we either need to do #18902 (which builds on the re-tar-ing), or restore the build.h hack
231 2020-05-07T12:47:35  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18902 | Bugfix: Only use git for build info if the repository is actually the right one by luke-jr · Pull Request #18902 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
232 2020-05-07T12:47:37  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7522 | Bugfix: Only use git for build info if the repository is actually the right one by luke-jr · Pull Request #7522 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
233 2020-05-07T12:58:10  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2020-05-07T13:00:49  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
235 2020-05-07T13:00:49  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c1cd2b5a97f4...56611b0e2405
236 2020-05-07T13:00:50  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1e94a2b Russell Yanofsky: depends: Add --sysroot option to mac os native compile flags
237 2020-05-07T13:00:51  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 56611b0 fanquake: Merge #18743: depends: Add --sysroot option to mac os native compile flags...
238 2020-05-07T13:00:52  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
239 2020-05-07T13:01:10  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
240 2020-05-07T13:01:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #18743: depends: Add --sysroot option to mac os native compile flags (master...pr/sysroot) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18743
241 2020-05-07T13:01:12  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
242 2020-05-07T13:03:09  *** surja795 has quit IRC
243 2020-05-07T13:03:42  *** IGHOR has quit IRC
244 2020-05-07T13:09:22  *** IGHOR has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2020-05-07T13:14:54  *** molakala has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
246 2020-05-07T13:27:59  *** roconnor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
247 2020-05-07T13:33:14  <hebasto> luke-jr: what is wrong with "regression to #7522"? what builds fail?
248 2020-05-07T13:33:17  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7522 | Bugfix: Only use git for build info if the repository is actually the right one by luke-jr · Pull Request #7522 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
249 2020-05-07T13:34:37  <luke-jr> hebasto: builds will get the wrong version/hash embedded, from unrelated git repos, and access unrelated git data outside the source code root
250 2020-05-07T13:35:11  <hebasto> luke-jr: gitian?
251 2020-05-07T13:35:19  <luke-jr> no, not gitian
252 2020-05-07T13:35:40  <luke-jr> eg, https://bugs.gentoo.org/476294
253 2020-05-07T13:36:51  <luke-jr> relying on broken behaviour in gitian is not a good idea anyway
254 2020-05-07T13:37:27  <hebasto> IIUC, it is related to package maintaining?
255 2020-05-07T13:38:48  <luke-jr> hebasto: it's related to building non-git source, within a subdirectory of a foreign git repo
256 2020-05-07T13:39:09  <luke-jr> even without the sandboxing Gentoo used to detect it, it would still do the wrong thing
257 2020-05-07T13:39:33  <luke-jr> you were able to remove the build.h hack successfully, *because* you were relying on this incorrect behaviour
258 2020-05-07T13:45:49  *** mol_ has quit IRC
259 2020-05-07T13:47:56  <hebasto> luke-jr: I see now...
260 2020-05-07T13:48:29  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
261 2020-05-07T13:56:31  <luke-jr> hebasto: so in light of that, any ideas for doing this better? ☺
262 2020-05-07T13:59:08  *** mdunnio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
263 2020-05-07T14:00:00  *** brakmic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
264 2020-05-07T14:00:16  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
265 2020-05-07T14:00:17  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #18905: travis: Remove s390x (master...2005-removeTravis) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18905
266 2020-05-07T14:00:18  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
267 2020-05-07T14:01:19  <hebasto> luke-jr: still looking for...
268 2020-05-07T14:08:52  <luke-jr> if only git substitutions let you do a tag name..
269 2020-05-07T14:09:17  <hebasto> BITCOIN_GENBUILD_NO_GIT variable?
270 2020-05-07T14:28:53  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
271 2020-05-07T14:28:54  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/56611b0e2405...f54753293fe7
272 2020-05-07T14:28:54  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8c705ff MarcoFalke: travis: Remove s390x
273 2020-05-07T14:28:55  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f547532 MarcoFalke: Merge #18905: travis: Remove s390x
274 2020-05-07T14:28:56  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
275 2020-05-07T14:29:13  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
276 2020-05-07T14:29:14  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #18905: travis: Remove s390x (master...2005-removeTravis) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18905
277 2020-05-07T14:29:15  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
278 2020-05-07T14:31:25  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
279 2020-05-07T14:43:25  <luke-jr> hebasto: ?
280 2020-05-07T14:45:00  *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
281 2020-05-07T14:45:15  <hebasto> could setting BITCOIN_GENBUILD_NO_GIT=1 prevent from getting version/hash from unrelated git repos?
282 2020-05-07T14:46:53  <luke-jr> yes, but shouldn't be needed
283 2020-05-07T14:49:00  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
284 2020-05-07T14:49:22  <hebasto> it seems the simplest solution along with your commit https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18818/commits/b9054bce073620f9bf8ff99cde23056e93012b53
285 2020-05-07T14:50:15  <hebasto> I mean w.r.t. 0.20 release process
286 2020-05-07T14:51:10  <luke-jr> users needing extra steps to workaround a regression isn't really a solution
287 2020-05-07T14:54:29  *** dfmb_btc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
288 2020-05-07T14:56:00  <hebasto> isn't BITCOIN_GENBUILD_NO_GIT intended for this?
289 2020-05-07T14:56:20  <hebasto> than extra step could be documented
290 2020-05-07T14:56:22  *** dfmb_btc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
291 2020-05-07T14:57:33  <hebasto> besides, building within a subdirectory of a foreign git repo seems not a common case
292 2020-05-07T14:57:48  *** dfmbbtc has quit IRC
293 2020-05-07T14:58:29  <luke-jr> hebasto: no, it isn't.
294 2020-05-07T14:58:43  <luke-jr> just because it's uncommon doesn't mean we should do the wrong thing..
295 2020-05-07T15:00:01  *** bpalmer1 has quit IRC
296 2020-05-07T15:00:51  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
297 2020-05-07T15:03:19  <hebasto> if not this case, what are other usecases for BITCOIN_GENBUILD_NO_GIT ?
298 2020-05-07T15:04:20  *** dfmbbtc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
299 2020-05-07T15:05:30  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
300 2020-05-07T15:05:49  <luke-jr> hebasto: if for some reason the user doesn't want git called at all
301 2020-05-07T15:07:25  *** dfmb_btc has quit IRC
302 2020-05-07T15:11:55  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
303 2020-05-07T15:12:42  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
304 2020-05-07T15:18:48  *** promag has quit IRC
305 2020-05-07T15:25:44  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
306 2020-05-07T15:26:32  *** jarthur has quit IRC
307 2020-05-07T15:26:39  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
308 2020-05-07T15:27:09  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
309 2020-05-07T15:32:39  *** jarthur has quit IRC
310 2020-05-07T15:32:52  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
311 2020-05-07T15:33:18  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312 2020-05-07T15:37:00  *** agrotronic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
313 2020-05-07T15:37:55  *** surja795 has quit IRC
314 2020-05-07T15:42:56  *** kljasdfvv has quit IRC
315 2020-05-07T15:45:26  <achow101> luke-jr: what do you do for bdb for the ppa?
