--- Day changed Wed Jan 04 2017
00:05 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
00:06 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:11 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
00:11 < gmaxwell> gah we still sign inside the transaction creation inner loop?! I thought we fixed that a long time ago. :-/
00:12 < gmaxwell> insanity.
00:13 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:26 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:26 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.216.138] has quit [Changing host]     
00:26 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@unaffiliated/alina-malina] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:29 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
00:29 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:29 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@223.223.187.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
00:31 -!- fengling [~fengling@223.223.187.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
00:37 -!- fengling [~fengling@223.223.187.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:37 -!- Squidicc [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
00:38 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: you don't if you are using fundrawtx
00:38 -!- xiangfu [~xiangfu@223.223.187.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:38 < jonasschnelli> well, you use the dummy signer
00:41 < Jouke> pruning node do forward blocks nowadays right?
00:41 < gmaxwell> yes.
00:42 < Jouke> A rescan on my problem node didn't work, so I removed the block and chainstate dir and let it sync from fresh.
00:43 < gmaxwell> rescan? why were you rescanning?
00:44 < Jouke> I had that problem before which you helped me with a couple of days ago.
00:44 < Jouke> It couldn't read a block from disk when I issued a getblock rpc call
00:44 < gmaxwell> did you rescan or reindex?
00:45 < gmaxwell> rescan will do nothing, so if that didn't work it's unsurprising.
00:45 < Jouke> Euh, reindex indeed
00:45 < Jouke> I did a reindex
00:45 < gmaxwell> whew. Interesting!
00:46 < Jouke> But since it was connected only to a pruning node, I had it temporarily connect to an other node of mine through an ssh tunnel.
00:46 < gmaxwell> yes, can't fetch the history through the pruned node.
00:47 < Jouke> That connection went down this evening (I'm in europe), and it synced to block 445248
00:48 < Jouke> But the pruning node it connects to should have the rest of the blocks as prune=80000
00:48 < gmaxwell> if you were expecting it to fetch blocks that weren't at the tip but were within the pruning window, that also won't work: the pruned node has no way to tell the peer what blocks it has.
00:49 < gmaxwell> your fetching node will not try to sync off it. But when the pruned node has a new block it will relay it along (and if there is a reorg required, the client node will still fetch whatever blocks are required to accomplish the reorg).
00:50 < Jouke> Hmm, ok.
00:50 < Jouke> So my expectations were wrong. Thanks again for explaining!
00:51 -!- gielbier [~michiel@unaffiliated/gielbier] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:57 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] gmaxwell opened pull request #9465: [Wallet] Do not perform ECDSA in the fee calculation inner loop. (master...no_signing_in_inner_loop) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9465
01:04 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:04 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:08 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)]     
01:10 < gmaxwell> wumpus: I'm glad I wasn't the only person who thought it was already the case.
01:10 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #9467: [Trivial] [Doc] Install Protobuf v3 on OS X (master...osx-protobuf-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9467
01:10 -!- jannes [~jannes@095-097-246-234.static.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:10 < gmaxwell> only noticed it wasn't when I went to decrement the fee when we found we needed less than we expected and found I couldn't because the transaction was already signed.
01:10 < wumpus> gmaxwell: I thought that was exactly why the dummy signer was introduced, but apparently not 
01:11 < gmaxwell> I ... think there was a miscommunication when it was proposed that a dummy signer be used there. :P
01:12 < gmaxwell> As in someone thought that it was only needed for the fundrawtransaction case. :P
01:12 < wumpus> probably
01:12 < wumpus> ohh, so that's why it was introduced. Yes I remember now
01:12 -!- Giszmo [~leo@46.128.114.214.dynamic.cablesurf.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:12 < wumpus> anyhow using it for normal transaction generation makes a lot of sense
01:13 < gmaxwell> should be a lot faster in some cases.
01:13 < gmaxwell> but also lets us do more sensible things with fees.
01:14 -!- JackH [~laptop@79-73-186-204.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:23 < jonasschnelli> We could remove the "real" signing from CreateTransaction and factor out SignTransaction (from signrawtx) and use everywhere Create/Fund/Sign.
01:23 < jonasschnelli> (everywhere internally)
01:23 < jonasschnelli> Qt / sendtoaddr / sendmany
01:24 < jonasschnelli> Ah. Just saw. #9465
01:24 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-jrlutkvsntjcdzoj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:24 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9465 | [Wallet] Do not perform ECDSA signing in the fee calculation inner loop. by gmaxwell · Pull Request #9465 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
01:31 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
01:32 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:40 < fanquake> Is libevent 2.1.7 actually a release candidate, or just new beta version? Maybe a chance for a new release in the next few months.
