1 2020-10-15T00:00:02 *** ermau has quit IRC
2 2020-10-15T00:00:17 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
3 2020-10-15T00:00:28 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4 2020-10-15T00:00:28 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c2c4dbaebd95...661fe5d65cc6
5 2020-10-15T00:00:29 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fa1f6f2 MarcoFalke: net: Send post-verack handshake messages at most once
6 2020-10-15T00:00:29 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 661fe5d fanquake: Merge #20146: net: Send post-verack handshake messages at most once
7 2020-10-15T00:00:31 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
8 2020-10-15T00:00:45 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
9 2020-10-15T00:00:45 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #20146: net: Send post-verack handshake messages at most once (master...2010-netPostVerackHandshake) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20146
10 2020-10-15T00:00:46 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
11 2020-10-15T00:03:56 *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
12 2020-10-15T00:05:34 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
13 2020-10-15T00:15:22 *** murray_ has left #bitcoin-core-dev
14 2020-10-15T00:15:48 *** murrayn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
15 2020-10-15T00:17:08 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
16 2020-10-15T00:22:09 *** zyga has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
17 2020-10-15T00:23:14 *** promag has quit IRC
18 2020-10-15T00:23:26 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
19 2020-10-15T00:39:16 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
20 2020-10-15T00:39:44 *** molz_ has quit IRC
21 2020-10-15T00:41:00 *** gleb has quit IRC
22 2020-10-15T00:43:25 *** S3RK has quit IRC
23 2020-10-15T00:44:18 *** gleb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
24 2020-10-15T00:44:53 *** promag has quit IRC
25 2020-10-15T00:45:29 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
26 2020-10-15T00:49:25 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
27 2020-10-15T00:53:09 *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
28 2020-10-15T01:07:59 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
29 2020-10-15T01:11:25 *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
30 2020-10-15T01:15:13 *** mol has quit IRC
31 2020-10-15T01:19:28 *** S3RK has quit IRC
32 2020-10-15T01:22:22 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
33 2020-10-15T01:22:22 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #20150: [0.19] Backports (0.19...more_019_backports) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20150
34 2020-10-15T01:22:23 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
35 2020-10-15T01:23:36 *** mol_ has quit IRC
36 2020-10-15T01:30:02 *** sipsorcery has quit IRC
37 2020-10-15T01:34:23 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
38 2020-10-15T01:41:20 *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
39 2020-10-15T01:43:26 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
40 2020-10-15T01:45:02 *** Eagle[TM] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
41 2020-10-15T01:47:00 *** EagleTM has quit IRC
42 2020-10-15T02:03:10 *** Livestradamus has quit IRC
43 2020-10-15T02:03:26 *** IPGlider has quit IRC
44 2020-10-15T02:15:39 *** IPGlider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
45 2020-10-15T02:19:10 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
46 2020-10-15T02:27:06 *** Livestradamus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
47 2020-10-15T02:32:44 *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
48 2020-10-15T02:37:03 *** andreacab has quit IRC
49 2020-10-15T02:37:05 *** glozow has quit IRC
50 2020-10-15T02:41:49 *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
51 2020-10-15T02:45:42 *** troygiorshev has quit IRC
52 2020-10-15T02:46:30 *** troygiorshev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
53 2020-10-15T02:46:47 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
54 2020-10-15T02:50:17 *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
55 2020-10-15T02:55:04 *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
56 2020-10-15T03:00:01 *** zyga has quit IRC
57 2020-10-15T03:16:00 <fanquake> âï¸ feature freeze day âï¸
58 2020-10-15T03:17:14 <sipa> NOT YET
59 2020-10-15T03:18:57 <aj> sipa: it's thursday even in Honolulu, so i think fanquake is right
60 2020-10-15T03:19:32 <fanquake> meshcollider will surely tell us it's nearly over
61 2020-10-15T03:19:34 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
62 2020-10-15T03:22:07 <meshcollider> T minus 7hours
63 2020-10-15T03:22:15 <meshcollider> It's not over til I merge sqlite wallets!
64 2020-10-15T03:22:25 *** mol has quit IRC
65 2020-10-15T03:22:28 <meshcollider> And don't take that satisfaction away from me ;)
66 2020-10-15T03:23:52 <fanquake> heh. As long as you don't merge it in the next few minutes ð¥
67 2020-10-15T03:24:17 <meshcollider> Nah don't worry I don't have my key with me, it'll be a few hours til I'm home
68 2020-10-15T03:24:59 <meshcollider> I could just click the github "Merge" button and break everything though...
69 2020-10-15T03:25:23 <fanquake> ð¤ I'm about to rip out some non-endomorphison
70 2020-10-15T03:25:46 <meshcollider> ð
71 2020-10-15T03:26:24 <fanquake> Gotta love patents on multiplication
72 2020-10-15T03:29:15 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
73 2020-10-15T03:29:16 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/661fe5d65cc6...f2e6d1443013
74 2020-10-15T03:29:17 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 52380bf Pieter Wuille: Squashed 'src/secp256k1/' changes from 8ab24e8dad..c6b6b8f1bb
75 2020-10-15T03:29:18 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9e5626d Pieter Wuille: Update libsecp256k1 subtree to latest master
76 2020-10-15T03:29:19 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f2e6d14 fanquake: Merge #20147: Update libsecp256k1 (endomorphism, test improvements)
77 2020-10-15T03:29:20 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
78 2020-10-15T03:29:35 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
79 2020-10-15T03:29:36 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #20147: Update libsecp256k1 (endomorphism, test improvements) (master...202010_secp256k1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20147
80 2020-10-15T03:29:36 *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
81 2020-10-15T03:29:37 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
82 2020-10-15T03:30:24 <sipa> \o/
83 2020-10-15T03:48:13 *** promag has quit IRC
84 2020-10-15T03:48:30 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
85 2020-10-15T03:53:10 *** promag has quit IRC
86 2020-10-15T03:53:45 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
87 2020-10-15T03:55:20 *** ferringb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
88 2020-10-15T04:01:16 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
89 2020-10-15T04:10:13 *** balbirs has quit IRC
90 2020-10-15T04:10:45 *** balbirs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
91 2020-10-15T04:14:15 *** sr_gi has quit IRC
92 2020-10-15T04:14:45 *** sr_gi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
93 2020-10-15T04:18:53 <meshcollider> \o/
94 2020-10-15T04:32:09 *** dermoth_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
95 2020-10-15T04:32:28 *** dermoth has quit IRC
96 2020-10-15T04:32:30 *** dermoth_ is now known as dermoth
97 2020-10-15T04:38:03 *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
98 2020-10-15T04:42:13 *** mol has quit IRC
99 2020-10-15T04:44:11 *** flag has quit IRC
100 2020-10-15T04:50:55 *** flag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
101 2020-10-15T04:55:46 *** rc_423_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102 2020-10-15T04:56:05 *** rc_423 has quit IRC
103 2020-10-15T05:16:26 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
104 2020-10-15T05:21:46 *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
105 2020-10-15T05:22:03 *** mol_ has quit IRC
106 2020-10-15T05:50:04 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
107 2020-10-15T05:56:38 *** S3RK has quit IRC
108 2020-10-15T05:56:55 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
109 2020-10-15T05:57:10 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
110 2020-10-15T05:57:12 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
111 2020-10-15T06:00:02 *** ferringb has quit IRC
112 2020-10-15T06:02:55 *** S3RK has quit IRC
113 2020-10-15T06:22:48 *** larsivi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
114 2020-10-15T06:26:01 *** Pavlenex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
115 2020-10-15T06:30:39 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
116 2020-10-15T06:34:38 *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
117 2020-10-15T06:38:54 *** andreacab has quit IRC
118 2020-10-15T06:46:34 *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
119 2020-10-15T06:49:16 *** mrostecki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
120 2020-10-15T06:59:15 *** promag has quit IRC
121 2020-10-15T06:59:29 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122 2020-10-15T07:02:57 *** mrostecki has quit IRC
123 2020-10-15T07:11:27 *** mrostecki has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
124 2020-10-15T07:11:35 *** promag has quit IRC
125 2020-10-15T07:12:10 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
126 2020-10-15T07:13:19 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
127 2020-10-15T07:13:19 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider pushed 27 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f2e6d1443013...8ed37f6c8497
128 2020-10-15T07:13:20 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 54729f3 Andrew Chow: Add libsqlite3
129 2020-10-15T07:13:20 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e87df82 Andrew Chow: Add sqlite to travis and depends
130 2020-10-15T07:13:21 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7577b6e Andrew Chow: Add SQLiteDatabase and SQLiteBatch dummy classes
131 2020-10-15T07:13:22 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
132 2020-10-15T07:14:14 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
133 2020-10-15T07:14:14 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider merged pull request #19077: wallet: Add sqlite as an alternative wallet database and use it for new descriptor wallets (master...sqlite-wallet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19077
134 2020-10-15T07:14:15 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
135 2020-10-15T07:14:23 <aj> \o/
136 2020-10-15T07:14:35 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
137 2020-10-15T07:15:13 *** jesseposner has quit IRC
138 2020-10-15T07:15:30 <meshcollider> achow101: ð¥³
139 2020-10-15T07:16:53 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00_ has quit IRC
140 2020-10-15T07:45:49 *** vincenzopalazzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
141 2020-10-15T07:46:40 *** jesseposner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142 2020-10-15T07:47:03 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
143 2020-10-15T07:48:54 *** andreacab has quit IRC
144 2020-10-15T07:56:20 *** promag has quit IRC
145 2020-10-15T07:57:13 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
146 2020-10-15T07:57:50 *** jouke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
147 2020-10-15T08:03:36 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
148 2020-10-15T08:07:36 *** S3RK has quit IRC
149 2020-10-15T08:08:05 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
150 2020-10-15T08:13:23 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
151 2020-10-15T08:19:25 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
152 2020-10-15T08:23:19 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
153 2020-10-15T08:23:19 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 20 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8ed37f6c8497...3caee1694657
154 2020-10-15T08:23:20 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f8c099e Pieter Wuille: --- [TAPROOT] Refactors ---
155 2020-10-15T08:23:21 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 107b57d Pieter Wuille: scripted-diff: put ECDSA in name of signature functions
156 2020-10-15T08:23:21 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8bd2b4e Pieter Wuille: refactor: rename scriptPubKey in VerifyWitnessProgram to exec_script
157 2020-10-15T08:23:23 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
158 2020-10-15T08:23:38 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
159 2020-10-15T08:23:38 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #19953: Implement BIP 340-342 validation (Schnorr/taproot/tapscript) (master...taproot) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19953
160 2020-10-15T08:23:40 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
161 2020-10-15T08:24:08 <sipa> \\\o///
162 2020-10-15T08:25:06 <jonatack> boom \o/
163 2020-10-15T08:30:29 <wumpus> \o/
164 2020-10-15T08:30:57 * sipa does the tapdance
165 2020-10-15T08:31:01 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
166 2020-10-15T08:31:06 <sipa> actually wait no, i can't dance
167 2020-10-15T08:31:11 *** sdaftuar has quit IRC
168 2020-10-15T08:31:36 *** sdaftuar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
169 2020-10-15T08:35:11 <wumpus> (don't let it being merged stop you from reviewing further if you were still in progress)
170 2020-10-15T08:35:14 * wumpus neither
171 2020-10-15T08:37:01 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172 2020-10-15T08:37:01 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #20152: doc: Update wallet files in files.md (master...201015-sqlite) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20152
173 2020-10-15T08:37:02 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
174 2020-10-15T08:37:21 *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
175 2020-10-15T08:42:25 <sipa> what is the meeting topic command?