316 2020-05-07T15:49:07  *** Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
317 2020-05-07T15:51:01  <luke-jr> achow101: links to system db4.8
318 2020-05-07T15:52:30  *** kers has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
319 2020-05-07T15:52:41  <luke-jr> which is also a package provided by the ppa
320 2020-05-07T15:54:44  *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
321 2020-05-07T15:57:14  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
322 2020-05-07T15:58:39  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
323 2020-05-07T15:59:28  *** andrewtoth_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
324 2020-05-07T15:59:43  *** andrewtoth has quit IRC
325 2020-05-07T16:00:04  *** andrewtoth_ has quit IRC
326 2020-05-07T16:00:17  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
327 2020-05-07T16:02:34  *** michaelf_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
328 2020-05-07T16:03:14  *** promag has quit IRC
329 2020-05-07T16:04:06  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
330 2020-05-07T16:19:56  *** vasild_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
331 2020-05-07T16:20:33  *** jarthur_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332 2020-05-07T16:20:43  *** agrotronic has quit IRC
333 2020-05-07T16:21:06  *** dfmbbtc has quit IRC
334 2020-05-07T16:21:35  *** dfmbbtc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
335 2020-05-07T16:23:03  *** vasild has quit IRC
336 2020-05-07T16:23:04  *** vasild_ is now known as vasild
337 2020-05-07T16:23:53  *** jarthur has quit IRC
338 2020-05-07T16:24:34  *** dfmb_btc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
339 2020-05-07T16:26:18  *** jarthur_ has quit IRC
340 2020-05-07T16:27:56  *** dfmbbtc has quit IRC
341 2020-05-07T16:38:51  *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
342 2020-05-07T16:40:33  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
343 2020-05-07T16:41:32  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
344 2020-05-07T16:45:07  *** jarthur has quit IRC
345 2020-05-07T16:45:33  *** jb55 has quit IRC
346 2020-05-07T16:50:30  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
347 2020-05-07T16:50:43  *** mol has quit IRC
348 2020-05-07T16:59:18  *** lightlike has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
349 2020-05-07T17:01:20  *** jonatack_ has quit IRC
350 2020-05-07T17:01:39  *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
351 2020-05-07T17:01:46  *** michaelf_ has quit IRC
352 2020-05-07T17:02:23  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
353 2020-05-07T17:04:22  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
354 2020-05-07T17:11:17  *** jarthur_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
355 2020-05-07T17:12:13  *** promag has quit IRC
356 2020-05-07T17:14:52  *** jarthur has quit IRC
357 2020-05-07T17:17:15  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
358 2020-05-07T17:25:12  *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
359 2020-05-07T17:28:25  *** promag has quit IRC
360 2020-05-07T17:28:59  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
361 2020-05-07T17:33:27  *** promag has quit IRC
362 2020-05-07T17:34:26  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
363 2020-05-07T17:34:46  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
364 2020-05-07T17:36:48  *** tryphe_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
365 2020-05-07T17:39:35  *** tryphe has quit IRC
366 2020-05-07T17:44:18  *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
367 2020-05-07T17:48:24  *** tryphe_ is now known as tryphe
368 2020-05-07T17:49:39  *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
369 2020-05-07T17:50:02  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
370 2020-05-07T17:53:32  *** timothy has quit IRC
371 2020-05-07T18:00:01  *** kers has quit IRC
372 2020-05-07T18:01:51  *** promag has quit IRC
373 2020-05-07T18:03:23  *** bitdex has quit IRC
374 2020-05-07T18:11:14  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
375 2020-05-07T18:14:20  *** jarthur_ has quit IRC
376 2020-05-07T18:14:31  *** kvaciral has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
377 2020-05-07T18:16:03  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
378 2020-05-07T18:16:48  *** jarthur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
379 2020-05-07T18:20:03  *** Dimlock has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
380 2020-05-07T18:21:20  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
381 2020-05-07T18:26:06  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
382 2020-05-07T18:32:07  *** promag has quit IRC
383 2020-05-07T18:32:59  *** bitdex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
384 2020-05-07T18:33:27  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
385 2020-05-07T18:35:26  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
386 2020-05-07T18:35:27  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #18907: walletdb: Don't remove database transaction logs and instead error (master...dont-retry-bdbenv) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18907
387 2020-05-07T18:35:27  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
388 2020-05-07T18:40:11  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
389 2020-05-07T18:41:48  *** nothingmuch has quit IRC
390 2020-05-07T18:41:48  *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
391 2020-05-07T18:41:57  *** theStack has quit IRC
392 2020-05-07T18:47:11  *** promag has quit IRC
393 2020-05-07T18:47:25  *** promag_ is now known as promag
394 2020-05-07T18:47:28  <promag> I can't be in the meeting, I think #18578 and #18894 should be for 0.20
395 2020-05-07T18:47:30  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18578 | gui: Fix leak in CoinControlDialog::updateView by promag · Pull Request #18578 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
396 2020-05-07T18:47:31  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18894 | gui: Fix manual coin control with multiple wallets loaded by promag · Pull Request #18894 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
397 2020-05-07T18:47:48  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
398 2020-05-07T18:48:44  *** davterra has quit IRC
399 2020-05-07T18:50:50  *** promag_ has quit IRC
400 2020-05-07T18:52:43  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
401 2020-05-07T18:52:44  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] brakmic opened pull request #18908: util: fix UB error in ArgsManager::ParseParameters (master...fuzz-ub-argsmanager) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18908
402 2020-05-07T18:52:56  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
403 2020-05-07T19:02:06  <fjahr> meeting?
404 2020-05-07T19:02:10  <wumpus> #startmeeting
405 2020-05-07T19:02:10  <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu May  7 19:02:10 2020 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
406 2020-05-07T19:02:10  <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
407 2020-05-07T19:02:14  <jonasschnelli> hi
408 2020-05-07T19:02:18  <meshcollider> hi
409 2020-05-07T19:02:19  <fjahr> hi
410 2020-05-07T19:02:27  <achow101> hi
411 2020-05-07T19:02:30  <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator aj Chris_Stewart_5 dongcarl gwillen jamesob ken281221 ryanofsky gleb moneyball kvaciral ariard digi_james amiti fjahr
412 2020-05-07T19:02:31  <sipsorcery> hi
413 2020-05-07T19:02:31  <elichai2> hi
414 2020-05-07T19:02:31  <wumpus> jeremyrubin lightlike emilengler jonatack hebasto jb55
415 2020-05-07T19:02:33  <gleb> hi
416 2020-05-07T19:02:41  <ariard> hi
417 2020-05-07T19:02:43  <jonatack> hi
418 2020-05-07T19:02:48  <sipa> hi
419 2020-05-07T19:02:56  <jb55> hi
420 2020-05-07T19:03:02  <jnewbery> hi
421 2020-05-07T19:03:16  <wumpus> one proposed topic (by jnewbery): removing valgrind from travis PR builds   but that was already done
422 2020-05-07T19:03:36  <gleb> I have something to bring up, unless we're still to busy with 0.20...
