--- Day changed Tue May 23 2017 00:10 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 00:12 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:17 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 00:17 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:28 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@207.38.86.239] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 00:29 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@207.38.86.239] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:33 -!- btcdrak [uid229044@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-nuvcbepkcxtnaedw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:35 -!- btcdrak [uid229044@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-nuvcbepkcxtnaedw] has quit [Client Quit] 00:37 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-daljvfyxkycbhxvf] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:49 -!- btcdrak [uid230524@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-uohqvkpihafgkdec] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:12 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:17 -!- JackH [~laptop@79-73-189-229.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:22 -!- afk11 [~afk11@gateway/tor-sasl/afk11] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:24 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:24 -!- jtimon [~quassel@117.29.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 01:25 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@5.79.76.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:28 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 01:46 -!- kewde[m] [kewdematri@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-zggedefgzwhjzrul] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:46 -!- frabrunelle [frabrunell@safenetwork/frabrunelle] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:46 -!- herzmeister[m] [herzmeiste@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-roeetarkzhllpokp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:48 -!- amiller [~socrates1@unaffiliated/socrates1024] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 01:48 -!- herzmeister[m] [herzmeiste@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-mlldcwgcuguhsgnw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:51 -!- Guest29397 [~socrates1@li175-104.members.linode.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:54 -!- frabrunelle [frabrunell@safenetwork/frabrunelle] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:54 -!- kewde[m] [kewdematri@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-lcudlclfatiupzud] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:57 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 02:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:18 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:19 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:24 -!- afk11 [~afk11@gateway/tor-sasl/afk11] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:24 -!- afk11 [~afk11@gateway/tor-sasl/afk11] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:39 -!- riemann [~riemann@84-10-11-234.static.chello.pl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:47 < jonasschnelli> The protocol wiki "https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_documentation" says: 02:47 < jonasschnelli> If all TxIn inputs have final (0xffffffff) sequence numbers then lock_time is irrelevant. Otherwise, the transaction may not be added to a block until after lock_time (see NLockTime). 02:47 < jonasschnelli> I guess this is wrong... 02:48 < jonasschnelli> IsFinalTx first checks the nLockTime (0 or < height/time) before checking the nSequence 02:48 < jonasschnelli> if someone confirms I can update the wiki 02:48 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 02:49 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:12 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:16 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:17 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:22 < wumpus> jonasschnelli: the function will always return true when all sequence numbers are SEQUENCE_FINAL 03:23 < wumpus> but yes you're right it seems the other way around 03:23 < wumpus> when locktime is 0, or hmm the logic as stated there is correct: *iff* all TxIn inputs have final, then no matter what locktime is, it will always be accepted 03:26 < wumpus> if not all TxIn inputs have final, then it depends on the locktime 03:27 < wumpus> it doesn't matter in what order the checks are for that, it can only return true and false after all, and it doesn't matter through which code path it does that 03:31 < jonasschnelli> wumpus: Indeed. Thanks for checking... 03:32 < wumpus> thanks for checking the docs, subtleties like this could result in lost money if they're wrong 03:43 < jonasschnelli> I guess a confusing element is that a tx can pass IsFinalTx() (in therefore has the term "final") even if it can be replaced by opt-in-RBF/BIP125 03:49 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 03:59 < wumpus> right - opt-in RBF is essentially a separate thing from finalness, even though it uses the sequence field too 04:04 -!- shesek [~shesek@bzq-84-110-53-131.cablep.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:04 -!- shesek [~shesek@bzq-84-110-53-131.cablep.bezeqint.net] has quit [Changing host] 04:04 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:23 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:25 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit] 04:41 -!- jtimon [~quassel@117.29.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:44 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 05:07 -!- cryptapus_afk [~cryptapus@unaffiliated/cryptapus] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:09 -!- frabrunelle [frabrunell@safenetwork/frabrunelle] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:09 -!- herzmeister[m] [herzmeiste@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-mlldcwgcuguhsgnw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:09 -!- kewde[m] [kewdematri@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-lcudlclfatiupzud] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:11 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:11 -!- kayamm [~km@unaffiliated/kayamm] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 05:11 -!- BlueMatt [~BlueMatt@unaffiliated/bluematt] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 05:11 -!- phantomcircuit [~phantomci@192.241.205.97] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 05:13 -!- herzmeister[m] [herzmeiste@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-sblvdleayruemcwm] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:14 -!- phantomcircuit [~phantomci@192.241.205.97] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:14 -!