01:40 < fanquake> wumpus would you be opposed to moving depends to the latest libevent beta (which it is pre 0.14) for the 0.14 release?
01:41 < fanquake> Just looking through dependancies now. Qt is another one to consider. 5.7 has had a point release, so should be more stable.
01:42 < cfields> fanquake: speaking of, I know I owe you a bunch of review/acks on depends PRs. Been rushing to get net stuff finished up. I'll find some time this week to go through those.
01:43 < fanquake> cfields no worries. I've just fixed-up the Zero-MQ one. Was going to open a more general depends related one tonight/tomorrow. Are you working on anything there that might conflict?
01:45 < cfields> fanquake: no, only qt would conflict. I have a halfway-rewritten .mk to take advantage of some of the new build features for 5.7. But iirc we can bump without that and save it for 5.8 if needed.
01:46 < cfields> er, that should say halfway-done rewrite
01:47 < fanquake> cfields cool. I'll get these changes finished up and PR. Are we at all confident of dropping Boost for 0.14.0? Otherwise is a 1.61.0 -> 1.63.0 bump worth it in the interim?
01:48 < cfields> fanquake: yea, not going to make it for 0.14. The changes are no fun to review, so it tends to go slowly
01:51 < fanquake> cfields fair enough, it's a long slog. You're doing great work though. :)
01:52 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
01:53 < cfields> heh, thanks
02:06 -!- berndj [~berndj@mail.azna.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]     
02:19 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:21 < wumpus> fanquake: no, I'd propose the same
02:22 < wumpus> fanquake: the libevent beta is *lots* better than the last stable, lots of fixes and new features
02:23 < fanquake> wumpus: Great, i'll work on some changes for that as well.
02:25 < wumpus> IIRC also means a windows-specific patch is no longer necesary
02:26 < fanquake> Yes, I think there is the possibility to drop some workarounds as well.
02:26 < fanquake> Yea #8867
02:26 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8867 | Move to Libevent 2.1.x · Issue #8867 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
02:53 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
03:03 -!- MarcoFalke [~marco@5.199.182.203] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:09 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/649cf5fe894b...c0ddd32bf629
03:09 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 27765b6 isle2983: Increment MIT Licence copyright header year on files modified in 2016...
03:09 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c0ddd32 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9450: Increment MIT licence copyright header year on files modified in 2016...
03:10 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9450: Increment MIT licence copyright header year on files modified in 2016 (master...PR-increment-year) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9450
03:12 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@207pc74.sshunet.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:12 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@207pc74.sshunet.nl] has quit [Changing host]     
03:12 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:21 -!- jtimon [~quassel@197.red-88-0-200.dynamicip.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:22 -!- jannes [~jannes@095-097-246-234.static.chello.nl] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
03:22 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 8 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c0ddd32bf629...d9ae1cefa081
03:22 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7325b15 Cory Fields: net: a few small cleanups before replacing boost threads...
03:22 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 799df91 Cory Fields: net: add CThreadInterrupt and InterruptibleSleep
03:22 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0985052 Cory Fields: net: make net interruptible...
03:22 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9289: net: drop boost::thread_group (master...connman-threads) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9289
03:23 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d9ae1cefa081...869781c51cc1
03:23 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c44e4c4 Pieter Wuille: Make AcceptToMemoryPool take CTransactionRef
03:23 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 62607d7 Pieter Wuille: Convert COrphanTx to keep a CTransactionRef
03:23 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6713f0f Pieter Wuille: Make FillBlock consume txn_available to avoid shared_ptr copies
03:23 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9283: A few more CTransactionRef optimizations (master...sharedblock2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9283
03:34 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/869781c51cc1...1ce7ede2a9df
03:34 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master eab8e1b Alex Morcos: fix a bug if the min fee is 0 for FeeFilterRounder
03:34 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master f8d43b8 Alex Morcos: Avoid rollingMinimumFeeRate never being able to decay below half
03:34 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1ce7ede Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9288: Fix a bug if the min fee is 0 for FeeFilterRounder...
03:34 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9288: Fix a bug if the min fee is 0 for FeeFilterRounder (master...fixFFRbug) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9288
03:45 -!- JackH [~laptop@79-73-186-204.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
03:48 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1ce7ede2a9df...d65a13b773f8
03:48 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 3f67972 accraze: updated listsinceblock rpc docs...
03:48 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d65a13b Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9396: Updated listsinceblock rpc documentation...
03:48 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9396: Updated listsinceblock rpc documentation (master...docs-listsinceblock-rpc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9396
04:01 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d65a13b773f8...c2ea1e6561ca
04:01 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0513c70 Gregory Sanders: Make rpcauth help message clearer, add example in example .conf
04:01 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master c2ea1e6 MarcoFalke: Merge #9401: Make rpcauth help message clearer, add example in example .conf...