423 2020-05-07T19:03:42  <meshcollider> There was another by Andrew re. wallet storage
424 2020-05-07T19:03:58  <jnewbery> I have a little bit to add to the valgrind topic, just for context
425 2020-05-07T19:04:20  <wumpus> gleb: if you have any topics to propose please do
426 2020-05-07T19:04:36  <wumpus> we're not too busy with 0.20, 0.20 is going pretty slow at the moment
427 2020-05-07T19:05:04  <gleb> I want to ask about adding extra threads in light of my work in #18421
428 2020-05-07T19:05:05  <wumpus> most focus is on 0.21/master
429 2020-05-07T19:05:06  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18421 | Periodically update DNS caches for better privacy of non-reachable nodes by naumenkogs · Pull Request #18421 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
430 2020-05-07T19:05:22  <wumpus> ok
431 2020-05-07T19:05:50  <wumpus> we'll come to those, let's start with high prio as usual
432 2020-05-07T19:05:51  <jkczyz> hi
433 2020-05-07T19:06:03  <wumpus> #topic High priority for review
434 2020-05-07T19:06:18  <achow101> meshcollider: I think that topic is for tomorrow's wallet meeting
435 2020-05-07T19:06:33  <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8   4 blockers, 1 bugfix, 5 chasing concept ACK
436 2020-05-07T19:06:37  <jnewbery> I'd like to add #18877 please
437 2020-05-07T19:06:39  <meshcollider> achow101: ok sure :)
438 2020-05-07T19:06:40  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18877 | Serve cfcheckpt requests by jnewbery · Pull Request #18877 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
439 2020-05-07T19:07:30  <wumpus> jnewbery: added
440 2020-05-07T19:07:37  <wumpus> (to blockers, I suppose?)
441 2020-05-07T19:07:42  <jnewbery> yes
442 2020-05-07T19:07:52  <jnewbery> blocking the rest of BIP 157 implementation
443 2020-05-07T19:07:53  <jnewbery> thanks!
444 2020-05-07T19:08:03  <lightlike> #17037, which is on "chasing concept ACKs", was closed yesterday
445 2020-05-07T19:08:05  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17037 | Testschains: Many regtests with different genesis and default datadir by jtimon · Pull Request #17037 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
446 2020-05-07T19:08:50  <wumpus> lightlike: thanks, removed
447 2020-05-07T19:09:42  <wumpus> anything else to change/add/remove?
448 2020-05-07T19:10:21  <jonatack> nice to see the blockers moving forward lately
449 2020-05-07T19:10:32  <wumpus> yes, two have been merged this week IIRC
450 2020-05-07T19:11:18  <wumpus> looks like #17994 is kind of close to merge too
451 2020-05-07T19:11:21  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17994 | validation: flush undo files after last block write by kallewoof · Pull Request #17994 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
452 2020-05-07T19:11:30  *** bitdex has quit IRC
453 2020-05-07T19:11:43  <wumpus> and #16946
454 2020-05-07T19:11:46  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16946 | wallet: include a checksum of encrypted private keys by achow101 · Pull Request #16946 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
455 2020-05-07T19:12:29  <wumpus> #topic Adding another scheduler thread (gleb)
456 2020-05-07T19:12:37  <gleb> I implemented #18421 which helps non-reachable nodes to be less visible to the upstream infrastructure (DNS servers, ASNs).
457 2020-05-07T19:12:37  <gleb> The idea is to query DNS periodically by already-known reachable nodes, to update the caches, so that non-reachable nodes are served from caches.
458 2020-05-07T19:12:39  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18421 | Periodically update DNS caches for better privacy of non-reachable nodes by naumenkogs · Pull Request #18421 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
459 2020-05-07T19:12:46  <gleb> It requires reachable nodes execute this query periodically, and potentially that DNS request might take several minutes. AFAIK, it is a part of the low-level stack, and can’t be easily solved on application level. Because of this, we can’t safely integrate this feature into existing threads: all of them sort of assume nothing would block them
460 2020-05-07T19:12:46  <gleb> for so long.
461 2020-05-07T19:13:10  <gleb> So I was wondering what should be a good solution here? Give up on the idea because it’s not worth adding a new thread? Or maybe add a new thread keeping in mind it will be useful in future for similar (non-restricted) tasks? Or maybe modify scheduler to limit max exec time (not sure how to do that in practice…)
462 2020-05-07T19:13:19  <wumpus> can't this be done asynchronously?
463 2020-05-07T19:13:37  <wumpus> it seems the thread would spend most of its time waiting for the network anyhow
464 2020-05-07T19:13:39  *** Talkless has quit IRC
465 2020-05-07T19:14:08  <gleb> Yeah, it hangs on the network call.
466 2020-05-07T19:14:10  <wumpus> IIRC libevent has some async DNS functionality
467 2020-05-07T19:14:49  <luke-jr> oops, sorry I'm late
468 2020-05-07T19:15:05  <gleb> That might help actually! Will investigate this then. Thank you wumpus. Wasn't sure which tools we have available.
469 2020-05-07T19:15:28  <wumpus> in any case, on 32-bit systems we don't want to add another thread, on 64 bit systems it doesn't matter
470 2020-05-07T19:16:01  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
471 2020-05-07T19:16:02  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #18909: [0.20] Fix release tarball (0.20...fix_release_tarball-0.20) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18909
472 2020-05-07T19:16:03  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
473 2020-05-07T19:16:05  <gleb> What's the reason behind not adding it on 32-bit?
474 2020-05-07T19:16:07  <wumpus> the 2MB/4MB of virtual memory for the stack that is only mapped when it is used is only a problem on 32 bit
475 2020-05-07T19:16:20  <wumpus> virtual memory space
476 2020-05-07T19:16:24  <gleb> Oh, i see.
477 2020-05-07T19:16:33  <wumpus> it's really tight on 32 bit already
478 2020-05-07T19:16:42  *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
479 2020-05-07T19:16:48  <gleb> Alright, I opened an issue for broader thread discussion is #18488, if anyone is interested. Otherwise, done here, will explore libevent.
480 2020-05-07T19:16:49  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18488 | Support for non-immediate periodic tasks with variable runtime · Issue #18488 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
481 2020-05-07T19:17:05  <wumpus> in any case if you can avoid adding a thread that'd be good
482 2020-05-07T19:19:48  <ariard> do people have a bit of time to talk about bip157 or more broadly light clients ?
483 2020-05-07T19:19:49  <wumpus> #topic Removing valgrind from travis (jnewbery)
484 2020-05-07T19:20:05  <jnewbery> thanks wumpus
485 2020-05-07T19:20:24  <jnewbery> like you say, this was mostly resolved this morning, but I thought I'd give some more context in general
486 2020-05-07T19:20:30  <jnewbery> In December, we added a travis job to run all the functional test in valgrind for every PR.
487 2020-05-07T19:20:36  <jnewbery> That meant that ci runs were taking around 3 hours (and much longer in some cases due to backlog).
488 2020-05-07T19:20:40  <jnewbery> Thankfully, we're not doing that since this morning :)
489 2020-05-07T19:20:41  <wumpus> ariard: probably there's some time left, though it's preferred if you propose topics at the beginning of the meeting or between meetings with #proposedmeetingtopic
490 2020-05-07T19:20:46  <jnewbery> We are, however, still running ASan/LSan and UBSan jobs, which take about an hour.