176 2020-10-15T08:42:44 *** jonatack has quit IRC
177 2020-10-15T08:43:06 <MarcoFalke> #proposedmeetingtopic
178 2020-10-15T08:43:26 <MarcoFalke> Is there anything left to discuss, now that everything is merged?
179 2020-10-15T08:44:19 <sipa> #proposedmeetingtopic taproot relay policy / activation on testnet/signet
180 2020-10-15T08:47:01 *** jeremyrubin has quit IRC
181 2020-10-15T08:47:14 <wumpus> also wanted to get it merged so that other pre-0.21 PRs don't make it require rebase
182 2020-10-15T08:47:26 <wumpus> with that many ACKs
183 2020-10-15T08:51:53 *** Pavlenex has quit IRC
184 2020-10-15T08:52:43 *** Pavlenex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
185 2020-10-15T08:53:53 <MarcoFalke> Makes sense, and as the code is not active yet, it can still be changed freely
186 2020-10-15T08:56:41 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
187 2020-10-15T08:56:42 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3caee1694657...3956165903cf
188 2020-10-15T08:56:42 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6020ce3 Gregory Sanders: DecodeHexTx: Try case where txn has inputs first
189 2020-10-15T08:56:43 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 27fc6a3 Gregory Sanders: DecodeHexTx: Break out transaction decoding logic into own function
190 2020-10-15T08:56:43 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3956165 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #17775: DecodeHexTx: Try case where txn has inputs first
191 2020-10-15T08:56:45 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
192 2020-10-15T08:58:11 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
193 2020-10-15T08:58:11 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #17775: DecodeHexTx: Try case where txn has inputs first (master...decode_wit_first) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17775
194 2020-10-15T08:58:12 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
195 2020-10-15T09:00:02 *** larsivi has quit IRC
196 2020-10-15T09:07:45 *** jesseposner has quit IRC
197 2020-10-15T09:10:13 <kallewoof> Won't be at meeting but my 2 sats on signet and taproot activation: I don't think there's a reason to delay activation. My suggestion is to set activation for a week or so from now (long enough for a trivial pull request to get ACKs and be merged + to update the servers issuing blocks). I guess the question is whether this is affected by feature freeze or not. If it is, I suggest we activate it after 0.21 branch split in
198 2020-10-15T09:10:14 <kallewoof> master only.
199 2020-10-15T09:11:29 <kallewoof> If people want to try out the actual real taproot activation mechanism for activation on signet, the story changes I guess.
200 2020-10-15T09:12:10 <sipa> kallewoof: the nice thing about signet is that really consensus rules are decided by the signers - even if the rest of the network doesn't enforce
201 2020-10-15T09:12:49 *** belcher has quit IRC
202 2020-10-15T09:13:16 <sipa> the reason i brought it up is that i realize that master will now relay (valid) taproot spends... which may be unexpected, and feels wrong without activation plan
203 2020-10-15T09:13:37 <kallewoof> sipa: yeah, but p2p layer is affected... propagation can be delayed or fail unless one peer is a miner
204 2020-10-15T09:14:13 <kallewoof> sipa: in pre-activation? i thought it policy-rejected
205 2020-10-15T09:14:19 <sipa> kallewoof: no
206 2020-10-15T09:15:01 <sipa> i think segwit had special rules about relay before activation, because it was also a p2p change
207 2020-10-15T09:15:18 <kallewoof> ohh! i didn't realize that.
208 2020-10-15T09:15:22 <aj> sipa: (if the network enforces rules prior to "real" activation, and there's a hard-fork, you need more than just signers to fix things up)
209 2020-10-15T09:15:46 <aj> sipa: (probably no need for hard-forks in the taproot implementation now though so, whatevs)
210 2020-10-15T09:15:52 *** S3RK has quit IRC
211 2020-10-15T09:16:03 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212 2020-10-15T09:17:42 <sipa> the last softfork before that, CSV, was implemented & activated in the same release, 0.12.1
213 2020-10-15T09:18:28 <sipa> but i think we should disable relay for networks which have no activation defined (i.e., all but regtest and maybe signet)
214 2020-10-15T09:20:16 <kallewoof> sipa: my vote is to keep it enabled on signet, as that means we can just flip it on whenever and it will just workâ¢ï¸
215 2020-10-15T09:21:32 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
216 2020-10-15T09:22:37 *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
217 2020-10-15T09:27:43 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
218 2020-10-15T09:27:43 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack closed pull request #19874: cli, bugfix: degrade -getinfo gracefully for older servers (master...getinfo-handle-older-servers-gracefully) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19874
219 2020-10-15T09:27:44 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
220 2020-10-15T09:28:03 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
221 2020-10-15T09:28:03 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack reopened pull request #19874: cli, bugfix: degrade -getinfo gracefully for older servers (master...getinfo-handle-older-servers-gracefully) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19874
222 2020-10-15T09:28:04 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
223 2020-10-15T09:28:52 <kallewoof> I get the sneaky suspicion that enum class with bit fiddling is... not the way to go. Tempted to just do const uint8_t's and skip the enum part altogether..
224 2020-10-15T09:30:27 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
225 2020-10-15T09:30:27 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #19997: History for Taproot PR #19953 (master...taproot-history) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19997
226 2020-10-15T09:30:28 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
227 2020-10-15T09:32:29 *** Pavlenex has quit IRC
228 2020-10-15T09:33:37 *** S3RK has quit IRC
229 2020-10-15T09:33:56 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
230 2020-10-15T09:37:37 *** Pavlenex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
231 2020-10-15T09:38:16 *** jonatack has quit IRC
232 2020-10-15T09:38:58 *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
233 2020-10-15T09:40:39 *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2020-10-15T09:43:46 *** mol_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
235 2020-10-15T09:45:02 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
236 2020-10-15T09:45:03 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3956165903cf...e3b474c54866
237 2020-10-15T09:45:03 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 883cea7 Pieter Wuille: Restore compatibility with old CSubNet serialization
238 2020-10-15T09:45:04 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 886be97 Pieter Wuille: Ignore incorrectly-serialized banlist.dat entries
239 2020-10-15T09:45:04 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e3b474c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20140: Restore compatibility with old CSubNet serialization
240 2020-10-15T09:45:05 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
241 2020-10-15T09:45:06 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
242 2020-10-15T09:45:22 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
243 2020-10-15T09:45:22 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20140: Restore compatibility with old CSubNet serialization (master...202010_subnet_ser_compact) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20140
244 2020-10-15T09:45:23 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
245 2020-10-15T09:46:56 *** mol has quit IRC
246 2020-10-15T09:47:32 *** Pavlenex has quit IRC
247 2020-10-15T09:47:45 *** jonatack has quit IRC
248 2020-10-15T09:50:03 *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
249 2020-10-15T09:51:56 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
250 2020-10-15T09:51:56 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e3b474c54866...560dea9b26f7
251 2020-10-15T09:51:57 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d681a28 Luke Dashjr: RPC: getpeerinfo: Deprecate "whitelisted" field (replaced by "permissions")
252 2020-10-15T09:51:57 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5b57dc5 Luke Dashjr: RPC: getpeerinfo: Wrap long help line for bytesrecv_per_msg
253 2020-10-15T09:51:58 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 560dea9 MarcoFalke: Merge #19770: RPC: getpeerinfo: Deprecate "whitelisted" field (replaced by...
254 2020-10-15T09:51:59 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
255 2020-10-15T09:52:26 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
256 2020-10-15T09:52:26 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #19770: RPC: getpeerinfo: Deprecate "whitelisted" field (replaced by "permissions") (master...deprecate_whitelisted) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19770
257 2020-10-15T09:52:27 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2020-10-15T09:56:03 *** BjarniRunar1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
259 2020-10-15T09:58:48 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
260 2020-10-15T10:01:42 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
261 2020-10-15T10:01:43 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/560dea9b26f7...711ddce94377
262 2020-10-15T10:01:43 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master faad92f MarcoFalke: test: Remove unused nVersion=1 in p2p tests
263 2020-10-15T10:01:44 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 711ddce Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20131: test: Remove unused nVersion=1 in p2p tests
264 2020-10-15T10:01:46 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
265 2020-10-15T10:02:02 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
266 2020-10-15T10:02:02 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20131: test: Remove unused nVersion=1 in p2p tests (master...2010-testnVersion) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20131
267 2020-10-15T10:02:03 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
268 2020-10-15T10:10:23 *** vasild has quit IRC
269 2020-10-15T10:12:23 *** vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
270 2020-10-15T10:14:23 *** shesek has quit IRC
271 2020-10-15T10:18:33 *** Coralie12Moscisk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272 2020-10-15T10:23:50 *** jonatack has quit IRC
273 2020-10-15T10:23:56 *** S3RK has quit IRC
274 2020-10-15T10:24:29 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
275 2020-10-15T10:25:56 *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
276 2020-10-15T10:27:57 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
277 2020-10-15T10:28:24 *** csknk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
278 2020-10-15T11:31:23 *** lightningbot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
279 2020-10-15T11:32:32 *** tralfaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
280 2020-10-15T11:32:37 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
281 2020-10-15T11:32:37 *** davterra has quit IRC
282 2020-10-15T11:32:49 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
283 2020-10-15T11:33:35 *** S3RK has quit IRC
284 2020-10-15T11:34:03 *** S3RK has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
285 2020-10-15T11:35:38 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
286 2020-10-15T11:35:55 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00 has quit IRC
287 2020-10-15T11:37:53 *** Eagle[TM] has quit IRC
288 2020-10-15T11:38:11 *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
289 2020-10-15T11:42:04 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
290 2020-10-15T11:42:15 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00_ has quit IRC
291 2020-10-15T11:54:56 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292 2020-10-15T11:55:33 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00 has quit IRC
293 2020-10-15T11:59:59 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00_ has quit IRC
294 2020-10-15T12:00:01 *** BjarniRunar1 has quit IRC
295 2020-10-15T12:04:07 *** kristapsk___ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
296 2020-10-15T12:04:31 *** kristapsk_ has quit IRC
297 2020-10-15T12:08:48 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
298 2020-10-15T12:22:30 *** kerbyu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
299 2020-10-15T12:33:07 <jamesob> wow, big merge day. congrats sipa, achow101!
300 2020-10-15T12:35:25 <elichai2> ð¥³ð¥³ð¥³ð¥³
301 2020-10-15T12:38:22 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302 2020-10-15T12:39:53 *** Ga1aCt1Cz00 has quit IRC
303 2020-10-15T12:46:35 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
304 2020-10-15T12:49:27 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
305 2020-10-15T12:49:27 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] kallewoof opened pull request #20154: BIP-322 support (master...202010-bip322) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20154
306 2020-10-15T12:49:28 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
307 2020-10-15T12:50:22 <kallewoof> andytoshi: hope you didn't spend too much time on your implementation. I have begun working on a rough implementation of BIP 322 support here, FYI: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20154
308 2020-10-15T12:52:07 *** willcl_ark is now known as [github-bot]
309 2020-10-15T12:53:15 <hebasto> is #20120 rtm?