04:01 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #9401: Make rpcauth help message clearer, add example in example .conf (master...rpcauthnotes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9401
04:14 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.207.83.140] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
04:46 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/c2ea1e6561ca...5bc3b6cede8d
04:46 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 35ee63c fanquake: [Doc] Install Protobuf v3 on OS X
04:46 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5bc3b6c MarcoFalke: Merge #9467: [Trivial] [Doc] Install Protobuf v3 on OS X...
04:47 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #9467: [Trivial] [Doc] Install Protobuf v3 on OS X (master...osx-protobuf-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9467
05:00 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
05:15 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #9468: [WIP][Depends] Dependancy updates for 0.14.0 (master...depends-update-014) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9468
05:24 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:28 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #9469: [WIP][depends] Qt 5.7.1 (master...depends-0-14-0-qt) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9469
05:32 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:37 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #9470: qt: Set (count) placeholder in sendcoinsdialog to notranslate (master...2017_01_more_translate_fixes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9470
05:42  * jonasschnelli is downloading github issue/PR-html 0-10000 to process html and calculate how many comments where made in 2016
05:43 < fanquake> jonasschnelli What's your guess?
05:43 < jonasschnelli> No idea. :)
05:43 < jonasschnelli> I guess around 30 per day
05:44 < jonasschnelli> I though about counting words per comment,... but due to code/log copy and paste, etc., this is not really representative 
05:45 < fanquake> I was going to say far less than that, maybe between 3000-5000 comments total. However now I think about it, some days I'd easily see > 30 emails from bitcoin/bitcoin heh
05:46 < fanquake> Depends how many people you have blocked :p
05:47 < MarcoFalke> Huh, you can block comments from specific people?
05:48 < fanquake> I don't think so, just block the entire user. So you won't see any PRs/comments etc
05:48 < MarcoFalke> hmm, interesting. Luckily we don't have returning spammers.
05:50 < fanquake> One thing I had been considering was going back through some ancient issues/PRs, and "locking" the conversation. That would at least stop the random comments/replies on some.
06:00 < fanquake> wumpus looks like we can drop both libevent patches
06:08 < sipa> jonasschnelli: isn't easier through the json interface?
06:09 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #9471: [WIP][depends] libevent 2.1.7rc (master...depends-0-14-0-libevent) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9471
06:09 < jonasschnelli> sipa: last time I checked there where some limits and not all data was available
06:09 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []     
06:13 < jonasschnelli> sipa: I guess the main problem is: curl https://api.github.com/rate_limit
06:13 < jonasschnelli> Maybe I need to a sleep(100) and run it over night
06:14 < jonasschnelli> I mean, not I need a sleep(100), the script.
06:19 < jonasschnelli> Ah. Found the reason why I didn't used the API: "Requests that return multiple items will be paginated to 30 items by default."
06:20 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5bc3b6cede8d...df1ab5b4d67b
06:20 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 388ea19 Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: Set (count) placeholder in sendcoinsdialog to notranslate
06:20 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master df1ab5b MarcoFalke: Merge #9470: qt: Set (count) placeholder in sendcoinsdialog to notranslate...
06:20 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #9470: qt: Set (count) placeholder in sendcoinsdialog to notranslate (master...2017_01_more_translate_fixes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9470
06:33 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:34 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit]     
06:50 < luke-jr> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5ltw5n/bitcoin_core_v0131_sends_enormously_high_fee/ seems to not be an isolated case
06:54 < MarcoFalke> jonasschnelli: I think there is already a repo with all the github comments to Bitcoin Core. (Including history for each comment)
06:54 < MarcoFalke> But I can't find the link. I think someone mentioned it last year in Zürich
06:54 < jonasschnelli> Yes. I remember that. Is it up to date? I can't recall the URL though
06:56 < jonasschnelli> A html dump is always a good thing. Also, parsing auto-generated-html is simple and a good regex exercise. :)
06:56 < luke-jr> a markdown dump would be better *hides*
06:59 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: Yeah. But does Github offers a md dump? I don't think so.
06:59 < rabidus_> http://bitcoinfees.21.co shows that there are plenty of more those 421-450 satoshi/byte transactions. Maybe related to that bug?
07:01 < MarcoFalke> kanzure: ^ Might know the url to the repo. :)
07:02 < kanzure> actually no, i'd like to know that repo as well
07:02 < MarcoFalke> How come no one ever reported that wallet fee bug?
07:03 < kanzure> (i've also never heard of it.)