491 2020-05-07T19:20:55  <jnewbery> I think that's too long for a PR ci job. Preferably travis runs should return in a few minutes to allow fast iteration on PRs. Longer running jobs can be done on a nightly travis build on master.
492 2020-05-07T19:21:05  <jnewbery> I did a bunch of work in 2017/18 to make ci jobs faster, so I was surprised to see how much slower they've become since then.
493 2020-05-07T19:21:12  <ariard> wumpus: ah yes I proposed yesterday but I should have used #proposedmeetingtopic right
494 2020-05-07T19:21:53  <gleb> Nice to hear travis no longer takes hours because of valgrind, it was painful last time I rebased my things at a busy day. Thanks jnewbery
495 2020-05-07T19:21:55  <wumpus> as I said in the PR I think it'd still make sense to run the unit tests and one functional test (spinning up and down bitcoind) in travis to test the init/shutdown sequence
496 2020-05-07T19:21:59  <elichai2> I have a suggestion, but I'm not sure how easy to implement is that
497 2020-05-07T19:22:02  <wumpus> but running it on everythign was always overkill
498 2020-05-07T19:22:02  <jnewbery> Really, just a plea to keep travis times down on PR jobs. It makes developers' lives much pleasanter!
499 2020-05-07T19:22:17  <wumpus> I agree, long turnaround times for tests are bad for a project
500 2020-05-07T19:22:27  <elichai2> we can have a "fast" CI on PRs and a longer one after it was accepted to merge, so before the actual merge it will run in another CI
501 2020-05-07T19:22:31  <wumpus> please use testing time and resources efficiently
502 2020-05-07T19:22:43  <luke-jr> elichai2: does Travis support that?
503 2020-05-07T19:22:51  <wumpus> don't do silly or overkill things
504 2020-05-07T19:23:07  <sipa> i think that would introduce way more process overhead for maintainers
505 2020-05-07T19:23:08  <jonasschnelli> also... don't forget that bitcoinbuilds.org runs usually faster but without the ASAN/TSAN and fuzzers
506 2020-05-07T19:23:23  <elichai2> luke-jr: good question, sadly I doubt it supports it natively . I know rust-lang is doing it via a bot.
507 2020-05-07T19:23:23  <jonasschnelli> (for a quick feedback on a PR)
508 2020-05-07T19:23:26  <wumpus> jonasschnelli: hah
509 2020-05-07T19:23:41  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: can we get that to report to GitHub?
510 2020-05-07T19:23:50  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: it is
511 2020-05-07T19:23:57  <jnewbery> I think it probably does support it. You just set it up to run on every push to master
512 2020-05-07T19:23:59  * luke-jr didn't notice O.o
513 2020-05-07T19:24:08  <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/jonasschnelli/bitcoin-core-ci
514 2020-05-07T19:24:19  <luke-jr> jnewbery: well, it'd be nice to get them aall runn BEFORE merge
515 2020-05-07T19:24:20  <jonatack> jonasschnelli: yes, i always look at bitcoinbuilds for first feedback, then much later, travis on my own github branch and on bitcoin/bitcoin
516 2020-05-07T19:24:22  <jnewbery> but like sipa says, anything that causes things to not get caught pre-merge transfers work to the maintainers
517 2020-05-07T19:24:24  <elichai2> sipa: well we could delegate it to a bot, but it will require implementing and a big change on how merges happen(more uses of bots) which probably not everyone will like
518 2020-05-07T19:24:31  <jonatack> jonasschnelli: i'm grateful for bitcoinbuilds
519 2020-05-07T19:24:43  <elichai2> oh sipa was talking about nightly builds
520 2020-05-07T19:24:50  <luke-jr> I only see AppVeyor and Travis on the PR I just made..
521 2020-05-07T19:24:53  <sipa> we're talking about different things
522 2020-05-07T19:25:05  <sipa> i'm totally in favor of doing more work on master merges than on PRs
523 2020-05-07T19:25:26  <sipa> things can always be reverted if there is an unexpected problem soon after merging
524 2020-05-07T19:26:17  <elichai2> sipa: and then maintainers need to check the result on the nightly CI and revert if something broke it?
525 2020-05-07T19:26:17  <wumpus> rather not, of  course, but the full valgrind run wasn't that effective in catching things anyway
526 2020-05-07T19:26:19  <sipa> i don't think adding separate CI between PRs before and after they're "accepted" is a good idea as it just pushes more work to maintainers (arguably a more scarce resource than CI infrastructure...)
527 2020-05-07T19:26:41  <luke-jr> does valgrind do anything the *Sans don't?
528 2020-05-07T19:26:57  <sipa> luke-jr: it can test actual production binaries
529 2020-05-07T19:26:58  <elichai2> luke-jr: I think gmaxwell show me an example once but I don't remember
530 2020-05-07T19:27:10  <luke-jr> sipa: oh, true
531 2020-05-07T19:27:23  <sipa> the sans all require different builds that invasively change the output
532 2020-05-07T19:27:28  <luke-jr> well, Valgrind does it by runtime patching of stuff… not sure that's much different?
533 2020-05-07T19:27:46  <luke-jr> and emulation IIRC
534 2020-05-07T19:27:47  <sipa> (they can also test things that valgrind can't, because they have knowledge of the source code)
535 2020-05-07T19:27:53  <wumpus> yes
536 2020-05-07T19:27:54  <luke-jr> (I've seen Valgrind emulate an instruction *wrong* before)
537 2020-05-07T19:28:05  <sipa> luke-jr: sure
538 2020-05-07T19:28:18  <wumpus> both approaches have their advantages and disadvantages I think that's clear
539 2020-05-07T19:28:37  <sipa> but it is certainly possible that a bug in the source code exists that persists into production binaries (and can be caught by valgrind), but is compiled out in sanitizer builds
540 2020-05-07T19:29:01  <wumpus> true
541 2020-05-07T19:29:12  <sipa> because it's very optimizer dependent for example, and sanitizer builds prevent some optimizations (or at least interfere with it significantly)
542 2020-05-07T19:29:14  <wumpus> so yes it's good to test master under valgrind as well
543 2020-05-07T19:29:30  <wumpus> once in a while at least
544 2020-05-07T19:29:41  <elichai2> can the opposite also be true? (ie overflow that is optimized out because the read was never used etc)
545 2020-05-07T19:29:50  <sipa> sure
546 2020-05-07T19:29:56  <sipa> that's what sanitizers are for
547 2020-05-07T19:30:10  <sipa> they primarily test for discoverable bugs in the source code
548 2020-05-07T19:31:02  <wumpus> yes good point
549 2020-05-07T19:31:35  <elichai2> FWIW I think I have a mainnet node lying around running under valgrind constantly (although since covid I didn't check it)
550 2020-05-07T19:32:18  <jonasschnelli> elichai2: social node distancing
551 2020-05-07T19:32:28  <wumpus> hehe
552 2020-05-07T19:32:34  <luke-jr> aka Tor?