310 2020-10-15T12:53:17 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20120 | net, rpc, test, bugfix: update GetNetworkName, GetNetworksInfo, regression tests by jonatack · Pull Request #20120 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
311 2020-10-15T12:54:59 <andytoshi> kallewoof: no, i spent about 30 minutes on it :) the old spec was super straightforward (at least, with the existing rust-bitcoin/miniscript infrastructure i have)
312 2020-10-15T12:55:16 <andytoshi> the new spec is bigger but i think will integrate much better with my descriptors library
313 2020-10-15T12:55:30 *** molz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
314 2020-10-15T12:56:00 <kallewoof> andytoshi: it seems to integrate really well with bitcoin core, from what i can tell so far. the old code was a split out thing of its own
315 2020-10-15T12:56:22 <kallewoof> andytoshi: cool to hear you're working on it. feedback and such super welcome :)
316 2020-10-15T12:57:06 *** molz_ has quit IRC
317 2020-10-15T12:57:16 <andytoshi> right, that's also what was going to happen with the rust-miniscript implementation ... de/serialization was easy but then providing a usable sign/verify API seemed pretty unnatural. i think this one will be better because i can write a function that takes a descriptor + message and converts it to a to_spend transaction
318 2020-10-15T12:57:25 *** molz_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
319 2020-10-15T12:57:36 <andytoshi> (and i guess now, will also take a value ... i'm curious why you changed this this morning...i don't have strong feelings either way, i just don't understand it)
320 2020-10-15T12:57:43 *** [github-bot] is now known as wilcl_ark
321 2020-10-15T12:58:45 *** mol_ has quit IRC
322 2020-10-15T13:00:34 <kallewoof> andytoshi: uh... i somehow thought the sum of amounts was required in the signature, but now that you mention it, i think i was confused..
323 2020-10-15T13:01:29 <kallewoof> andytoshi: I'll revert that one now. Thanks for pointing it out
324 2020-10-15T13:03:55 *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
325 2020-10-15T13:05:03 <andytoshi> cool :) the value made it a little harder, API-wise, because it means that you need to know upfront whether you're going to use the to_spend purely as a dummy input when proving funds, or not (and you have to konw how many funds you're planning to prove)
326 2020-10-15T13:05:18 <andytoshi> you sorta have to know this now, in choosing whether to use an OP_TRUE descriptor or a "real" one
327 2020-10-15T13:05:40 *** jesseposner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
328 2020-10-15T13:06:12 <kallewoof> andytoshi: that makes sense -- yeah, i think i managed to convince myself that the signatures commit to the amounts, so we need to have those available and why not just stuff them in the virtual to_sign tx... but that's not how it works at all.
329 2020-10-15T13:06:58 <luke-jr> oh blah, sqlite isn't optional? :/
330 2020-10-15T13:07:25 *** Exho has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
331 2020-10-15T13:08:41 * MarcoFalke updates all build scripts to install sqlite-dev
332 2020-10-15T13:09:17 <MarcoFalke> This is probably the first time a dependecy has been added in years. Others were only removals.
333 2020-10-15T13:09:52 * luke-jr begins on a PR to fix it optional
334 2020-10-15T13:10:37 *** jesseposner has quit IRC
335 2020-10-15T13:18:44 * kallewoof calls it a day at "checker.CheckECDSASignature(vchSig, vchPubKey, scriptCode, sigversion)" returning false. :) Will compare sighashes tomorrow. Maybe I should've implemented this in btcdeb first.
336 2020-10-15T13:20:56 *** luke-jr has quit IRC
337 2020-10-15T13:21:18 *** luke-jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
338 2020-10-15T13:26:51 *** tralfaz is now known as davterra
339 2020-10-15T13:28:58 <andytoshi> kallewoof: sounds good, hopefully i'll have some test vectors in the next 6-8 hours we can compare
340 2020-10-15T13:29:28 <kallewoof> andytoshi: nice!
341 2020-10-15T13:29:44 *** harrigan has quit IRC
342 2020-10-15T13:30:26 *** kerbyu has quit IRC
343 2020-10-15T13:31:32 *** jonatack has quit IRC
344 2020-10-15T13:31:38 *** doomas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
345 2020-10-15T13:31:39 *** harrigan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
346 2020-10-15T13:33:00 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
347 2020-10-15T13:33:00 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
348 2020-10-15T13:33:34 *** mol has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
349 2020-10-15T13:36:03 *** molz_ has quit IRC
350 2020-10-15T13:38:55 *** jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
351 2020-10-15T13:45:51 *** kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352 2020-10-15T13:45:52 *** glozow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
353 2020-10-15T13:53:46 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
354 2020-10-15T13:53:46 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #20156: Make sqlite support optional (compile-time) (master...opt_sqlite) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20156
355 2020-10-15T13:53:47 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
356 2020-10-15T14:06:16 *** vincenzopalazzo has quit IRC
357 2020-10-15T14:11:32 *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
358 2020-10-15T14:12:46 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
359 2020-10-15T14:16:14 *** promag has quit IRC
360 2020-10-15T14:16:18 <jamesob> anyone ever seen "/usr/bin/ld: error: [...]: <corrupt x86 property (0xc0000002) size: 0x8>" during compilation before? I'm getting a truckload of them, but compilation seems to succeed anyway. Think it has to do with having installed the debian gcc-9 package, but not sure. Google turns up nothing.
361 2020-10-15T14:16:30 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362 2020-10-15T14:16:44 *** davterra has quit IRC
363 2020-10-15T14:16:57 *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
364 2020-10-15T14:18:03 <jamesob> s/compilation/link & ar time
365 2020-10-15T14:24:14 *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
366 2020-10-15T14:31:27 *** promag has quit IRC
367 2020-10-15T14:32:03 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
368 2020-10-15T14:34:30 *** promag has quit IRC
369 2020-10-15T14:34:31 <yanmaani> jamesob: yeah, me too
370 2020-10-15T14:34:34 <yanmaani> what OS?
371 2020-10-15T14:34:43 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372 2020-10-15T14:34:59 <jamesob> Linux slug 4.19.0-10-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.19.132-1 (2020-07-24) x86_64 GNU/Linux
373 2020-10-15T14:35:00 <yanmaani> I use gcc 8.3.0 @ debian (devuan)
374 2020-10-15T14:35:02 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1 | JSON-RPC support for mobile devices ("ultra-lightweight" clients) · Issue #1 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
375 2020-10-15T14:35:19 <jamesob> I get it when compiling with gcc or clang; I think it's an issue with ld/ar
376 2020-10-15T14:35:50 <yanmaani> Linux hostname 4.19.0-10-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.19.132-1 (2020-07-24) x86_64 GNU/Linux
377 2020-10-15T14:35:52 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1 | JSON-RPC support for mobile devices ("ultra-lightweight" clients) · Issue #1 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
378 2020-10-15T14:35:55 <promag> does it make sense to support multiple -blocksdir where one is rw but the others are ro? so that older blocks can be kept on a slower disk?
379 2020-10-15T14:36:13 <yanmaani> promag: you may be interested in overlayfs
380 2020-10-15T14:36:22 <yanmaani> or just some caching setup
381 2020-10-15T14:37:13 <luke-jr> promag: probably
382 2020-10-15T14:37:22 <promag> yanmaani: yes, I though about that, but then in instead of prunning it would move blocks the the other place
383 2020-10-15T14:37:28 <luke-jr> promag: needs some thought, though, as it also makes sense to move them automatically
384 2020-10-15T14:37:38 <promag> luke-jr: right
385 2020-10-15T14:37:59 <yanmaani> uh, how are you going to automatically move blocks to a RO fs?
386 2020-10-15T14:38:04 <luke-jr> FWIW Signet may be broken on master since it lacks Taproot activation params
387 2020-10-15T14:38:40 <promag> yanmaani: no, I mean RO as in bitcoind doesn't writes new blocks there
388 2020-10-15T14:38:44 <yanmaani> the simple solution is to have a cronjob that checks mtime/ctime and moves+symlinks them
389 2020-10-15T14:38:48 <yanmaani> oh, not a RO fs
390 2020-10-15T14:38:56 <yanmaani> just do overlayfs or something IMO
391 2020-10-15T14:39:04 <promag> not ro fs, "RO" -blocksdir
392 2020-10-15T14:40:04 <promag> yanmaani: I understand this can be overcome out of bitcoind, but the idea would be to add a -prunestrategy=archive for instance
393 2020-10-15T14:40:27 <luke-jr> yanmaani: for example, it can be an external drive you unplug when you leave home
394 2020-10-15T14:40:28 <promag> just a thought..
395 2020-10-15T14:41:01 <luke-jr> and blocks would just not prune-to-slow-storage while you're away from home
396 2020-10-15T14:41:05 <luke-jr> when you get back, then they move
397 2020-10-15T14:41:12 <yanmaani> luke-jr: But then you have a problem when you start bitcoind in such cases, no?
398 2020-10-15T14:41:17 <promag> luke-jr: exactly
399 2020-10-15T14:41:23 <luke-jr> and if you need to use (eg) a rescan RPC, you plug in the drive
400 2020-10-15T14:41:30 <promag> it can be copy first, then delete old
401 2020-10-15T14:41:31 <luke-jr> yanmaani: that's exactly what this would avoid
402 2020-10-15T14:42:01 <yanmaani> I guess if you have the DB, yeah. Couldn't it just ignore missing blocks until they're needed?
403 2020-10-15T14:42:13 <promag> yup
404 2020-10-15T14:42:14 <yanmaani> so you can do whatever you want and bitcoind will just deal with it
405 2020-10-15T14:42:24 <promag> this might interact with assumeutxo cc jamesob
406 2020-10-15T14:42:26 <yanmaani> instead of re-implementing overlayfs in bitcoin core
407 2020-10-15T14:43:08 <promag> yanmaani: overlayfs is cool if you dont care where each file is stored
408 2020-10-15T14:43:27 <promag> and it's platform dependant
409 2020-10-15T14:43:36 <yanmaani> you can move them around by yourself though
410 2020-10-15T14:43:45 <yanmaani> or just set a cronjob to move+symlink
411 2020-10-15T14:44:09 <promag> yes I could
412 2020-10-15T14:44:28 <promag> or have it automatic
413 2020-10-15T14:44:34 <jamesob> promag: should be compatible with assumeutxo since blocksdir access is largely unchanged; blocks have always come out of order anyway
414 2020-10-15T14:45:00 <jamesob> well... not always, but for a while :)
415 2020-10-15T14:45:39 *** Mercury_Vapor has quit IRC
416 2020-10-15T14:45:43 <promag> jamesob: but what happens if you have to validate and a block isn't there?
417 2020-10-15T14:46:44 <jamesob> promag: validation doesn't require access to blockfiles per se because all the data you're relying on is stored in (i) the headers chain and (ii) the utxo set
418 2020-10-15T14:47:10 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
419 2020-10-15T14:47:10 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #20157: Bugfix: chainparams: Add missing (disabled) Taproot deployment for Signet (master...signet_taproot_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20157
420 2020-10-15T14:47:12 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
421 2020-10-15T14:47:59 <provoostenator> I'd like to nominate https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/96 for v0.21 too
422 2020-10-15T14:48:26 <provoostenator> Also note it's impossible to create an unnamed wallet with the GUI atm
423 2020-10-15T14:49:10 <promag> jamesob: https://github.com/jamesob/assumeutxo-docs/tree/2019-04-proposal/proposal#do-you-perform-any-extra-validation-on-a-loaded-snapshot-besides-comparing-its-hash-to-the-assumeutxo-value
424 2020-10-15T14:49:48 <promag> jamesob: but if blocks are available locally then this is not required right?
425 2020-10-15T14:50:06 <promag> "this" as in ibd
426 2020-10-15T14:50:38 <jamesob> promag: ibd is still required to make sure that the blocks on disk render into the utxo set that you expect
427 2020-10-15T14:51:13 <jamesob> I guess that'd be more like a reindex
428 2020-10-15T14:52:22 <promag> thanks jamesob
429 2020-10-15T14:52:53 <jamesob> sure thing
430 2020-10-15T14:52:57 *** Mercury_Vapor has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
431 2020-10-15T15:00:01 *** doomas has quit IRC
432 2020-10-15T15:01:56 <jamesob> man it is now amazingly hard to replicate the slew of CI errors locally
433 2020-10-15T15:03:39 *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
434 2020-10-15T15:04:06 <sdaftuar> i thought it was a video game where you keep clicking the re-run button til it passes?