07:05 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: there must be some way, since the AJAX gets it for comment editing
07:07 < kanzure> or email inbox receiving all comments
07:07 < kanzure> which is better because you have even deleted comments (which, ahem, has happened to btcdrak and others)
07:13 < jtimon> jonasschnelli: I just realized I never understood your proposal for the spv mode in bitcoin core (or maybe I'm missing something about bloom filter based implementations of SPV)
07:14 < jonasschnelli> jtimon: It's simple.
07:14 < jtimon> you said that this is better for privacy because it will download full blocks, which makes sense to me
07:14 < jtimon> but how do you know which blocks you want to download?
07:14 < jonasschnelli> Just download blocks, scan transactions, if relevant to the wallet, mark them a fSPV=true
07:14 < jonasschnelli> Just all of them!
07:14 < jonasschnelli> But not deeper then your wallet birthday.
07:15 < jonasschnelli> If you start a fresh bitcoin-qt/d, you download only a couple of blocks and can start using Core with SPV
07:15 < jtimon> mhmm, you download all blocks without validating them?
07:15 < jonasschnelli> jtimon: You have to do that anyways
07:15 < jonasschnelli> (if you want a full node)
07:15 < jtimon> ok, I get now, thanks
07:15 < jonasschnelli> Just download the relevant blocks first, don't validate and use them for SPV
07:16 < jonasschnelli> As soon as we have block-bloom-filters, we can find out which of the blocks are relevant to the wallet (2nd step)
07:18 < MarcoFalke> kanzure: jonasschnelli: If it is on the web, you can find it: https://github.com/zw/bitcoin-gh-meta
07:18 < jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: thanks.
07:18 -!- jannes [~jannes@095-097-246-234.static.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:18 < jonasschnelli> jtimon: If your node is out-of-sync for a week, you need to catch up 144*7 blocks = ~1GB data, ... .maybe 30min.
07:19 < jonasschnelli> and the download blocks are kept for the later full-validation
07:20 < jtimon> thanks again, it was the "download all blocks from wallet creation" part that I was missing
07:22 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
07:25 < kanzure> MarcoFalke: thank you. i've now timestamped that repository as of 38ff87cb68592ca19b10803908cf3d1bf0320bf7 :D.
07:29 < kanzure> we should probably ask whoever maintains that to do some automatic timestamping (petertodd made a git compatibility tool)
07:33 -!- NielsvG [~Necrathex@unaffiliated/necrathex] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:33 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: arubi, wasi
07:42 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/df1ab5b4d67b...123ea7362478
07:42 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fae26e8 MarcoFalke: [qt] Add more sources to translate
07:42 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master facf3e7 MarcoFalke: [qt] `make translate`
07:42 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 123ea73 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9457: [qt] Select more files for translation...
07:42 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #9457: [qt] Select more files for translation (master...Mf1701-qtTrans) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9457
07:42 -!- Netsplit over, joins: arubi, wasi
07:56 < gmaxwell> morcos: RE #9167  I asked a question there and I think you may have answered me on IRC but I don't remember the reply.
07:56 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9167 | IsAllFromMe by morcos · Pull Request #9167 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
08:00 < morcos> gmaxwell: yep, will copy conversation into PR
08:01 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: sigh, #9326 apparently breaks with LibreSSL
08:01 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9326 | Update for OpenSSL 1.1 API. by gmaxwell · Pull Request #9326 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
08:03 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:04 -!- abpa [~abpa@2602:306:b837:dbf0:59db:2ccd:f772:ea3e] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:05 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: okay, well we don't support that.... And dark, I did test it with older OpenSSL.
08:06 < luke-jr> apparently LibreSSL claims to be OpenSSL >=1.1 for some stupid reason :/
08:06 < luke-jr> without supporting 1.1 APIs..
08:07 < gmaxwell> morcos: oh right, that was where I commented that we should track input values so fees could be computed accurately.
08:07 < morcos> ha, yes, i left out the rest of the conversation, because i figured that was a bigger change. sorry.
08:08 < gmaxwell> it was, I agree.
08:08 < luke-jr> libressl-2.5.0/include/openssl/opensslv.h:#define OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER  0x20000000L
08:08 < luke-jr> >_<     
08:09 -!- abpa [~abpa@2602:306:b837:dbf0:59db:2ccd:f772:ea3e] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
08:10 < timothy> luke-jr: cool
08:11 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: so it needs to be changed to a #if NEW_OPENSSL_API  and a #define NEW_OPENSSL_API that has a different version test for libressl and openssl?