553 2020-05-07T19:32:36  <elichai2> yeah lol, I don't want it to get infected with some UB :P
554 2020-05-07T19:33:16  *** bitdex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
555 2020-05-07T19:33:39  <wumpus> #topic bip157 and light clients (ariard)
556 2020-05-07T19:33:41  <jonatack> the full valgrind run brought to light some issues for me recently that lead to more robust code... #18681 was an example
557 2020-05-07T19:33:43  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18681 | donotmerge: build: Enable thread-local with glibc compat by laanwj · Pull Request #18681 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
558 2020-05-07T19:34:03  <jonatack> er, #18691
559 2020-05-07T19:34:06  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18691 | test: add wait_for_cookie_credentials() to framework for rpcwait tests by jonatack · Pull Request #18691 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
560 2020-05-07T19:34:20  <ariard> Yes so about light client I had really interesting discussion with people
561 2020-05-07T19:34:41  <ariard> and the constructive outcome of this was it would be better to have a more defined policy
562 2020-05-07T19:35:06  <ariard> when we now a solution isn't perfect, but at same time not restrain the project to make steps forward
563 2020-05-07T19:35:24  <ariard> what I was worry about, is by supporting bip157 in core, all people building such nice LN wallets
564 2020-05-07T19:35:29  <wumpus> jonatack: hehe the cookie file race was detected just because valgrind makes things slow :)
565 2020-05-07T19:35:34  <ariard> consider the validation backend as a solved issue
566 2020-05-07T19:35:40  <luke-jr> BIP157 isn't just "not perfect", it's harmful/backward
567 2020-05-07T19:35:41  <jonatack> yep :p
568 2020-05-07T19:35:43  *** theStack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
569 2020-05-07T19:36:10  <ariard> instead of having well-awareness, they are free-riding on the p2p network for now
570 2020-05-07T19:38:09  <jonasschnelli> I think BIP157 support in core is a conceptual no brainer. The question is maybe more, if it should be open to non-whitelisted peers (random peers).
571 2020-05-07T19:38:10  <ariard> and having a better idea for which bip157 support was aimed, people using their mobile wallets with their full-nodes
572 2020-05-07T19:38:25  <ariard> or servicing random clients in the wild, which maybe a bit insecure
573 2020-05-07T19:39:02  <sipa> there is nothing insecure about it; it's just a bad idea for them to trust random peers
574 2020-05-07T19:39:07  <wumpus> the same issue as with the bloom filters again
575 2020-05-07T19:39:09  <sipa> (but that's still better than BIP37...)
576 2020-05-07T19:39:15  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: what is the use case for it?
577 2020-05-07T19:39:30  <wumpus> (though at least this doesn't have as much DoS potential)
578 2020-05-07T19:39:35  <sipa> wumpus: i don't think so;
579 2020-05-07T19:39:37  <sipa> exactly
580 2020-05-07T19:39:42  <luke-jr> bloom filters are strictly better I think
581 2020-05-07T19:39:49  <sipa> BIP157 support is very cheap for the server
582 2020-05-07T19:39:51  <sipa> luke-jr: how so?
583 2020-05-07T19:39:56  <wumpus> it's a kind of 'altruism' that might not be warranted
584 2020-05-07T19:40:00  <luke-jr> sipa: lower overhead
585 2020-05-07T19:40:09  <sipa> luke-jr: for whom?
586 2020-05-07T19:40:09  <ariard> on the security aspect, supporting bip157 in core encourage people to connect directly to random peers
587 2020-05-07T19:40:10  <wumpus> luke-jr: wait, how?
588 2020-05-07T19:40:16  <luke-jr> sipa: for everyone
589 2020-05-07T19:40:19  <sipa> luke-jr: wut
590 2020-05-07T19:40:27  <ariard> and almost all bip157 clietns, dont't have strong addr management countermeasures
591 2020-05-07T19:40:40  <wumpus> ariard: but that's *their* problem
592 2020-05-07T19:40:40  <sipa> BIP157 is certainly harder on clients
593 2020-05-07T19:40:41  <ariard> *peer management protection
594 2020-05-07T19:40:43  <luke-jr> take the reasonable use case of a user using a light wallet with their own full node
595 2020-05-07T19:40:52  <wumpus> we care about the server side
596 2020-05-07T19:40:53  <luke-jr> bloom does this fine, with very little overhead
597 2020-05-07T19:40:58  <ariard> wumpus: but do you want to make it easy for people to build insecure solutions?
598 2020-05-07T19:40:59  <luke-jr> you scan the blockchain once on the server side
599 2020-05-07T19:41:08  <sipa> luke-jr: but you need to do it once per client
600 2020-05-07T19:41:13  <sipa> with BIP157 you do it once
601 2020-05-07T19:41:19  <luke-jr> sipa: how many people have multiple clients?
602 2020-05-07T19:41:35  <luke-jr> and even a few clients is still relatively low total overhead there
603 2020-05-07T19:41:38  <wumpus> scanning on the server side was always the problem
604 2020-05-07T19:41:48  <luke-jr> wumpus: but that's exactly the ideal in this case
605 2020-05-07T19:41:55  <luke-jr> you don't want to burden your phone/battery
606 2020-05-07T19:41:56  <wumpus> if you allow random people on the internet to offload computation to you, you're infinitely generous
607 2020-05-07T19:42:07  <luke-jr> you don't. this isn't for random people, it's for trusted peers…
608 2020-05-07T19:42:12  <luke-jr> your own wallets
609 2020-05-07T19:42:21  <ariard> scanning on the server side isn't great, even worst with LN clients verifying channel opening
610 2020-05-07T19:42:22  <wumpus> for whitelisted peers it's okay
611 2020-05-07T19:42:25  <wumpus> sure
612 2020-05-07T19:42:26  <luke-jr> random people using it is harmful, and the very reason to avoid merging it
613 2020-05-07T19:42:27  *** owowo has quit IRC
614 2020-05-07T19:42:54  <luke-jr> ariard: server side typically has ~unlimited power
615 2020-05-07T19:42:56  <sipa> luke-jr: i agree it's a bad idea; i'm not sure it is harmful
616 2020-05-07T19:42:59  <luke-jr> client has a battery to worry about
617 2020-05-07T19:43:20  <luke-jr> sipa: it encourages light wallets to use foreign nodes
618 2020-05-07T19:43:22  <sipa> and it would be far less of a bad idea if it was softforked in, so the filters are verifiable
619 2020-05-07T19:43:25  <ariard> maybe it should be part of the release node, to advice whitelisting
620 2020-05-07T19:43:29  <ariard> *notes
621 2020-05-07T19:43:36  <sipa> but that's not going to happen any time soon
622 2020-05-07T19:43:38  <luke-jr> sipa: that doesn't fix the problem of people not usign their own node
623 2020-05-07T19:43:46  <jnewbery> if it's your own server, you don't need an spv protocol. Just upload your xpub
624 2020-05-07T19:43:49  <sipa> luke-jr: not everyone uses their own full node, period
625 2020-05-07T19:43:52  <theStack> so the rationale here from luke-jr is that in the end every person should have its own full node?