435 2020-10-15T15:04:11 * sdaftuar ducks
436 2020-10-15T15:05:01 <promag> sdaftuar: like go away pls
437 2020-10-15T15:06:02 <promag> luke-jr: another approach would be -prunedir which if set it would move there instead of deleting
438 2020-10-15T15:06:46 *** jesseposner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
439 2020-10-15T15:06:59 <luke-jr> promag: keep in mind it may be desirable to actually prune too
440 2020-10-15T15:07:11 <luke-jr> promag: eg, keep blocks with your own txs in them in storage, but prune everything else
441 2020-10-15T15:08:15 <promag> that requires to have wallets loaded
442 2020-10-15T15:08:39 <luke-jr> not necessarily (see prune locks)
443 2020-10-15T15:09:41 <promag> ah you mean #19463
444 2020-10-15T15:09:44 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19463 | Prune locks by luke-jr · Pull Request #19463 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
445 2020-10-15T15:10:13 <luke-jr> promag: anyway, my point is it probably shouldn't literally hijack the pruning logic
446 2020-10-15T15:10:21 <luke-jr> it is fundamentally different
447 2020-10-15T15:10:35 <promag> don't want to change the logic
448 2020-10-15T15:10:46 <promag> just want to s/delete/move
449 2020-10-15T15:12:00 *** jesseposner has quit IRC
450 2020-10-15T15:14:22 *** Emcy has quit IRC
451 2020-10-15T15:15:03 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452 2020-10-15T15:22:25 *** gonemad3 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
453 2020-10-15T15:28:05 <luke-jr> #proposedmeetingtopic Getting BIP 8 logic in before freeze
454 2020-10-15T15:28:05 <yanmaani> https://travis-ci.org/github/namecoin/namecoin-core/jobs/736047101 What could cause this Travis failure? It seems to relate to #11394 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/6e4e98ee8ce2da3cca2e2fd210e9e8dbc9b1c936
455 2020-10-15T15:28:07 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11394 | Perform a weaker subtree check in Travis by sipa · Pull Request #11394 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
456 2020-10-15T15:29:50 *** kabaum has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
457 2020-10-15T15:44:48 *** kristapsk___ is now known as kristapsk
458 2020-10-15T15:45:22 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
459 2020-10-15T15:45:22 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 6 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/711ddce94377...0d2248235375
460 2020-10-15T15:45:23 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6df7882 Jon Atack: net: add peer network to CNodeStats
461 2020-10-15T15:45:23 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4938a10 Jon Atack: rpc, test: expose CNodeStats network in RPC getpeerinfo
462 2020-10-15T15:45:24 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5133fab Jon Atack: cli: simplify -netinfo using getpeerinfo network field
463 2020-10-15T15:45:25 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
464 2020-10-15T15:45:42 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
465 2020-10-15T15:45:42 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20002: net, rpc, cli: expose peer network in getpeerinfo; simplify/improve -netinfo (master...getpeerinfo-GetNetClass) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20002
466 2020-10-15T15:45:44 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
467 2020-10-15T15:51:03 *** proofofkeags has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
468 2020-10-15T15:51:44 *** andreacab has quit IRC
469 2020-10-15T15:52:18 *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
470 2020-10-15T15:55:06 *** jesseposner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
471 2020-10-15T16:04:10 *** andreacab has quit IRC
472 2020-10-15T16:04:35 *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
473 2020-10-15T16:13:27 *** jeremyrubin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
474 2020-10-15T16:15:24 *** jesseposner has quit IRC
475 2020-10-15T16:17:47 *** da39a3ee5e6b4b0d has quit IRC
476 2020-10-15T16:21:20 *** Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
477 2020-10-15T16:22:11 <hebasto> provoostenator: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/96
478 2020-10-15T16:22:29 <hebasto> provoostenator: agree about 0.21
479 2020-10-15T16:47:04 *** andreacab has quit IRC
480 2020-10-15T16:47:30 *** andreacab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
481 2020-10-15T16:50:16 *** jesseposner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
482 2020-10-15T16:51:40 *** andreacab has quit IRC
483 2020-10-15T16:52:27 *** ossifrage has quit IRC
484 2020-10-15T17:15:30 <yanmaani> Do you get my posts to the bitcoin-dev list? I can see them online, but I get the "your message awaits approval" message
485 2020-10-15T17:38:01 *** davec has quit IRC
486 2020-10-15T17:42:06 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
487 2020-10-15T17:57:43 *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
488 2020-10-15T17:58:28 <provoostenator> #16546 can be dropped from the high priority list: it won't make it into 0.21 and hardware wallets already have a project
489 2020-10-15T17:58:30 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16546 | External signer support - Wallet Box edition by Sjors · Pull Request #16546 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
490 2020-10-15T17:58:55 <provoostenator> That said, it now works with Sqlite!
491 2020-10-15T17:59:07 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
492 2020-10-15T18:00:02 *** gonemad3 has quit IRC
493 2020-10-15T18:02:09 *** Cory has quit IRC
494 2020-10-15T18:05:47 *** kristapsk has quit IRC
495 2020-10-15T18:06:10 *** kristapsk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
496 2020-10-15T18:06:44 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
497 2020-10-15T18:09:21 *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
498 2020-10-15T18:16:36 *** joerodgers has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
499 2020-10-15T18:20:30 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
500 2020-10-15T18:20:30 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 8 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0d2248235375...9855422e65ca
501 2020-10-15T18:20:30 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 567008d Hennadii Stepanov: p2p: Add DumpAnchors()
502 2020-10-15T18:20:31 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c29272a Hennadii Stepanov: p2p: Add ReadAnchors()
503 2020-10-15T18:20:31 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master bad16af Hennadii Stepanov: p2p: Add CConnman::GetCurrentBlockRelayOnlyConns()
504 2020-10-15T18:20:32 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
505 2020-10-15T18:21:38 *** Lthere has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
506 2020-10-15T18:22:15 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
507 2020-10-15T18:22:15 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #17428: p2p: Try to preserve outbound block-relay-only connections during restart (master...20191109-anchors) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17428
508 2020-10-15T18:22:16 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
509 2020-10-15T18:26:48 <phantomcircuit> sipa, can an attacker with access to the private key generate two signatures from the same private key for the same message?
510 2020-10-15T18:26:53 <phantomcircuit> with schnorr signatures?
511 2020-10-15T18:27:21 <phantomcircuit> i assume so
512 2020-10-15T18:27:26 <sipa> generally you don't call someone with a private key an attacker ;)
513 2020-10-15T18:27:43 <sdaftuar> "signer"
514 2020-10-15T18:27:44 <sipa> but yes - the term you're looking for (i think) is a "unique signature", and no EC based signature schemes are
515 2020-10-15T18:27:51 <phantomcircuit> sipa, if they're trying to abuse poorly written wallet software they are :P
516 2020-10-15T18:27:59 <sdaftuar> "user"
517 2020-10-15T18:28:07 <phantomcircuit> that's what i thought
518 2020-10-15T18:28:23 <phantomcircuit> it's still an attacker... just not of the signature scheme itself
519 2020-10-15T18:28:26 <jeremyrubin> I think phantomcircuit is more asking if a signing oracle will ever generate different signatures for same msg
520 2020-10-15T18:28:52 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
521 2020-10-15T18:28:52 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] dongcarl opened pull request #20158: tree-wide: De-globalize ChainstateManager (master...2020-06-libbitcoinruntime) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20158
522 2020-10-15T18:28:53 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
523 2020-10-15T18:28:58 <sipa> phantomcircuit: to be clear, the bip340 signing algorithm is deterministic if no auxiliary randomness is used
524 2020-10-15T18:29:08 <phantomcircuit> jeremyrubin, not if they will, but if they can, which sipa has answered
525 2020-10-15T18:29:17 <sipa> but nobody is required (or can be verified to) follow that algorithm
526 2020-10-15T18:29:35 <phantomcircuit> sipa, yeah i understand now, i was confused by the bip340 language about malleability
527 2020-10-15T18:30:02 <sipa> there is one context where we actually treat someone with a private key as an attacker in BIP340, and it's a rather unusual requirement: nobody (even those with private keys) should be able to construct a signature for which the single-sig validation and batch-validation algorithm produce a different result (with more than negligible probability)
528 2020-10-15T18:30:03 <phantomcircuit> i thought that my original reading was unlikely so im here asking :)
529 2020-10-15T18:30:31 <sipa> well, i don't think it should be an unusual requirement - but in practice it seems it's not part of the standard attack model for signatures
530 2020-10-15T18:30:57 <phantomcircuit> sipa, indeed cause then you could validate a transaction that is then rejected by block validation, would be a nasty issue
531 2020-10-15T18:32:37 <sipa> in ed25519 land, this property clearly does not hold: https://hdevalence.ca/blog/2020-10-04-its-25519am
532 2020-10-15T18:33:12 *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
533 2020-10-15T18:33:13 <sipa> and it's trivial to make signatures (with private key) that validate in some implementations and not others, with tons of variants
534 2020-10-15T18:34:55 <phantomcircuit> sipa, for most signature scheme use the cost of rejecting a signature that would be valid elsewhere is typically zero
535 2020-10-15T18:35:11 <phantomcircuit> this is a sort of unique case in which everybody has to actually 100% agree
536 2020-10-15T18:37:55 <phantomcircuit> sipa, do you know ballpark how many signatures are in a typical 'full' block right now?
537 2020-10-15T18:40:28 <sipa> around 6000 txins per block, and i assume only a fraction have more than one signature
538 2020-10-15T18:42:09 <jeremyrubin> #proposedmeetingtopic small announcement on behalf of BGIN
539 2020-10-15T18:46:36 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
540 2020-10-15T18:46:37 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9855422e65ca...9ad7cd2887ab
541 2020-10-15T18:46:37 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3069b56 Amiti Uttarwar: [doc] Improve help for getpeerinfo connection_type field.
542 2020-10-15T18:46:38 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 41dca08 Amiti Uttarwar: [trivial] Extract connection type doc into file where it is used.
543 2020-10-15T18:46:39 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9ad7cd2 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #20090: [doc] Tiny followups to new getpeerinfo connection type fiel...
544 2020-10-15T18:46:40 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
545 2020-10-15T18:46:56 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
546 2020-10-15T18:46:56 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20090: [doc] Tiny followups to new getpeerinfo connection type field (master...2020-09-getpeerinfo-conn-type-release-notes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20090
547 2020-10-15T18:46:57 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
548 2020-10-15T18:49:40 *** lightlike has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
549 2020-10-15T18:50:57 *** Pavlenex has quit IRC
550 2020-10-15T18:58:10 *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
551 2020-10-15T18:59:32 *** promag_ has quit IRC
552 2020-10-15T19:00:15 *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
553 2020-10-15T19:00:27 <wumpus> #startmeeting
554 2020-10-15T19:00:27 <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Oct 15 19:00:27 2020 UTC. The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
555 2020-10-15T19:00:27 <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
556 2020-10-15T19:00:28 <provoostenator> hi
557 2020-10-15T19:00:30 *** promag has quit IRC
558 2020-10-15T19:00:32 <emzy> hi
559 2020-10-15T19:00:37 <hebasto> hi
560 2020-10-15T19:00:39 <jnewbery> hi
561 2020-10-15T19:00:49 <luke-jr> hi
562 2020-10-15T19:00:54 <kanzure> hi
563 2020-10-15T19:00:57 *** promag_ is now known as promag
564 2020-10-15T19:01:05 <promag> hi
565 2020-10-15T19:01:06 *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
566 2020-10-15T19:01:10 <wumpus> two proposed topics taproot relay policy / activation on testnet/signet (sipa), Getting BIP 8 logic in before freeze (luke-jr)
567 2020-10-15T19:01:26 <luke-jr> wumpus: there was a third by jeremyrubin O.o
568 2020-10-15T19:01:33 <luke-jr> [18:42:09] <jeremyrubin> #proposedmeetingtopic small announcement on behalf of BGIN
569 2020-10-15T19:01:33 <jonatack> hi
570 2020-10-15T19:02:03 <elichai2> hi
571 2020-10-15T19:02:06 <wumpus> PSA today is the feature freeze for 0.21, it seems we managed to merge all the features on the milestone
572 2020-10-15T19:02:12 <wumpus> luke-jr: strange, didn't see it in http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-core-dev/proposedmeetingtopics.txt
573 2020-10-15T19:02:18 <luke-jr> wumpus: thought it was tomorrow? :x
574 2020-10-15T19:02:20 <provoostenator> Note that the GUI repo doesn't have a milestone
575 2020-10-15T19:02:43 <MarcoFalke> provoostenator: Right. Is there any feature we missed from the GUI?