08:12 < luke-jr> I guess so. I was just going to change it to http://bpaste.net/show/ac2c68d93576
08:12 < luke-jr> (getting some libressl user to test this before I open a PR)
08:12 < timothy> luke-jr: I think you should use something like have_func("CRYPTO_lock") || $defs.push("-DHAVE_OPENSSL_110_THREADING_API")
08:12 -!- JackH [~laptop@79-73-186-204.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:13 < timothy> check if CRYPTO_lock function exists instead of rely on OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER
08:13 < luke-jr> EVP_MD_CTX_new in this case
08:13 < luke-jr> I suppose that'd probably be more future-proof if LibreSSL then adds it
08:18 < luke-jr> someone here has an OpenSSL 1.1 system? Can you test http://bpaste.net/show/7565deaf5c48 ?
08:20 < luke-jr> (note re-running autogen.sh is needed)
08:22 < timothy> luke-jr: give me 2 minutes
08:24 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #9472: Disentangle progress estimationc from heckpoints and update it (master...update_tx_estimation) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9472
08:25 -!- NielsvG [~Necrathex@unaffiliated/necrathex] has left #bitcoin-core-dev ["Leaving"]     
08:25 -!- Giszmo [~leo@46.128.114.214.dynamic.cablesurf.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
08:40 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
08:40 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #9474: Mark the minconf parameter to move as ignored (master...stale_minconf_parameter) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9474
08:41 < timothy> luke-jr: you have to use AC_CHECK_FUNCS instead
08:47 < luke-jr> timothy: does this work any better? http://bpaste.net/show/b0c01efeceb6
08:47 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-25-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:49 < timothy> AC_CHECK_DECLS is wrong
08:49 < timothy> wait
08:49 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: patch does not work on openssl 1.1
08:51 < gmaxwell> HAVE_DECL_EVP_MD_CTX_NEW isn't getting set.
08:54 < timothy> setting CFLAGS is useless since it's using g++
08:54 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:54 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit]     
08:55 < luke-jr> hmm     
08:55 < timothy> configure:29569: g++ -c -g -O2 -Wall -Wextra -Wformat -Wformat-security -Wno-unused-parameter -DHAVE_BUILD_INFO -D__STDC_FORMAT_MACROS conftest.cpp >&5
08:57 < timothy> gmaxwell: do you have the same behaviour?
09:00 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:02 < luke-jr> ok, tested http://bpaste.net/show/5acc82591b69 with a non-installed OpenSSL 1.1 build, should work finally
09:03 < timothy> +CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} ${SSL_CFLAGS}"
09:03 < timothy> typo
09:04 < timothy> CXXFLAGS+"${CXXFLAGS} ${SSL_CFLAGS}" imho
09:04 < timothy> CXXFLAGS=
09:05 < luke-jr> oops good catch
09:05  * luke-jr wonders why autoconf doesn't have a macro to push-and-append stuff like this
09:06 < timothy> since SSL_CXXFLAGS doesn't exists, SSL_CFLAGS is ok
09:06 < gmaxwell> that (fixed version of luke's patch) compiles for me.
09:07 < timothy> for me too
09:08 < luke-jr> thanks
09:08 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #9475: Let autoconf detect presence of EVP_MD_CTX_new (master...EVP_MD_CTX_new) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9475
09:16 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-25-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]     
09:16 < timothy> luke-jr: why don't you use  #include <openssl/evp.h> (https://www.openssl.org/docs/manmaster/man3/EVP_MD_CTX_new.html) ?
09:17 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-25-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:18 < luke-jr> timothy: the actual code doesn't.
09:18 < luke-jr> figure less hiccups if the check and code are closer aligned
09:21 < timothy> luke-jr: on openssl 1.1  you have openssl/evp.h
09:21 < luke-jr> x509_vfy.h includes evp.h, and Core's code only includes x509_vfy.h
09:26 < jtimon> how realistic it is to hope to get https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8994 merged for 0.14 ?
09:27 < jtimon> what is it missing? as said in a comment, segwit.py and p2p-compactblocks.py still need to run with self.chain = "regtest" instead of self.chain = "custom". But perhaps that's ok?
09:27 -!- wvr [~wvr@215.red-83-59-62.dynamicip.rima-tde.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
09:30 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:37 < jtimon> maybe a new rpc test changing some chainparams values?
09:50 < MarcoFalke> cfields: Any guess why #9416 causes a undefined reference to `qInitResources_bitcoin()'?
09:50 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9416 | travis: make distdir before make by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #9416 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
10:08 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
10:14 -!- protomar [~protomar@109.232.227.133] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:20 < paveljanik> MarcoFalke, https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/187303535#L1939
10:20 < paveljanik> Cannot find file 'res/movies/spinner-000.png'
10:21 < paveljanik> strange 8)
10:24 < Chris_Stewart_5> Just to be clear, there are public keys in the blockchain that do not pass the `IsCompressedOrUncompressedPubKey` check right? This is enforced as policy right? 