626 2020-05-07T19:43:56  <sipa> luke-jr: there are good and bad ways to deal with it
627 2020-05-07T19:43:57  <ariard> luke-jr: yes but rescannning code of core isn't that performant, no parallelization, a lot of lock tacking
628 2020-05-07T19:44:01  <luke-jr> jnewbery: yes, that direction seems a lot better IMO
629 2020-05-07T19:44:12  <jonasschnelli> I think ariard concern is hypothetical but IMO boils down on limiting bandwidth,... you can write a client today that downloads all blocks over and over again.
630 2020-05-07T19:44:14  <jnewbery> good, so your use case is solved
631 2020-05-07T19:44:35  <luke-jr> jnewbery: ⁇
632 2020-05-07T19:44:49  <ariard> jonasschenelli: are you thinking about intentional DoS ?
633 2020-05-07T19:44:56  <luke-jr> my point is that there is no use case for neutrino
634 2020-05-07T19:44:59  <jnewbery> not everyone wants to use bitcoin in the same way as you, and that's ok
635 2020-05-07T19:45:05  <jonasschnelli> ariard: both... intentional or just because of the use cases
636 2020-05-07T19:45:13  <luke-jr> Bitcoin's security model depends on at least most people using their own full ndoe
637 2020-05-07T19:45:39  <luke-jr> it's okay if there are exceptions, but there's no reason to cater to them, especially when the network's security is already at high risk
638 2020-05-07T19:45:40  <sipa> luke-jr: i strongly disagree; it depends on enough people independently verifying the blockchain
639 2020-05-07T19:45:43  <jonasschnelli> if there is the concern that there are too many BIP157 clients,... one might want to limit the bandwidth
640 2020-05-07T19:45:44  <ariard> jonasschenelli: okay my point was really about LN clients, for which bip157 was designed, not an application which needs to download block over and over
641 2020-05-07T19:45:51  <luke-jr> sipa: enough people = most
642 2020-05-07T19:46:01  <sipa> luke-jr: i strongly disagree
643 2020-05-07T19:46:09  <luke-jr> sipa: a minority verifying is useless if the majority imposes the invalid chain economically
644 2020-05-07T19:46:17  <jonasschnelli> ariard: Same for any SPV client,... right?
645 2020-05-07T19:46:34  *** michaelf_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
646 2020-05-07T19:46:35  <ariard> jonasschenlli: yes my concern isn't bip157 specific, I do think that's the best option available today
647 2020-05-07T19:46:46  <luke-jr> stratum > bloom > bip157
648 2020-05-07T19:46:59  <luke-jr> for private/trusted usage
649 2020-05-07T19:47:08  <luke-jr> which is the only usage we should support IMO
650 2020-05-07T19:47:11  <ariard> it's more how do you scale any light client protocol to avoid building centralized chain access services when they hit a scaling roof
651 2020-05-07T19:47:45  <gleb> luke-jr: I assume you meant electrum?
652 2020-05-07T19:47:48  <luke-jr> ariard: there's no difference
653 2020-05-07T19:47:50  <sipa> luke-jr: bip157 has other advantages over bloom filters, such as being able to connect to two nodes and comparing the filters, permitting a "1 of 2 nodes is trusted" security model
654 2020-05-07T19:47:55  <luke-jr> gleb: Stratum is the protocol Electrum uses, yes
655 2020-05-07T19:47:58  *** tryphe_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
656 2020-05-07T19:48:10  <jonasschnelli> ariard: I would expect that wallet providers ship a recent pack of filters with the ap
657 2020-05-07T19:48:11  <ariard> overall, bip157 is good for experimentation, while keeping awareness there is still unsolved issues on security and scalability
658 2020-05-07T19:48:13  <luke-jr> sipa: but improving security of light wallets is a net loss of security for the network
659 2020-05-07T19:48:24  <luke-jr> sipa: because now fewer people will use a full node of their own
660 2020-05-07T19:48:30  <sipa> luke-jr: 99.99% of users don't even have SPV level verification
661 2020-05-07T19:48:40  <jonasschnelli> ariard: the beauty is also that filters can be retrieved from centralized sources and CDNs
662 2020-05-07T19:48:46  <luke-jr> sipa: if 99.99% don't have their own full node, Bitcoin has failed
663 2020-05-07T19:48:52  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
664 2020-05-07T19:48:53  *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
665 2020-05-07T19:49:02  <jonatack> fwiw, i'm running a bip157 node on mainnet with -peercfilters=1 -blockfilterindex=1 to test for the first time, and /blockfilter/basic is 4 GB
666 2020-05-07T19:49:06  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
667 2020-05-07T19:49:10  <ariard> jonasschnelli: yes but what's your trust model with such centralized sources and CDNS
668 2020-05-07T19:49:40  <jonasschnelli> ariard: IMO the goal for compact block filters is to get a block commitment at some point
669 2020-05-07T19:49:42  <ariard> you can dissociate getting the filters from such CDN and getting filters-headers/headers from the p2p network
670 2020-05-07T19:50:08  <jonasschnelli> ariard: also, one can crosscheck the CDN filters against some p2p loaded bip157 filters
671 2020-05-07T19:50:13  <ariard> jonasschenlli: it would simplify SPV logic and improve their security but even committed you still need to download them
672 2020-05-07T19:50:20  <sipa> luke-jr: Ok.
673 2020-05-07T19:50:37  <jonasschnelli> ariard: what is the worry with downloading them?
674 2020-05-07T19:50:39  <sipa> i don't think this discussion will lead anywhere
675 2020-05-07T19:50:54  *** tryphe has quit IRC
676 2020-05-07T19:50:57  <jonasschnelli> better continue the ML discussion I think
677 2020-05-07T19:50:58  <ariard> jonasschnelli: bandwidth cost if you download them directly from the p2p network
678 2020-05-07T19:51:11  <jonasschnelli> (happy to continue outside of this meeting)
679 2020-05-07T19:51:37  <ariard> jonasschnelli: but yes I agree you can crosscheck the CDN filters against filter-headers provided from the p2p network
680 2020-05-07T19:51:50  <kanzure> is the contention that light clients should be doing IBD and validation?
681 2020-05-07T19:52:09  <jonasschnelli> heh
682 2020-05-07T19:52:40  <sipa> kanzure: i think luke-jr is contending that light clients shouldn't exist, and all wallets should be either a full node, or connected to the user's own trusted full node
683 2020-05-07T19:52:41  <ariard> kanzure: no my concern is assuming you have the bip157 light client paradigm, how do you make it scale ecosystem-wise
684 2020-05-07T19:52:47  <sipa> at least for a majority of users
685 2020-05-07T19:52:50  <kanzure> next question: how many times should someone have to do IBD? i think the correct answer should be only once ever....
686 2020-05-07T19:53:12  <kanzure> [if they can keep integrity of their download and state]
687 2020-05-07T19:53:14  <sipa> ariard: i don't understand how your concern is any different from nodes serving blocks *at all*
688 2020-05-07T19:53:32  <jonasschnelli> kanzure: next question: how many random peers have I misused by testing mainnet IBD
689 2020-05-07T19:53:44  <kanzure> these and other disturbing questions.