576 2020-10-15T19:02:52 <MarcoFalke> bugfixes can go in any time
577 2020-10-15T19:02:57 <luke-jr> [16:22:11] <hebasto> provoostenator: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/96
578 2020-10-15T19:02:59 <wumpus> there are some PRs left of course, but nothing that can be labeled feature imo https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+milestone%3A0.21.0
579 2020-10-15T19:03:19 <wumpus> provoostenator: good point, didn't look at the gui repo at all
580 2020-10-15T19:03:24 <luke-jr> wumpus: would be nice to get some of BIP 8 in, so there's less backported with activation
581 2020-10-15T19:03:24 <MarcoFalke> We still have 14 days to find and fix all bugs
582 2020-10-15T19:04:01 <luke-jr> but I'll save that for the dedicated topic
583 2020-10-15T19:04:08 <wumpus> luke-jr: well 10-15 is today here https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18947 , but does it matter, everything tagged as feature was merged
584 2020-10-15T19:04:26 <wumpus> (except for the GUI one apparently, if it's ready for merge it should go in)
585 2020-10-15T19:04:38 <luke-jr> wumpus: doesn't mean much when only a few people can edit tags :/
586 2020-10-15T19:05:00 <wumpus> luke-jr: the idea is that things get proposed for the milestone in meetings, or in the channel at least
587 2020-10-15T19:05:08 <dongcarl> hi
588 2020-10-15T19:05:30 <luke-jr> oh well, BIP 8 isn't strictly feature anyway
589 2020-10-15T19:05:33 <fjahr_> hi
590 2020-10-15T19:06:01 <wumpus> #topic Pending bugfixes for 0.21
591 2020-10-15T19:06:47 <wumpus> any bugfixes that we should get in for the release missing on the milestone?
592 2020-10-15T19:07:14 <jonatack> i'd propose 20120, 20115, 19961, and maybe 19874
593 2020-10-15T19:07:15 <luke-jr> I found #20157, not sure how important it is
594 2020-10-15T19:07:16 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20157 | Bugfix: chainparams: Add missing (disabled) Taproot deployment for Signet by luke-jr · Pull Request #20157 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
595 2020-10-15T19:07:37 <sipa> luke-jr: should definitely be fixed before release
596 2020-10-15T19:07:42 <sipa> #20120
597 2020-10-15T19:07:44 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20120 | net, rpc, test, bugfix: update GetNetworkName, GetNetworksInfo, regression tests by jonatack · Pull Request #20120 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
598 2020-10-15T19:07:45 <luke-jr> > #20120, #20115, #19961, and maybe #19874
599 2020-10-15T19:07:45 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20120 | net, rpc, test, bugfix: update GetNetworkName, GetNetworksInfo, regression tests by jonatack · Pull Request #20120 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
600 2020-10-15T19:07:46 <jonatack> plus the upcoming fix for #19543
601 2020-10-15T19:07:47 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20115 | cli: -netinfo quick updates/fixups and release note by jonatack · Pull Request #20115 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
602 2020-10-15T19:07:49 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19961 | doc: tor.md updates by jonatack · Pull Request #19961 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
603 2020-10-15T19:07:50 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19874 | cli, bugfix: degrade -getinfo gracefully for older servers by jonatack · Pull Request #19874 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
604 2020-10-15T19:07:51 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19543 | Normalize fee units for RPC ("BTC/kB" and "sat/B) · Issue #19543 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
605 2020-10-15T19:08:09 <hebasto> #20080 or #19933
606 2020-10-15T19:08:11 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20080 | Strip any trailing `/` in -datadir path by hebasto · Pull Request #20080 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
607 2020-10-15T19:08:14 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19933 | wallet: bugfix; if datadir has a trailing / listwalletdir would strip lead char of walletname by Saibato · Pull Request #19933 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
608 2020-10-15T19:08:41 <luke-jr> oh yes, one of those are important to get in âº
609 2020-10-15T19:08:51 <wumpus> jonatack: i'm not convinced #19874 is really a bugfix
610 2020-10-15T19:08:53 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19874 | cli, bugfix: degrade -getinfo gracefully for older servers by jonatack · Pull Request #19874 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
611 2020-10-15T19:09:17 <luke-jr> afaik -getinfo has never worked with old servers gracefully
612 2020-10-15T19:09:21 <ariard> hi
613 2020-10-15T19:09:23 <jonatack> agree that it's optional. the doc/tor.md is still in draft but will open v soon
614 2020-10-15T19:09:47 <sipa> i think documentation improvements can be done after feature freeze
615 2020-10-15T19:09:58 <MarcoFalke> tests and docs can go in any time
616 2020-10-15T19:10:07 <jonatack> sipa: agree, i held off on those to get the features in
617 2020-10-15T19:11:31 <provoostenator> #18788 would be good tests to add
618 2020-10-15T19:11:34 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18788 | tests: Update more tests to work with descriptor wallets by achow101 · Pull Request #18788 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
619 2020-10-15T19:11:56 <wumpus> 19543 was already tagged
620 2020-10-15T19:12:18 <luke-jr> oh, did achow101 want to make descriptor wallets tied to sqlite? where does that stand?
621 2020-10-15T19:12:28 <luke-jr> #20156 is IMO a bugfix
622 2020-10-15T19:12:30 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20156 | Make sqlite support optional (compile-time) by luke-jr · Pull Request #20156 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
623 2020-10-15T19:12:37 <provoostenator> luke-jr: that's already merged
624 2020-10-15T19:12:40 <wumpus> yes, that was his plan, to make it clearer that those are two different wallet formats
625 2020-10-15T19:12:57 <meshcollider> Please can we decide which of 19933 and 20080 we want to keep and which one to close?
626 2020-10-15T19:13:03 <luke-jr> provoostenator: tying the two together is?
627 2020-10-15T19:13:07 <wumpus> luke-jr: i think 'return a null in a field' is graceful enough, it just shouldn't crash
628 2020-10-15T19:13:09 <MarcoFalke> I like #20080
629 2020-10-15T19:13:11 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20080 | Strip any trailing `/` in -datadir path by hebasto · Pull Request #20080 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
630 2020-10-15T19:13:20 <provoostenator> luke-jr: descriptor == sqlite for new wallet yes
631 2020-10-15T19:13:25 <provoostenator> see my comment as well
632 2020-10-15T19:13:33 <promag> +1 #20080
633 2020-10-15T19:13:35 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20080 | Strip any trailing `/` in -datadir path by hebasto · Pull Request #20080 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
634 2020-10-15T19:13:42 <provoostenator> Unless achow101 changed his mind about that, but I think that was the point of getting it in before release
635 2020-10-15T19:13:44 <wumpus> 20080 was already tagged right
636 2020-10-15T19:13:46 <MarcoFalke> I promise to test 20080 soon
637 2020-10-15T19:13:51 <wumpus> please don't repeat things
638 2020-10-15T19:13:56 <luke-jr> wumpus: 'return a null in a field' ?
639 2020-10-15T19:14:16 <wumpus> I'm having a lot of trouble keeping track of PRs mentioned here to add them to the milestone
640 2020-10-15T19:14:21 <luke-jr> oh, for -getinfo; sure; or just an error even
641 2020-10-15T19:14:25 <wumpus> luke-jr: yes
642 2020-10-15T19:14:37 <meshcollider> Alright 20080 it is, I'll close 19933
643 2020-10-15T19:15:09 <wumpus> meshcollider: yes makes sense
644 2020-10-15T19:16:14 <wumpus> I think I've tagged everything mentioned, if not, please let me know
645 2020-10-15T19:16:57 <promag> wumpus: maybe #20125
646 2020-10-15T19:16:59 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20125 | rpc, wallet: Expose database format in getwalletinfo by promag · Pull Request #20125 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
647 2020-10-15T19:17:26 <luke-jr> 20080 should get 0.19.x and 0.20.x tags too I think
648 2020-10-15T19:17:30 <wumpus> promag: sounds like a feature to me
649 2020-10-15T19:17:49 <MarcoFalke> luke-jr: It already has
650 2020-10-15T19:17:55 <wumpus> (though maybe a necessary one, I don't' know)
651 2020-10-15T19:17:57 <luke-jr> o
652 2020-10-15T19:17:57 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
653 2020-10-15T19:17:58 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] meshcollider closed pull request #19933: wallet: bugfix; if datadir has a trailing '/' listwalletdir would strip lead char of walletname (master...wallet-fix-missing-chars-boost-1.47) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19933
654 2020-10-15T19:18:08 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
655 2020-10-15T19:18:14 <jonatack> agree with promag about 20125
656 2020-10-15T19:18:18 <wumpus> luke-jr: let's discuss the 0.21 milestone now not other ones
657 2020-10-15T19:18:36 *** belcher has quit IRC
658 2020-10-15T19:19:09 <wumpus> ok adding 20125...
659 2020-10-15T19:19:14 <promag> wumpus: not really... just adds "format" key to the rpc response
660 2020-10-15T19:19:27 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
661 2020-10-15T19:19:28 <wumpus> well it's not a bugfix at least
662 2020-10-15T19:19:36 <wumpus> but I don't care it seems minimal enough
663 2020-10-15T19:19:52 <promag> wumpus: right
664 2020-10-15T19:20:43 <wumpus> that concludes the topic I guess
665 2020-10-15T19:20:53 <luke-jr> I'm not sure it makes sense to expose that detail, but meh
666 2020-10-15T19:21:06 <wumpus> #topic taproot relay policy / activation on testnet/signet (sipa)
667 2020-10-15T19:21:18 <sipa> hi
668 2020-10-15T19:21:31 <wumpus> luke-jr: especially if it's linked to descriptor wallets it seems a bit redundant, but yeah...
669 2020-10-15T19:21:32 <promag> luke-jr: could still be rejected ;)
670 2020-10-15T19:21:41 <sipa> there are a few aspects here
671 2020-10-15T19:21:50 <wumpus> if it's useful for troubleshooting/diagnosis it should be in
672 2020-10-15T19:22:12 <sipa> one is relay of v1 transaction outputs; bitcoin core will do that since #15846
673 2020-10-15T19:22:15 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15846 | [POLICY] Make sending to future native witness outputs standard by sipa · Pull Request #15846 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
674 2020-10-15T19:22:54 <sipa> but since the merge of #19953, we'll also relay spends of (valid) taproot outputs
675 2020-10-15T19:22:57 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19953 | Implement BIP 340-342 validation (Schnorr/taproot/tapscript) by sipa · Pull Request #19953 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
676 2020-10-15T19:23:09 <sipa> i think that's undesirable, at least until activation is defined, or even until actually activated
677 2020-10-15T19:23:44 * luke-jr did suggest splitting that out of the PR a few months ago :P
678 2020-10-15T19:24:07 <sipa> luke-jr: well, we do want it on regtest
679 2020-10-15T19:24:24 <luke-jr> regtest supports acceptnonstdtxn, but ok
680 2020-10-15T19:26:03 <sipa> talking to sdaftuar a bit, i think we should just reject creation and spending of v1 outputs until taproot is _active_
681 2020-10-15T19:26:17 <sipa> as a policy rule (not through script validation, which is more invasive)
682 2020-10-15T19:27:16 <sipa> or at least creation as soon as an activation is defined
683 2020-10-15T19:27:36 <sipa> (so that the behavior on mainnet before an activation is defined is essentially as if it didn't exist at all)
684 2020-10-15T19:28:06 <sipa> i can open a PR/issue and discuss further there
685 2020-10-15T19:28:30 <sipa> but i wanted to bring this up, as it may be unexpected that master is now doing taproot validation on the mempool
686 2020-10-15T19:28:43 <wumpus> I think that makes sense, to do that as a policy rule
687 2020-10-15T19:28:59 <MarcoFalke> so the spends would be valid taproot spends (with witness) only?