10:28 < sipa> there may be
10:28 < sipa> i'm not sure
10:28 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] instagibbs closed pull request #8992: Enable pubkey lookup for p2sh-p2wpkh in validateaddress (master...validatep2pkh) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8992
10:28 < sipa> there certainly are in testnet
10:29 < Chris_Stewart_5> sipa: Is there a BIP that was proposed that check?
10:31 < sipa> not afaik
10:38 < cfields> MarcoFalke: hmm, sounds like something's legitimately not getting included
10:39 < MarcoFalke> paveljanik had a hint. Let me try to solve the wildcard
10:40 < cfields> MarcoFalke: ah, missed that
10:45 < cfields> MarcoFalke: hmm, it's been a while, but i'm assuming that I somehow missed the other qrc in fc4ad0c7fcf2e5841756c9d1003f95c879ee5cd2
10:48 < Chris_Stewart_5> sipa: We don't have a more general public key check do we? For instance, a valid public key encoding that encompasses all encodings that are valid in openssl?
10:48 < cfields> MarcoFalke: so.. http://pastebin.com/raw/xYXmu8Jk
10:48 < MarcoFalke> cfields: Could be but when this is the cause, I don't understand why travis didn't fail back then: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/fc4ad0c7fcf2e5841756c9d1003f95c879ee5cd2/.travis.yml#L76
10:48 < sipa> Chris_Stewart_5: CPubKey::IsFullyValid()
10:49 < sipa> (which is implemented in libsecp256k1)
10:49 < Chris_Stewart_5> Thank you! 
10:50 < cfields> MarcoFalke: unsure. The above is just a guess. I need to catch a flight, I'll catch up on irc logs later
10:50 < MarcoFalke> sure, will try your patch
10:50 < gmaxwell> sipa: I'm doubtful that SIGCHECK_VERIFICATION_FACTOR is correct anymore except on really slow computers, fwiw.
10:50 < cfields> MarcoFalke: heh, that came off as very rude. Wasn't intentional :)
10:50 < sipa> gmaxwell: willing to change it based on HARD DATA
10:51 < MarcoFalke> cfields: I didn't read any rudeness. :P
10:51 < gmaxwell> 'HARD DATA, Soft forks.'
10:51 < sipa> gmaxwell: though, it's probably better to overshoot than undershoot
10:51 < sipa> (seeing a progress bar speed up over time is nice)
10:51 < Chris_Stewart_5> /r/oddlysatisfying
10:52 < gmaxwell> jeremyrubin: did you ever explore having a simple bypass of the signature cache when validating blocks far from the best header, to reduce lock contention during IBD?
10:52 < sipa> gmaxwell: oops
10:52 < sipa> my code is wrong
10:52 < sipa> it assumes no signature checks up to the timestamp given
10:53 -!- droark [~droark@c-24-22-123-27.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: ZZZzzz…]     
10:57 < Chris_Stewart_5> sipa: I did not realize libsecp256k1 had java bindings in the repo, nice! 
10:58 < gmaxwell> they might even work!
10:58 < sipa> gmaxwell: they have unit tests!
10:58 < Chris_Stewart_5> assert(true == true, "true")
11:00 < sipa> gmaxwell: jeremyrubin: did you ever explore having a simple bypass of the signature cache   ->   you can't do that at the sigcache level, as there may be CHECKSIG NOTs in the chain
11:01 < gmaxwell> sipa: hm? just treat it as there being nothing in the cache for the whole block.
11:01 < sipa> Ah     
11:01 < sipa> nvm     
11:01 < gmaxwell> which there won't be, in ibd.
11:02 < jtimon> btw gmaxwell did you stop working on your patch to get rid of Checkpoints::GetLastCheckpoint() ? it looked quite advanced a while ago
11:05 < gmaxwell> We're really review starved right now.
11:09 < jtimon> I see
11:09 < jtimon> but you didn't open a PR, did you?
11:10 < jtimon> no, just looked
11:10 < jtimon> anyway, leaving now...
11:10 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:15 -!- jtimon [~quassel@197.red-88-0-200.dynamicip.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
11:18 < MarcoFalke> cfields: Your patch works! Mind to create a pull for that some time after your flight?
11:23 < morcos> gmaxwell: re: 9465, it concerns me a little that DummySignatureCreator creates 72-byte signatures and not 73-byte signatures.  I realize most of the time its neglible, but it seems like it could just lead to bad edge cases.  It seems like we should always overpay instead.