690 2020-05-07T19:54:01  <luke-jr> sipa: ideally
691 2020-05-07T19:54:20  <luke-jr> at least, that as long as the situation is not good, anything that makes light clients better, is harmful to Bitcoin, and shouldn't be merged
692 2020-05-07T19:54:48  <luke-jr> because that can only result in fewer people using a full node
693 2020-05-07T19:55:00  <ariard> sipa: it's another issue but yes also an unsolved problem, my assumption was you may have a desquilibritate number of light clients compare to full-nodes
694 2020-05-07T19:55:06  <ariard> and maybe faster than expected
695 2020-05-07T19:55:13  <sipa> luke-jr: my belief is that bitcoin offers a choice for financial autonomy, and choice is a good thing - not everyone will choose to make maximal use of that, but everyone who wants to should be able to
696 2020-05-07T19:55:16  <jonasschnelli> Yes. The only difference to blocks serving (which seems to cause much more traffic) is that blocks served to bip157 are pure consumption while blocks served to full nodes should - ideally - be served to other peers.
697 2020-05-07T19:55:39  <luke-jr> sipa: you already have that choice with fiat: you can print monopoly money, and refuse to honour USD
698 2020-05-07T19:55:41  <ariard> jonasschelli: yes you may have assume some reciprocity between full-nodes peers
699 2020-05-07T19:55:44  <jnewbery> ariard: imposing upload costs on peers is something that is caused by any activity on the p2p network. It doesn't make much sense to distinguish between application data types because there will always be some other data you can download. Peer upload resource cost can really only be done on the net layer by deprioritizing nodes that are taking up resource.
700 2020-05-07T19:55:49  <ariard> at least I see incentives far more aligned
701 2020-05-07T19:56:07  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
702 2020-05-07T19:56:08  <sipa> luke-jr: this is not productive
703 2020-05-07T19:56:08  <jonasschnelli> agree with jnewbery
704 2020-05-07T19:56:23  <wumpus> 4 minutes to go
705 2020-05-07T19:56:41  <luke-jr> sipa: it's the same thing; if most people just trust miners, then the people who don't trust miners will simply get cut off when miners do something they don't like; the losers are the full nodes
706 2020-05-07T19:57:47  <luke-jr> light clients are a hardfork to "no rules at all"
707 2020-05-07T19:58:33  <sipa> perhaps - but far less easily than having money on coinbase is a hardfork to "whatever monetary policy coinbase likes"
708 2020-05-07T19:58:36  <ariard> jnewbery: but ideally you do want to increase security by increasing connectivity, like I prefer to offer my bandwidth to other full-nodes for censorship-resistance?
709 2020-05-07T19:58:55  <jnewbery> then don't enable serving cfilters :)
710 2020-05-07T19:58:56  <luke-jr> sipa: it's the same, but miner(s) instead of coinbase
711 2020-05-07T19:59:24  *** michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712 2020-05-07T19:59:36  <jonasschnelli> ariard: there is no way you know if the blocks you serve are for other full nodes
713 2020-05-07T19:59:40  <ariard> jnewbery: sorry I don't get you on depriorirtizing nodes that are taking up resources, can you precise?
714 2020-05-07T19:59:59  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: technically true, but what non-full nodes download full blocks these days?
715 2020-05-07T20:00:03  <jnewbery> ariard: here's another example for you. If a peer asks for the same block twice, should you serve it again? You're clearly not helping block propagation
716 2020-05-07T20:00:22  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: wasabi did for a while (full block SPV)
717 2020-05-07T20:00:23  <jnewbery> if your answer is 'no', then you need to keep internal book-keeping of which blocks you've served to whom
718 2020-05-07T20:00:26  <jonasschnelli> (maybe still does)
719 2020-05-07T20:00:27  <sipa> ariard: if a node asks too much of your resources (memory, cpu, bandwidth, i/o), deprioritize serving their incoming requests
720 2020-05-07T20:00:36  <jnewbery> if your answer is 'yes', then how is it any different from serving a cfilter?
721 2020-05-07T20:00:52  <ariard> jnewbery: maybe that's a fault-tolerance case and it makes sense to serve it again
722 2020-05-07T20:01:08  *** promag_ has quit IRC
723 2020-05-07T20:01:24  *** michaelf_ has quit IRC
724 2020-05-07T20:01:39  <ariard> sipa: yes but we don't do this AFAIK? and if everyone start to deprioritizie servicing bip157 clients you do have an issue
725 2020-05-07T20:01:48  <sipa> ariard: no, but we absolutely should
726 2020-05-07T20:02:09  <jnewbery> sipa: +1
727 2020-05-07T20:02:15  <sipa> (not BIP157 specifically, just in general - if you ask too much of us and we get overloaded, deprioritize)
728 2020-05-07T20:02:29  * luke-jr still hasn't heard a use case for merging BIP157 at all, aside from harming Bitcoin
729 2020-05-07T20:02:46  <jonatack> question: if bip157 is opt-in, and a full node can soon export a descriptor wallet xpub, why would a full node turn on serving cfilters?
730 2020-05-07T20:03:17  <wumpus> this should be the end of the meeting
731 2020-05-07T20:03:26  <sipa> i don't see what exporting and xpub has to do with that
732 2020-05-07T20:03:31  <wumpus> maybe we should continue next week
733 2020-05-07T20:03:34  * luke-jr either
734 2020-05-07T20:03:43  <ariard> jonasschnelli: yes you may not know what kind of clients you're servicing, but with all this stuff we make assumptions of what kind of clients
735 2020-05-07T20:03:50  <ariard> are effectively deployed ?
736 2020-05-07T20:04:06  <ariard> wumpus: yes we can end, but thanks for all your points it's really interesting
737 2020-05-07T20:04:44  <wumpus> #endmeeting
738 2020-05-07T20:04:44  <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu May  7 20:04:44 2020 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
739 2020-05-07T20:04:44  <lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-05-07-19.02.html
740 2020-05-07T20:04:44  <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-05-07-19.02.txt
741 2020-05-07T20:04:44  <lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-05-07-19.02.log.html
742 2020-05-07T20:04:48  <luke-jr> maybe we can get NicolasDorier to join next week <.<
743 2020-05-07T20:05:23  <luke-jr> although it might be the middle of the night there
744 2020-05-07T20:05:37  <sipa> this discussion should really be on the ML
745 2020-05-07T20:07:49  <luke-jr> it is, I need to read recent replies
746 2020-05-07T20:08:49  <ariard> luke-jr: I've read your point on supermajority of the economy, but isn't this assuming you can see the economic traffic?
747 2020-05-07T20:09:16  <ariard> and with LN you may have not see the real payment traffic because channel
748 2020-05-07T20:09:41  <luke-jr> ariard: measuring it accurately would require that, but not understanding what we depend on
749 2020-05-07T20:09:58  <luke-jr> even today, we can't measure it accurately, but we can see it's not in a good situation
750 2020-05-07T20:14:51  <ariard> luke-jr: and what's your opinon on fallback-full-node in case of fork detection ? Like you can switch to an authoritative blockchain view in case of anomalies
751 2020-05-07T20:15:08  <ariard> but at least you don't have to download all blocks in regular time
752 2020-05-07T20:15:19  *** sipa has left #bitcoin-core-dev
753 2020-05-07T20:15:48  <luke-jr> ariard: so every stale block, you IBD⁇
754 2020-05-07T20:16:07  *** mdunnio_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
755 2020-05-07T20:17:39  <luke-jr> ariard: if you have the capability to run a full node all the time (necessary for any similar ideas), why wouldn't you just run it regularly anyway?