688 2020-10-15T19:29:28 <sipa> so right now: all v1 creation is relayed, v1 spends are relayed only if valid according to taproot rules
689 2020-10-15T19:29:52 <ariard> is there any disadvantage of doing this?
690 2020-10-15T19:30:20 <sipa> my proposal: v1 creation is not relayed while taproot activation is defined but not yet active; v1 spending is only relayed after being actually active
691 2020-10-15T19:30:23 *** ossifrage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692 2020-10-15T19:30:40 <provoostenator> Why not always relay?
693 2020-10-15T19:31:02 <MarcoFalke> provoostenator: Someone will give away their coins, surely
694 2020-10-15T19:31:03 <provoostenator> Doesn't seem ideal to have a bunch of nodes out there not relaying v1 transactions.
695 2020-10-15T19:31:23 <sipa> provoostenator: they'd all start relaying as soon as activation happens
696 2020-10-15T19:31:31 <sipa> before that point, we don't care
697 2020-10-15T19:31:59 *** jesseposner has quit IRC
698 2020-10-15T19:32:03 <ariard> sipa: so you want to hardcode the loosening policy change based on the consensus activation IIRC ?
699 2020-10-15T19:32:07 <luke-jr> well, activation isn't in 0.21.0, so not these
700 2020-10-15T19:32:38 <sipa> luke-jr: indeed, the only effect on 0.21.0 would be making spending of v1 non relayed
701 2020-10-15T19:32:50 <jnewbery> sipa: what's the difference between 'not relayed while taproot activation is defined but not yet active' and 'only relayed after being actually active'
702 2020-10-15T19:33:31 <provoostenator> Did we relay v1 to/from transactions before taproot was merged?
703 2020-10-15T19:33:37 <sipa> jnewbery: creation would be relayed as long as no activation parameters are set (the idea being that without activation parameters, it should be treated as an unknown future upgrade that can still change)
704 2020-10-15T19:33:41 <aj> jnewbery: 0.21.0 will be not-defined and not-active, so will always relay creation of taproot outputs, but not spends of them
705 2020-10-15T19:34:16 <sipa> maybe this is a simpler principle: before activation is _defined_, behavior should be identical to before taproot was merged
706 2020-10-15T19:34:21 <aj> sipa: i'm not sure it makes much sense to make it harder to spend a taproot output than to create one? creating one before activation is how you lose money?
707 2020-10-15T19:34:43 <jeremyrubin> aj: i thought we checked outputs standardness?
708 2020-10-15T19:35:02 <jnewbery> sipa aj: thanks
709 2020-10-15T19:35:10 <aj> jeremyrubin: 15846
710 2020-10-15T19:35:12 <luke-jr> aj: the spend we make harder, may be a theft
711 2020-10-15T19:35:20 <luke-jr> you can't steal if you can't spend
712 2020-10-15T19:35:22 <jeremyrubin> #15846
713 2020-10-15T19:35:24 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15846 | [POLICY] Make sending to future native witness outputs standard by sipa · Pull Request #15846 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
714 2020-10-15T19:35:41 <aj> luke-jr: prior to activation miners can spend trivially
715 2020-10-15T19:35:58 <luke-jr> aj: miners don't rely on others' policy
716 2020-10-15T19:36:11 <sipa> aj: my suggestion is that relay of creation and spending only differs before activation is defined... to match pre-taproot-implemented behavior
717 2020-10-15T19:36:27 <sipa> after activation is defined, both are disallowed until it is actually active
718 2020-10-15T19:36:29 *** Talkless has quit IRC
719 2020-10-15T19:37:45 <luke-jr> (OT: wumpus: #19502 should probably get milestoned)
720 2020-10-15T19:37:47 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19502 | Bugfix: Wallet: Soft-fail exceptions within ListWalletDir file checks by luke-jr · Pull Request #19502 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
721 2020-10-15T19:37:51 <sipa> aj: which is ultimately due to softfork safeness... if we treat taproot as subject to change still (which i think we should until activation is defined), we shouldn't permit spending it to be relayed
722 2020-10-15T19:38:09 <wumpus> luke-jr: ok
723 2020-10-15T19:38:24 <jeremyrubin> has that been reverted though somehow?
724 2020-10-15T19:38:33 <sipa> jeremyrubin: what?
725 2020-10-15T19:38:42 <jeremyrubin> looking at the current code and I'm not seeing that logic still
726 2020-10-15T19:38:46 <aj> sipa: right, immediately after activation (supported by 0.21.1 say), you have all nodes relaying creation, but only 0.21.1 nodes relaying spends. vs having 0.21.0 and 0.21.1 nodes validating and relaying spends if we leave things as they are now
727 2020-10-15T19:39:36 <jeremyrubin> Ah
728 2020-10-15T19:39:39 <jeremyrubin> it went into Solver
729 2020-10-15T19:39:51 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
730 2020-10-15T19:40:35 <sipa> aj: i think permitting spends right now is bad... it's just gratuitous policy difference between 0.21 and pre-0.21 nodes
731 2020-10-15T19:40:54 <sipa> the extra rule for suspending relay of outputs is user protection before activation
732 2020-10-15T19:41:07 <sipa> anyway, will open an issue
733 2020-10-15T19:41:08 <aj> sipa: the principle (no behaviour change prior to activation) makes sense, just doesn't seem like it has much benefit (people still lose money if they create outputs earlier, because miners will claim them via a non-std tx) and slight costs (will make relay slightly harder due to implementation-but-no-activation nodes not relaying)
734 2020-10-15T19:41:21 <wumpus> 20 minutes left, we might want to move to the next topic
735 2020-10-15T19:41:30 <sipa> aj: if their own node rejects relay, miners will never see the tx :)
736 2020-10-15T19:41:46 <luke-jr> sipa: no reason their own node would :P
737 2020-10-15T19:41:53 <wumpus> #topic Getting BIP 8 logic in before freeze (luke-jr)
738 2020-10-15T19:42:03 <luke-jr> I've implemented the current BIP 8 as logic only (no activations) in #19573. This is probably not the final BIP 8 (aj's been working on some revisions), but having it merged in 0.21 means we can have a smaller diff to add Taproot activation later.
739 2020-10-15T19:42:04 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19573 | Replace unused BIP 9 logic with draft BIP 8 by luke-jr · Pull Request #19573 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
740 2020-10-15T19:42:06 <luke-jr> Would be nice to get this merged before 0.21.0rc1 if possible. Anyone who wants to help review (or other) can join ##taproot-activation to help get this done quickly.
741 2020-10-15T19:42:09 <luke-jr> Note the PR depends on #19401 and #20157. These are fairly trivial, and the former already has 2 ACKs.
742 2020-10-15T19:42:11 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19401 | QA: Use GBT to get block versions correct by luke-jr · Pull Request #19401 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
743 2020-10-15T19:42:12 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20157 | Bugfix: chainparams: Add missing (disabled) Taproot deployment for Signet by luke-jr · Pull Request #20157 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
744 2020-10-15T19:43:31 *** rafaelpac has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
745 2020-10-15T19:45:03 <wumpus> i don't know, it does feel a bit rushed to me, to merge something (that should be a no-op otherwise) last minute just to minimize the diff later, especially when we don't even know yet if it's the final state of the BIP
746 2020-10-15T19:45:13 <wumpus> not a small project either
747 2020-10-15T19:45:48 <luke-jr> hmm, true
748 2020-10-15T19:46:01 <sipa> no strong opinion... it doesn't seem very invasive, but on the other hand, this can also easily be backported along with actual activation parameters
749 2020-10-15T19:46:18 <sipa> it also may turn out to be wasted effort
750 2020-10-15T19:46:26 *** ossifrage has quit IRC
751 2020-10-15T19:47:13 <luke-jr> not sure how it could be wasted effort
752 2020-10-15T19:47:29 <luke-jr> sipa: your topic, you had mentioned signet/testnet activation - that might or might not be a reason to do this sooner
753 2020-10-15T19:47:38 <jeremyrubin> i think it makes sense to wait for cleaner git history
754 2020-10-15T19:48:03 <luke-jr> jeremyrubin: I'm assuming the two trivial PRs would be merged first as part of this process
755 2020-10-15T19:48:20 <sipa> oh right, i didn't bring that up... do we want to define an activation on testnet?
756 2020-10-15T19:48:36 <sipa> that's something that was done historically, but with signet i think there may be less need now
757 2020-10-15T19:48:40 <luke-jr> I think it makes sense to test BIP 8 with testnet
758 2020-10-15T19:49:30 <wumpus> it should activate there at some time i guess
759 2020-10-15T19:50:18 <sipa> always possible in .1 or whatever point release too, of course
760 2020-10-15T19:50:19 <aj> probably shouldn't activate on testnet with a different activation method than we plan on using for mainnet?
761 2020-10-15T19:50:32 <luke-jr> sipa: true
762 2020-10-15T19:50:35 *** rafaelpac has quit IRC
763 2020-10-15T19:51:04 <luke-jr> maybe that's a good solution: testnet in .1, and mainnet not until .2
764 2020-10-15T19:51:05 <sipa> it'd be nice to see things active on signet first before suggesting testnet changes
765 2020-10-15T19:51:05 <wumpus> sipa: right
766 2020-10-15T19:51:20 <aj> kallewoof's not awake, but i was thinking maybe lock taproot as it stands in immediately on the default signet, and if worst comes to worst just restart the signet chain if needed
767 2020-10-15T19:51:20 <sipa> (as in signet it can be rolled out without code changes...)
768 2020-10-15T19:52:00 <wumpus> that's great
769 2020-10-15T19:52:12 <luke-jr> signet doesn't even need an activation, does it?
770 2020-10-15T19:52:15 <luke-jr> just always-active?
771 2020-10-15T19:52:16 <MarcoFalke> wait, if spends are made non-standard, it needs conde changes for signet
772 2020-10-15T19:52:21 <aj> sipa: (not-relaying taproot-txs if activation hasn't happened will affect the "without code changes" part a bit
773 2020-10-15T19:52:43 <aj> luke-jr: yeah, that's what i'm thinking
774 2020-10-15T19:52:55 <aj> luke-jr: (i mean, "always-active" is an activation)
775 2020-10-15T19:53:02 <luke-jr> the policy changes sipa suggested are conditional on the deployment state AFAIK?