11:28 < sipa> morcos: since low-S, the maximum is 72, i think
11:28 < sipa> and on average 71.5
11:28 < gmaxwell> darn sipa with the answer while I was off trying to confirm it. :)
11:28 < morcos> ah, missed that.. yeah i was caring about the maximum
11:30 < sipa> gmaxwell: of course, i also tried to confirm first :)
11:30 < morcos> out of curiousity, how were you confirming that
11:30 < sipa> 32 bytes S, 33 bytes R, 6 bytes DER stupidity, 1 byte sighash
11:31 < sipa> is the maximum
11:31 < sipa> where R is 32 bytes 50% of the tie
11:31 < morcos> ok i thought you meant confirming S couldn't be more than 32 bytes, which seemed pretty obvious if i understood what low-S meant
11:32 -!- grbs [~grubles@unaffiliated/grubles] has quit [Quit: brb]     
11:35 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@62.205.214.125] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
11:35 < sipa> maybe we should grind by default to produce a 32-byte R as well
11:35 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@62.205.214.125] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:35 < sipa> :)     
11:36 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: zxzzt, gribble, norotartagen, ratoder
11:36 < sipa> would need 2 iterations on average
11:36 -!- Netsplit over, joins: zxzzt
11:36 -!- Netsplit over, joins: ratoder
11:36 -!- Netsplit over, joins: norotartagen
11:38 < gmaxwell> sipa: it could be done in constant time using the endomorphism, no?
11:40 < sipa> gmaxwell: oh, sure!
11:40 < sipa> the negation endomorphism, you mean?
11:41 -!- Netsplit over, joins: gribble
11:41 < gmaxwell> negation doesn't change X, and it's used by low-S.  I mean multiply by lambda, potentially twice.
11:43 < sipa> is there a guarantee that that will always result in a R.x value in the lower range?
11:49 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/123ea7362478...0fc1c31a878e
11:49 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ffeb195 Alex Morcos: add test for -walletrejectlongchains
11:49 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 0fc1c31 MarcoFalke: Merge #9395: Add test for -walletrejectlongchains...
11:49 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #9395: Add test for -walletrejectlongchains (master...fixmovedtx) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9395
11:51 < gmaxwell> sipa: thats why I asked, expirementally it's true bit it's not obvious to me how to prove it.
11:53 < gmaxwell> sipa: I tested for F(-1) to F(-100000) and in all case either *beta or *beta^2 results in a number less than 2**255  
11:53 < gmaxwell> okay -1 to -1000000 now.
11:55 < gmaxwell> okay, theory disproved.
11:56 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0fc1c31a878e...7dac1e5e9e88
11:56 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b50cd7a Alex Morcos: Fix dangerous condition in ModifyNewCoins....
11:56 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7dac1e5 Pieter Wuille: Merge #9107: Safer modify new coins...
11:56 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #9107: Safer modify new coins (master...saferModifyNewCoins) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9107
11:58 < gmaxwell> (it's only true 87% of the time, but happens to hold for all very large and very small field elements)
12:32 -!- dcousens [~anon@c110-22-219-15.sunsh4.vic.optusnet.com.au] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:32 < dcousens> gmaxwell: RE https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9463#issuecomment-270303374,  my point was for naming of the RPC calls
12:33 < dcousens> Wait, I've just realised I've mis-read what belcher meant, I read it as:   " bitcoin nodes known to your node via RPC."
12:34 < dcousens> as in,  RPC connections
12:35 < gmaxwell> dcousens: I thought you might have been misreading it that way, thus the question.
12:36 < dcousens> gmaxwell: cheers :)
12:47 -!- brg444 [~bergealex@qubcpq1531w-lp130-02-65-92-224-54.dsl.bell.ca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:03 -!- dcousens [~anon@c110-22-219-15.sunsh4.vic.optusnet.com.au] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal]     
13:04 -!- dcousens [~anon@c110-22-219-15.sunsh4.vic.optusnet.com.au] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:15 -!- roidster [~chatzilla@47-41-33-247.dhcp.mtpk.ca.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:42 -!- roidster [~chatzilla@47-41-33-247.dhcp.mtpk.ca.charter.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
13:42 -!- droark [~droark@c-24-22-123-27.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:54 -!- droark [~droark@c-24-22-123-27.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
14:19 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: arubi, wasi
14:23 -!- jannes [~jannes@095-097-246-234.static.chello.nl] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
14:30 -!- brg444 [~bergealex@qubcpq1531w-lp130-02-65-92-224-54.dsl.bell.ca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
14:31 -!- brg444 [~bergealex@qubcpq1531w-lp130-02-65-92-224-54.dsl.bell.ca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:31 -!- protomar [~protomar@109.232.227.133] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
14:44 -!- MarcoFalke [~marco@5.199.182.203] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []     
14:46 -!- brg444 [~bergealex@qubcpq1531w-lp130-02-65-92-224-54.dsl.bell.ca] has quit [Read error: No route to host]     
14:46 -!- brg444 [~bergealex@qubcpq1531w-lp130-02-65-92-224-54.dsl.bell.ca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:48 -!- roidster [~chatzilla@47-41-33-247.dhcp.mtpk.ca.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:09 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-230-253.hot.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
15:10 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-230-253.hot.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:13 -!- brg444 [~bergealex@qubcpq1531w-lp130-02-65-92-224-54.dsl.bell.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
16:17 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)]     
16:36 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-100-15-114-3.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
16:37 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-100-15-114-3.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:00 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-25-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]     
17:04 -!- juscamarena [~justin@47.148.176.74] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
17:18 -!- juscamarena [~justin@47.148.176.74] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:40 -!- abpa [~abpa@2602:306:b837:dbf0:2d8d:4dfa:7408:cc74] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:41 -!- abpa [~abpa@2602:306:b837:dbf0:2d8d:4dfa:7408:cc74] has quit [Client Quit]     
17:57 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-jrlutkvsntjcdzoj] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
18:07 -!- Squidicc [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:11 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
18:32 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
18:35 < gmaxwell> morcos: I'd like to review #9404 but it would be easier to do if you rebased on #9465 if you think you'll be doing that anyways.