756 2020-05-07T20:18:28  *** tryphe_ is now known as tryphe
757 2020-05-07T20:18:38  *** mdunnio has quit IRC
758 2020-05-07T20:18:42  <theStack> luke-jr: would you mind shortly explaining how your full node count script works? what are the criteria to identify a peer as "full node"?
759 2020-05-07T20:22:33  <ariard> luke-jr: no after seeing like 6-blocks fork, you do connect to a full-node, and rescan filters from fork branch common ancestor until the fallback node tip
760 2020-05-07T20:22:49  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
761 2020-05-07T20:23:19  <ariard> you may not have the capability to run a full-node, but you may know someone around you that you can point your light client to in case of anomalies
762 2020-05-07T20:23:57  <ariard> also maybe you can do something like assumeutxo, in case of anomalies download a utxo set and IBD from then?
763 2020-05-07T20:25:25  <luke-jr> ariard: you can't connect to your full node unless you run one. connecting to *a* full node is what light clients normally do..
764 2020-05-07T20:25:33  <luke-jr> ariard: filters don't prove anything
765 2020-05-07T20:25:57  <luke-jr> if you're okay trusting someone around you, you can do that *normally*
766 2020-05-07T20:26:08  <luke-jr> assumeutxo does not reduce sync time
767 2020-05-07T20:26:31  <luke-jr> assumeutxo is only acceptable provided the full IBD from zero is performed still
768 2020-05-07T20:30:37  <ariard> luke-jr: assuming you do have authentication deployed at some point, you may not connect to *a* full node but actually Bob's full-node
769 2020-05-07T20:31:41  <ariard> and Bob maybe not okay to offer you bandwidth, but still okay to provide you headers, and you somehow trust Bob
770 2020-05-07T20:32:10  <ariard> you can have a set of semi-trusted fallback nodes, like Alice, Bob, etc
771 2020-05-07T20:32:36  <luke-jr> ariard: you can do that with bloom already
772 2020-05-07T20:33:35  <ariard> luke-jr: right I'm not arguing bip157-vs-bip37 here, but more broadly on light-client model in case of forks
773 2020-05-07T20:34:36  <luke-jr> ariard: if you have a node you personally trust, that's not quite the same thing as the light-client model
774 2020-05-07T20:34:41  <luke-jr> even if you're only using that node to verify headers
775 2020-05-07T20:36:42  <luke-jr> perhaps you don't trust the person as much as yourself, but it's still much closer to "your own full node" than light wallet
776 2020-05-07T20:38:56  <luke-jr> (actually, checking your incoming transactions against full nodes run by *the people you care to pay* might even be more secure than your own full node? XD)
777 2020-05-07T20:40:05  *** emilengler has quit IRC
778 2020-05-07T20:43:18  *** MrSquanchee has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
779 2020-05-07T20:44:10  *** dfmb_btc has quit IRC
780 2020-05-07T20:45:03  *** vasild has quit IRC
781 2020-05-07T20:47:00  *** Highway62 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
782 2020-05-07T20:48:39  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
783 2020-05-07T20:48:39  *** Highway62 is now known as Highway61
784 2020-05-07T20:55:15  *** vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
785 2020-05-07T21:00:02  *** Dimlock has quit IRC
786 2020-05-07T21:00:04  *** michaelfolkson has quit IRC
787 2020-05-07T21:00:50  *** bsm117532 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
788 2020-05-07T21:08:19  *** Highway62 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
789 2020-05-07T21:10:25  *** Highway61 has quit IRC
790 2020-05-07T21:10:26  *** Highway62 is now known as Highway61
791 2020-05-07T21:22:08  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
792 2020-05-07T21:50:51  *** RandIter has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
793 2020-05-07T21:50:56  *** RandIter is now known as Guest44912
794 2020-05-07T21:53:32  *** molakala has quit IRC
795 2020-05-07T22:14:37  <achow101> would it be reasonable to replace salvagewallet with a bdb deserializer and try to recover key-values ourselves instead?
796 2020-05-07T22:14:54  *** surja795 has quit IRC
797 2020-05-07T22:15:30  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
798 2020-05-07T22:20:18  *** surja795 has quit IRC
799 2020-05-07T22:21:09  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
800 2020-05-07T22:23:13  <jnewbery> achow101: lots of previous discussion on this: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10540, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10991
801 2020-05-07T22:23:26  <achow101> jnewbery: yeah, reading through a bunch of that now
802 2020-05-07T22:23:27  <jnewbery> I think it should be in a separate wallet tool
803 2020-05-07T22:26:16  *** brytemorio has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
804 2020-05-07T22:30:03  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
805 2020-05-07T22:34:33  *** promag_ has quit IRC
806 2020-05-07T22:46:26  *** marcoagner has quit IRC
807 2020-05-07T22:47:50  *** brakmic has quit IRC
808 2020-05-07T22:51:28  *** brytemorio has quit IRC
809 2020-05-07T22:53:18  *** lightlike has quit IRC
810 2020-05-07T23:03:12  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
811 2020-05-07T23:10:09  *** mdunnio_ has quit IRC
812 2020-05-07T23:12:45  <luke-jr> achow101: deserialize why? just search for the data we need in any format? :P
813 2020-05-07T23:14:43  *** vasild has quit IRC
814 2020-05-07T23:19:23  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
815 2020-05-07T23:19:38  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
816 2020-05-07T23:19:38  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #18385: WIP contrib: Add keys.openpgp.org as backup server (master...2003-contribPGPBackupServer) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18385
817 2020-05-07T23:19:39  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
818 2020-05-07T23:20:13  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
819 2020-05-07T23:20:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #18352: WIP NOMERGE [bench] gitian builds for OP_IF bench (master...2003-benchGitianOPIF) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18352
820 2020-05-07T23:20:14  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
821 2020-05-07T23:21:08  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
822 2020-05-07T23:21:08  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #15845: wallet: Fast rescan with BIP157 block filters (master...1904-walletFastRescan) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15845
823 2020-05-07T23:21:09  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
824 2020-05-07T23:21:23  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
825 2020-05-07T23:21:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #16003: init: Fixes for file descriptor accounting (master...fd-limits-3) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16003
826 2020-05-07T23:21:24  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
827 2020-05-07T23:21:39  *** vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
828 2020-05-07T23:22:27  *** surja795 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
829 2020-05-07T23:34:17  *** promag_ has quit IRC
830 2020-05-07T23:35:23  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
831 2020-05-07T23:44:31  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
832 2020-05-07T23:51:24  *** jonatack_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
833 2020-05-07T23:54:10  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
834 2020-05-07T23:54:28  *** jonatack has quit IRC