776 2020-10-15T19:53:21 <MarcoFalke> so I guess s/without/minimal/
777 2020-10-15T19:53:25 <aj> luke-jr: right, but *nodes* have to know the deployment state in that case, not just miners
778 2020-10-15T19:53:31 <luke-jr> so always-active would trigger the spending policy
779 2020-10-15T19:53:50 <sipa> i think we can flesh these things out the next few days
780 2020-10-15T19:53:55 <aj> yep
781 2020-10-15T19:54:04 <luke-jr> yeah, let's give jeremyrubin some minutes âº
782 2020-10-15T19:54:18 <jeremyrubin> i need like 1 min
783 2020-10-15T19:54:27 <jeremyrubin> so no rush
784 2020-10-15T19:54:47 <wumpus> #topic Small announcement on behalf of BGIN (jeremyrubin)
785 2020-10-15T19:55:00 <jeremyrubin> Matsuo has asked me to share the following
786 2020-10-15T19:55:02 <jeremyrubin> FYI bgin-global.org is hosting an event for core devs the first week of Nov, please fill out this form https://forms.gle/99yUnQdtAkAwt5SW7 to assist scheduling or email schwentker@bsafe.network with any questions. Goal of the event is to help core dev sustainability, so should be of interest for all here.
787 2020-10-15T19:55:12 <jeremyrubin> https://bgin-global.org
788 2020-10-15T19:55:20 <luke-jr> during a pandemic? O.o
789 2020-10-15T19:55:29 <achow101> Who's bgin?
790 2020-10-15T19:55:33 <jeremyrubin> it's a virtual event
791 2020-10-15T19:55:36 <luke-jr> i c
792 2020-10-15T19:55:56 <luke-jr> "Blockchain Governance Initiative Network "
793 2020-10-15T19:55:58 <jeremyrubin> BGIN is "Blockchain Governance Initiative Network (BGIN)"
794 2020-10-15T19:56:05 <jeremyrubin> I'd ignore the acronym tho
795 2020-10-15T19:56:11 <luke-jr> so this is like NY agreement in organization form? :x
796 2020-10-15T19:56:20 <jeremyrubin> no
797 2020-10-15T19:56:40 <aj> there's also coinbase looking to support bitcoin dev projects as of an hour or so ago https://twitter.com/coinbase/status/1316801517983334401
798 2020-10-15T19:56:42 <jeremyrubin> it's the sort of name that you have to have to get intl participation from people in intl financial regulation
799 2020-10-15T19:56:53 <luke-jr> jeremyrubin: lol
800 2020-10-15T19:56:56 <jeremyrubin> so it's started by Matsuo and others
801 2020-10-15T19:57:31 <jeremyrubin> the point being that a lot of various regulators want to chat about how Bitcoin works and how they engage, but also understanding how standards emerge
802 2020-10-15T19:57:57 <jeremyrubin> But a part of that is they want to understand and potentiall support development through research grants
803 2020-10-15T19:58:32 <wumpus> that sounds pretty scary tbh
804 2020-10-15T19:58:36 <jeremyrubin> so it's maybe folk you'd rather not talk to at all depending on your preferences, but it is a good faith effort afaict
805 2020-10-15T19:58:57 <jeremyrubin> :shrug:
806 2020-10-15T19:59:15 <jeremyrubin> I'd encourage you to email concerns to schwentker@bsafe.network
807 2020-10-15T20:00:05 <luke-jr> jeremyrubin: it sounds like they're just giving webinars and we'd simply watch it? O.o
808 2020-10-15T20:00:14 <jeremyrubin> no i don't think so
809 2020-10-15T20:00:26 <jeremyrubin> I think they want to hear from you directly
810 2020-10-15T20:00:41 <MarcoFalke> end meeting?
811 2020-10-15T20:00:44 <wumpus> ok, I think everything is said, thanks for the announcement
812 2020-10-15T20:00:46 <wumpus> #endmeeting
813 2020-10-15T20:00:46 <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Oct 15 20:00:46 2020 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
814 2020-10-15T20:00:46 <lightningbot> Minutes: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-10-15-19.00.html
815 2020-10-15T20:00:46 <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-10-15-19.00.txt
816 2020-10-15T20:00:46 <lightningbot> Log: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-10-15-19.00.log.html
817 2020-10-15T20:00:49 <luke-jr> >how they engage
818 2020-10-15T20:00:51 <luke-jr> "don't
819 2020-10-15T20:01:21 <luke-jr> jk, maybe should tell them to get rid of the travel rule tho ;)
820 2020-10-15T20:01:22 <jeremyrubin> I mean, there are practical things that are relatively improtant to engage them on
821 2020-10-15T20:01:26 <jeremyrubin> E.g., travel rule
822 2020-10-15T20:01:30 <luke-jr> jeremyrubin: yeah, joking
823 2020-10-15T20:01:31 <jeremyrubin> do you owe taxes on BCash
824 2020-10-15T20:01:40 <luke-jr> not anymore
825 2020-10-15T20:01:55 <emzy> jeremyrubin: I also find it strange. But can I as a none dev also join?
826 2020-10-15T20:02:07 <jeremyrubin> If you had a contract denom in Bitcoin do you owe BCash and Bitcoin after a fork?
827 2020-10-15T20:02:11 <luke-jr> emzy: who is to say you're not a dev? ;)
828 2020-10-15T20:02:16 <achow101> luke-jr: re: sqlite and descriptors. The intention for the foreseeable future is sqlite == descriptors and descriptors == sqlite. So adjust #20156 accordingly
829 2020-10-15T20:02:17 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20156 | Make sqlite support optional (compile-time) by luke-jr · Pull Request #20156 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
830 2020-10-15T20:02:20 <emzy> luke-jr: me :)
831 2020-10-15T20:02:39 <luke-jr> achow101: what needs adjustment?
832 2020-10-15T20:02:53 <sipa> achow101: no way to convert legacy bdb wallets to legacy sqlite ones?
833 2020-10-15T20:03:19 <jeremyrubin> Anyways, i don't think there is malintnet but up to you to give benefit of the doubt or express concerns to them directly
834 2020-10-15T20:03:23 <jeremyrubin> i am a mere herald
835 2020-10-15T20:03:31 <aj> "legacy sqlite" wow, already :)
836 2020-10-15T20:03:33 <luke-jr> wumpus: 20156 missed milestoning
837 2020-10-15T20:03:45 <luke-jr> aj: lol
838 2020-10-15T20:03:49 <sipa> aj: legacy meaning non-descriptor
839 2020-10-15T20:03:49 <jeremyrubin> emzy: I think you'd be fine to join, just fill out the form
840 2020-10-15T20:03:56 <achow101> luke-jr: to enforce that descriptor wallets can't be made of sqlite is disabled. Dunno of you already did that, still going through my email backlog
841 2020-10-15T20:03:57 <aj> sipa: yeah :)
842 2020-10-15T20:04:19 <emzy> jeremyrubin: I did. At least I can tell you here what happend :)
843 2020-10-15T20:04:47 <luke-jr> achow101: I didn't remove any code enforcing it, at least
844 2020-10-15T20:04:54 <achow101> sipa: maybe dump them createfromdump, but I'm not intending on making a migration for it
845 2020-10-15T20:04:56 <jeremyrubin> emzy: wat?
846 2020-10-15T20:05:39 <emzy> jeremyrubin: I submitted the form.
847 2020-10-15T20:05:59 <sipa> achow101: well the question is if the format should be supported i think, regardless of how someone can create it
848 2020-10-15T20:06:02 <luke-jr> error = Untranslated(strprintf("Failed to load database path '%s'. Data is not in required format.", path.string()));
849 2020-10-15T20:06:12 <luke-jr> I guess that error could be clearer
850 2020-10-15T20:06:19 <luke-jr> or maybe just remove descriptor support entirely
851 2020-10-15T20:06:25 <sipa> it's ok to say non-descriptor-sqlite wallets are unsupported
852 2020-10-15T20:06:33 <jonatack> achow101: right, the main reason for adding a db format field to getwalletinfo or -getinfo is because a bdb wallet can be descriptor
853 2020-10-15T20:06:38 <sipa> if we don't test that
854 2020-10-15T20:06:43 *** DeanWeen has quit IRC
855 2020-10-15T20:06:56 <sipa> but whatever combinations are supported should be tested
856 2020-10-15T20:07:07 <wumpus> i'm all for not supporting too many combinations
857 2020-10-15T20:07:11 <sipa> and those that aren't should at least get a warning
858 2020-10-15T20:07:19 <wumpus> be careful here, anything you support for the wallet needs to be support for pretty much near forever
859 2020-10-15T20:07:21 <sipa> (or otherwise be impossible to create)
860 2020-10-15T20:07:23 <achow101> luke-jr: I'll have a look when I get home, but I was intending on writing a full without-bdb and without-sqlite thing that disabled legacy or descriptors respectively
861 2020-10-15T20:07:25 <wumpus> as those files will be around for a long time
862 2020-10-15T20:07:44 <wumpus> it's also confusing for users
863 2020-10-15T20:07:57 <wumpus> two types of wallet is enough, avoid the combinatorial cmplexity
864 2020-10-15T20:08:43 <sipa> yeah
865 2020-10-15T20:09:07 <sipa> that's fair
866 2020-10-15T20:09:20 <achow101> jonatack: I think that's useful for experts who do unsupported things, but for most users, the format should be tied to the type
867 2020-10-15T20:09:52 <jeremyrubin> 2**256 wallets for added security
868 2020-10-15T20:10:16 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
869 2020-10-15T20:10:16 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] dongcarl closed pull request #20050: validation: Prune (in)direct g_chainman usage related to ::LookupBlockIndex (bundle 1) (master...2020-09-libbitcoinruntime-v4) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20050
870 2020-10-15T20:10:17 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
871 2020-10-15T20:12:13 <wumpus> heh
872 2020-10-15T20:12:40 <achow101> sipa: I think it will be supported but not recommended, aka you had to jump through a lot of hoops to get to legacy sqlite
873 2020-10-15T20:13:01 <sipa> yeah, ok
874 2020-10-15T20:13:32 <luke-jr> i can use sqlite wit uncompressed pubkeys?
875 2020-10-15T20:13:40 <luke-jr> :P
876 2020-10-15T20:13:48 <achow101> sure
877 2020-10-15T20:14:07 <achow101> Descriptora can have uncompressed keys
878 2020-10-15T20:14:12 <luke-jr> :o
879 2020-10-15T20:14:27 <luke-jr> I meant the old wallet format tho
880 2020-10-15T20:14:43 <luke-jr> we should probably drop support for that.. it isn't actually compatible post-segwit anyway :x
881 2020-10-15T20:15:07 *** filchef has quit IRC
882 2020-10-15T20:15:17 <sipa> you mean sqlite non-descriptor with uncompressed keys?
883 2020-10-15T20:15:24 <achow101> Yeah but you and Matt will complain about it
884 2020-10-15T20:15:31 *** filchef has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
885 2020-10-15T20:15:33 <luke-jr> lol
886 2020-10-15T20:16:53 <luke-jr> Qt should stop using camelcase so I don't need to guess at if they did ToolTip or Tooltip
887 2020-10-15T20:17:12 <achow101> Is actually toolTip
888 2020-10-15T20:17:22 <luke-jr> )(%#&)#_)#
889 2020-10-15T20:17:41 <luke-jr> (I'm actually calling SetToolTip, so it's okay)
890 2020-10-15T20:20:02 <promag> descriptors:true wallet doesn't mean it's sqlite right?
891 2020-10-15T20:20:38 <promag> only true starting with 0.21, at least that's my understanding
892 2020-10-15T20:21:00 <achow101> yes
893 2020-10-15T20:21:03 <promag> that's why I'm suggesting "format" in getwalletinfo response
894 2020-10-15T20:22:38 <promag> nit, and maybe in the gui we could have some thing/icon/whatever for these things - like getwalletinfo
895 2020-10-15T20:22:39 *** DeanWeen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
896 2020-10-15T20:23:23 <luke-jr> promag: descriptors:true will mean sqlite in all supported configurations AIUI
897 2020-10-15T20:24:49 <promag> luke-jr: you can still open a 0.20 descriptors wallet?