18:36 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9404 | Make a second pass with same coins in CreateTransaction. by morcos · Pull Request #9404 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
18:36 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9465 | [Wallet] Do not perform ECDSA signing in the fee calculation inner loop. by gmaxwell · Pull Request #9465 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
18:38 < gmaxwell> morcos: will #9404 increase the number of cases where you get change back when you were really trying to send all your funds? hm. I guess not, if you're doing a subtract fee from amount the second pass will subtract less.
18:38 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9404 | Make a second pass with same coins in CreateTransaction. by morcos · Pull Request #9404 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
18:38 < gmaxwell> okay bot, we got the picture.
18:40 < sipa> haha
18:41 < sipa> maybe it needs rate limiting
18:43 < btcdrak> what happens if you quote ticket A, which references B and in the title of B reference A? would gribble flood the channel?
18:49 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:49 -!- juscamarena [~justin@47.148.176.74] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
18:55 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@96.39.44.60] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:58 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
18:58 < sipa> btcdrak: i don't think it triggers based on things it says itself
19:05 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: wolfspraul, tadasv, trippysalmon
19:05 -!- Netsplit over, joins: wolfspraul
19:05 -!- Netsplit over, joins: trippysalmon
19:06 < morcos> gmaxwell: yep, i was going to do that, 9465 (just leave off the # if you don't want the bot) looks good to me, was just going to let it sit for a day before i rebased
19:08 < morcos> 9404 shouldn't have any affect when you were trying to send all your funds..  it only kicks in if you already had change and that change was big enough to absorb fees
19:08 -!- tadasv [ttttt@gateway/shell/panicbnc/x-koezlkvmruytqkso] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:08 < morcos> i also have #9343 which makes a change to cases when you are subtractFeeFromAmount'ing which i think will make future improvements easier if we're willing to accept the change in behavior
19:09 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9343 | An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
19:10 < morcos> in any case, i think we should evaluate these as to whether they are better behavior than existing but not hold them to too high a standard b/c i think only a reasonable simple change has a chance for 0.14..  after that we can try to do something more complete
19:16 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
19:52 -!- windsok [~windsok@45.63.59.8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:56 -!- Victor_sueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:59 -!- Victorsueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
20:00 -!- Squidicc [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
20:00 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:05 -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@p5DCB4C6E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:08 -!- chris200_ [~chris2000@p5DCB4BBA.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
20:10 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@96.39.44.60] has quit []     
21:30 -!- roidster [~chatzilla@47-41-33-247.dhcp.mtpk.ca.charter.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
22:06 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has quit [Quit: bye]     
22:15 -!- cannon-c [ccc23f04@gateway/web/freenode/ip.204.194.63.4] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
22:36 -!- dcousens [~anon@c110-22-219-15.sunsh4.vic.optusnet.com.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
22:40 -!- justanotheruser is now known as leibnitz     
22:40 -!- leibnitz is now known as OfficialLeibniz     
22:59 -!- Squidicc [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:00 -!- dermoth [~thomas@dsl-66-36-158-182.mtl.aei.ca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
23:01 -!- dermoth [~thomas@dsl-66-36-158-182.mtl.aei.ca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:03 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
23:05 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:40 -!- To7 [~theo@cpe-158-222-222-232.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:41 -!- LeMiner [~LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:47 < jonasschnelli> Hah. Eric Voskuli's answer to this nails it: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-January/013431.html
23:48 -!- PRab_ [~chatzilla@c-68-62-95-247.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:49 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@c-68-62-95-247.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
23:50 -!- PRab_ is now known as PRab     
23:51 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
23:52 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:56 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]