898 2020-10-15T20:25:20 <luke-jr> promag: 0.20 doesn't support descriptors
899 2020-10-15T20:25:37 <luke-jr> I don't think..
900 2020-10-15T20:25:41 <promag> <.<
901 2020-10-15T20:28:47 <promag> luke-jr: you are right
902 2020-10-15T20:28:54 <promag> #16528
903 2020-10-15T20:28:57 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16528 | Native Descriptor Wallets using DescriptorScriptPubKeyMan by achow101 · Pull Request #16528 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
904 2020-10-15T20:30:01 <promag> 0.20 has some descriptors stuff, but not the option to create descriptors wallet
905 2020-10-15T20:30:16 *** ossifrage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
906 2020-10-15T20:34:01 *** vincenzopalazzo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
907 2020-10-15T20:35:10 <achow101> Irs only helpful for people who have descriptor wallets on old master
908 2020-10-15T20:36:32 <promag> right
909 2020-10-15T20:37:22 * luke-jr likes git-worktree
910 2020-10-15T20:37:24 <promag> on the long run the plan is to enforce descriptors?
911 2020-10-15T20:37:52 <promag> and as a consequence it will be sqlite?
912 2020-10-15T20:38:06 <achow101> Yes
913 2020-10-15T20:38:08 <promag> or we will also support non descriptor wallets in sqlite?
914 2020-10-15T20:39:28 <achow101> It will be supported as in if you somehow make one, we won't explode
915 2020-10-15T20:39:52 <luke-jr> will we explode on promag's bdb descriptor wallet? ;)
916 2020-10-15T20:40:02 <achow101> But actually making one is going to be non trivial
917 2020-10-15T20:40:23 <achow101> Same for bdb descriptor wallets
918 2020-10-15T20:41:39 <achow101> luke-jr: I've been running the sqlite branch with 3 of the 4 combinations of format and type without any issue
919 2020-10-15T20:41:54 <achow101> For the past 3 months or so
920 2020-10-15T20:42:17 <promag> "non trivial" why?
921 2020-10-15T20:42:21 <achow101> Only one I haven't run is legacy sqlite
922 2020-10-15T20:42:26 *** lightlike has quit IRC
923 2020-10-15T20:43:47 <achow101> promag: to avoid combinatorial complexity in the migration code
924 2020-10-15T20:45:41 *** jesseposner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
925 2020-10-15T20:46:09 <achow101> I'll open an issue that lays out the full plan and a timeline
926 2020-10-15T20:52:53 <aj> luke-jr: git-worktree is the best. shame paths end up hardcoded so ccache stuff isn't shared across them though
927 2020-10-15T20:53:24 <luke-jr> aj: wait, what? ccache doesn't care about paths, does it?
928 2020-10-15T20:53:58 <sipa> your ccache cache is shared i think?
929 2020-10-15T20:54:07 <sipa> it's in $HOME/.ccache
930 2020-10-15T20:55:04 <luke-jr> hmm, I thought I configured my ccache to be on tmpfs tho
931 2020-10-15T20:55:20 <luke-jr> ah yes cache directory /var/tmp/ccache-dev
932 2020-10-15T20:55:27 <sipa> ah, or wherever you configure it to be
933 2020-10-15T20:57:55 *** promag has quit IRC
934 2020-10-15T20:58:34 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
935 2020-10-15T21:00:02 *** Lthere has quit IRC
936 2020-10-15T21:00:17 <aj> luke-jr: ccache doesn't directly, but the path ends up going into the preprocessed source somewhere or something which makes ccache's input different each time... not sure how though now that i look
937 2020-10-15T21:00:18 *** wilcl_ark is now known as willcl_ark
938 2020-10-15T21:03:07 *** promag has quit IRC
939 2020-10-15T21:05:45 <aj> oh, i'm wrong, ccache has a `hash_dir` flag that makes it hash the working dir, and it's -g that puts the working dir in the .o files
940 2020-10-15T21:06:05 <sipa> still, worktrees are very useful
941 2020-10-15T21:06:30 <sipa> i have separate ones for fuzzer builds (so i don't need to re-run ./configure with the fuzzer flags all the time)
942 2020-10-15T21:06:33 <sipa> and sanitizer builds
943 2020-10-15T21:07:22 <sipa> you can't checkout the same branch in two worktrees simultaneously, but you can use git checkout --detach in one to just switch to code of a branch in another
944 2020-10-15T21:10:23 <luke-jr> aj: it being in the .o should be okay?
945 2020-10-15T21:10:43 <luke-jr> sipa: you can checkout the same branch if you really want to :D
946 2020-10-15T21:10:52 <sipa> luke-jr: how so?
947 2020-10-15T21:11:21 <sipa> is there some --use-the-force option?
948 2020-10-15T21:11:37 <luke-jr> IIRC
949 2020-10-15T21:12:13 <luke-jr> --force
950 2020-10-15T21:12:36 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
951 2020-10-15T21:15:35 *** vincenzopalazzo has quit IRC
952 2020-10-15T21:16:05 *** filchef has quit IRC
953 2020-10-15T21:22:25 *** Antimatter has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
954 2020-10-15T21:30:00 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
955 2020-10-15T21:32:07 *** Pavlenex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
956 2020-10-15T21:38:31 *** Exho has quit IRC
957 2020-10-15T21:39:49 *** Pavlenex has quit IRC
958 2020-10-15T21:40:44 *** rabidus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
959 2020-10-15T21:43:54 <sipa> if anyone gets this warning with gcc 9, it's a compiler bug (which just produces a bogus warning):
960 2020-10-15T21:43:57 <sipa> src/ecmult_impl.h:496:48: warning: array subscript [1, 268435456] is outside array bounds of âstruct secp256k1_strauss_point_state[1]â [-Warray-bounds] 496 | secp256k1_gej tmp = a[state->ps[np].input_pos];
961 2020-10-15T21:59:28 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962 2020-10-15T21:59:28 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theStack opened pull request #20159: test: mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll.py improvements (use MiniWallet, add logging) (master...20201015-test-improve-mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20159
963 2020-10-15T21:59:35 *** owowo has quit IRC
964 2020-10-15T21:59:40 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
965 2020-10-15T22:04:17 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
966 2020-10-15T22:10:19 <luke-jr> btw, why do we use "org.bitcoinfoundation.Bitcoin-Qt" on macOS?
967 2020-10-15T22:11:03 *** vasild has quit IRC
968 2020-10-15T22:12:34 *** vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
969 2020-10-15T22:14:05 <jb55> awkward
970 2020-10-15T22:14:42 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, iirc wasn't gavin the one signing the macos builds?
971 2020-10-15T22:14:54 <phantomcircuit> probably just legacy from that
972 2020-10-15T22:15:11 <sipa> i think changing it was brought up before, but would break compatibility with existing settings so wasn't done?
973 2020-10-15T22:16:03 <sipa> (it's awkward that it was ever set to that - even when the foundation was actively sponsoring developers - but little that can be done about that now)
974 2020-10-15T22:16:48 <luke-jr> sipa: it doesn't look like it would from the context :/
975 2020-10-15T22:19:40 <sipa> there is some discussion about it in #17462
976 2020-10-15T22:19:42 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17462 | build: macOS fix Info.plist by RandyMcMillan · Pull Request #17462 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
977 2020-10-15T22:22:34 *** promag_ is now known as promag
978 2020-10-15T22:24:06 <promag> achow101: is there anything preventing swaping CWallet::database in runtime? so 1) load with bdb 2) swap database 3) write all ?
979 2020-10-15T22:24:25 <promag> *swap to sqlite
980 2020-10-15T22:24:35 <achow101> promag: you might end up missing a few records
981 2020-10-15T22:24:41 <achow101> I'd definitely wouldn't recommend doing that
982 2020-10-15T22:24:51 <promag> not all records are loaded ok
983 2020-10-15T22:25:36 <achow101> promag: all records are loaded, it's just a matter of making sure that "write all" wrote them all
984 2020-10-15T22:25:46 <achow101> there's no existing "write all"
985 2020-10-15T22:25:58 <promag> oh ok
986 2020-10-15T22:26:02 <luke-jr> all records might not be loaded
987 2020-10-15T22:26:05 <luke-jr> IIRC moves don't
988 2020-10-15T22:26:37 <achow101> there are some records that aren't loaded because they aren't useful, just kept around for back compat. obviously back compat doesn't matter if you move to sqlite
989 2020-10-15T22:26:37 <phantomcircuit> sipa, iirc the foundation was paying for the certificate, something about it being easier for a "foundation" to get one than for an individual
990 2020-10-15T22:26:56 <luke-jr> achow101: uh, pretty sure we still show them
991 2020-10-15T22:27:16 <phantomcircuit> who knows if that was true or if it was pretextual though..
992 2020-10-15T22:27:39 <achow101> luke-jr: no? I mean things like "default key" or the original "version"
993 2020-10-15T22:27:47 <achow101> (version is now "minversion")
994 2020-10-15T22:28:00 <promag> don't see a reason to remove load-bdb, that way the user could just send the funds to new wallet and we wouldn't have to do the migration tool
995 2020-10-15T22:28:26 <achow101> The surefire way to migrate format is to grab a cursor on the original db, iterate it, and write every key/value pair in the new db
996 2020-10-15T22:29:07 <luke-jr> achow101: well, I don't think moves get loaded either
997 2020-10-15T22:29:35 <achow101> luke-jr: moves as in the old move rpc?
998 2020-10-15T22:29:39 <luke-jr> yes
999 2020-10-15T22:30:10 <achow101> I thought those records just got renamed and redefined for labels
1000 2020-10-15T22:30:22 <luke-jr> what?
1001 2020-10-15T22:30:26 <promag> bdb2sqlite.py incoming
1002 2020-10-15T22:30:39 <achow101> but also, that's for back compat, and if you are going to sqlite, back compat doesn't matter
1003 2020-10-15T22:30:56 <luke-jr> achow101: I would be annoyed if migrating my wallet lost data
1004 2020-10-15T22:31:16 <luke-jr> {"account": "a", "category": "move", "time": 1296345052, "amount": 0.00100000, "otheraccount": "b", "comment": ""},
1005 2020-10-15T22:31:25 <luke-jr> this shouldn't disappear from listtransactions just because I upgrade
1006 2020-10-15T22:31:28 <achow101> luke-jr: right, which is also why I prefer the straight record-to-record migration rather than what is loaded in CWallet
1007 2020-10-15T22:39:49 *** Livestradamus has quit IRC
1008 2020-10-15T22:39:49 *** IPGlider has quit IRC
1009 2020-10-15T22:40:55 *** Livestradamus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1010 2020-10-15T22:41:04 *** IPGlider has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1011 2020-10-15T22:47:08 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012 2020-10-15T22:47:08 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #20161: Minor Taproot follow-ups (master...202010_taproot_followup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20161
1013 2020-10-15T22:47:10 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1014 2020-10-15T23:00:29 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1015 2020-10-15T23:18:39 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1016 2020-10-15T23:35:09 *** snex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1017 2020-10-15T23:35:11 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1018 2020-10-15T23:35:12 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #20162: p2p, compiler warnings: specify Announcement::m_state bitfield to be 8 bits (master...bitfield-too-small-warning) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20162
1019 2020-10-15T23:35:12 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1020 2020-10-15T23:35:40 *** snex has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1021 2020-10-15T23:36:33 <fanquake> Yea Iâm fairly certain we canât change that MacOS string without breaking something
1022 2020-10-15T23:40:27 *** fjahr_ is now known as fjahr
1023 2020-10-15T23:46:03 *** proofofkeags has quit IRC
1024 2020-10-15T23:47:55 *** _joerodgers has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1025 2020-10-15T23:52:09 *** joerodgers has quit IRC