- kayamm [~km@pastasuta.pro] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:14 -!- kayamm [~km@pastasuta.pro] has quit [Changing host] 05:14 -!- kayamm [~km@unaffiliated/kayamm] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:14 -!- BlueMatt [~BlueMatt@unaffiliated/bluematt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:17 -!- kewde[m] [kewdematri@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-qbrywcgpbruecjxr] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:17 -!- frabrunelle [frabrunell@safenetwork/frabrunelle] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:28 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@5.79.76.38] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 05:44 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@5.79.76.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:44 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@5.79.76.38] has quit [Changing host] 05:44 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:45 -!- felco_ [~felco@unaffiliated/felco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:48 -!- felco_ is now known as felco 05:57 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 06:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:34 < da2ce7> Is the fact that Bitcoin is under active exploit by the asicboost vulnerably a important consideration for the urgency of BIP148? 06:34 < da2ce7> I would suggest that it should be at least something to consider. 06:35 < da2ce7> Many developers have stated that they think that BIP148 is rushed, but remain silent on the fact that Bitcoin is under active exploit. 06:38 < da2ce7> I have gained no negative responses to my post on the mailing list about classifying asicboost as a Security Vulnerability. Yet BIP148, a rapidly deployed partial-fix is rejected by many for being 'too rushed'. I would suggest that any developers who states why it is 'too rushed' should state how the ongoing exploit of covert asicboost is the safer option. 06:44 < wumpus> it's a difficult compromise 06:47 < wumpus> it can still be too rushed, even if it addresses an immediate vulnerability; it depends on what outcome is worse, having stealth asicboost run for a few months longer (while BIP149 is being deployed) or a game of BIP148 chicken (which seems unavoidable in any case...). 06:47 < timothy> da2ce7: why asicboot is a vulnerability? 06:49 -!- Sprh [~Sprh@12.20.48.10] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:49 < da2ce7> timothy please see: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-May/014349.html and the followup: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-May/014353.html 06:50 -!- d_t [~textual@108-65-78-188.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:55 -!- d_t [~textual@108-65-78-188.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 06:55 < da2ce7> wumpus, I agree: BIP148 may be, even then, too rushed (but I personally believe BIP148 is the safest option available, as I think there is a dramatic under estimation the damage of asicboost to Bitcoin). However, I haven't seen this considered in any of the significant anti-BIP148 responses to the mailing list. Centrally not an analysis of the tradeoffs available. 06:56 < da2ce7> for example gmaxwell states on multiple occasions "we should not rush", but doesn't expand upon this statement in the context of an actively exploited security vulnerability. 06:56 < wumpus> "I think there is a dramatic under estimation the damage of asicboost to Bitcoin" in what way? because they overrepresent themselves, resulting in more mining centralization than would otherwise be the case? 06:57 < da2ce7> Because it demands that in a short time, the only profitable miners are the miners who implement asicbosot. 06:58 < da2ce7> One of the critical security properties of bitcoin is a well-distributed set of miners. AsicBoost dramatically breaks this assumtion. 06:59 < da2ce7> Not even to mention the perverse incentives by the massive layer violations that asicboost encourages. 07:00 < da2ce7> The choice of the ordering of transactions should have NO effect on the performance of a miner. 07:04 < timothy> I think many ASICBOOST miners doesn't want soft-fork for asciboost itself 07:07 < da2ce7> To me, it is clear why many miners don't like SegWit, because it breaks Covert AsicBoost. This is a feature, not a bug, of SegWit. However it is just the first step of putting AsicBoost into the grave. 07:08 < da2ce7> People will assume, quite correctly imho, that if you mine a non-segwit block, you are using AsicBoost. 07:08 < da2ce7> Making it quite conspicuous. 07:11 -!- cryptapus_afk [~cryptapus@unaffiliated/cryptapus] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:25 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:26 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:37 < luke-jr> jtimon: here is where I explain why BIP 149 is less safe (among other issues) vs BIP 148: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/69dm8e/what_is_segregated_witness_explanation_for/dh6dg3z/ 07:38 < Lauda> BIP148 is much better due to compatibility, indeed. 07:39 < jtimon> luke-jr: "BIP 149 is the opposite: it leaves the question of successful softfork open until some unknown future point" I don't think this is correct 07:39 < luke-jr> jtimon: well, it is. 07:39 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e4775167cb4b...e76a3927c3b0 07:39 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2a8e35a Russell Yanofsky: Fix importwallet edge case rescan bug... 07:39 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e76a392 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10410: Fix importwallet edge case rescan bug... 07:40 < jtimon> "BIP 148 is backward-compatible with segwit as already deployed in 0.13.1-0.14.1." so is bip149, bip149 is actually compatbile with pre-0.13 too 07:40 < luke-jr> I think what I said there is perfectly clear. 07:40 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10410: Fix importwallet edge case rescan bug (master...pr/scanimp) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10410 07:40 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:41 < jtimon> luke-jr: hos is 4 July 2018 UTC (Epoch timestamp 1530662400) " some unknown future point" ? 07:41 < luke-jr> jtimon: that's not when you'd find out 07:41 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:42 < jtimon> luke-jr: it can be made earlier by miners, that's true for bip148 as well 07:42 < luke-jr> jtimon: with a BIP148-style *UASF*, you don't find out the outcome until a miner tries to steal segwit funds 07:43 < jtimon> "there are plenty of "sharp edges" that could be encountered if we need to do it for segwit" what are those "sharp edges"? how don't they apply with the current bip9 deployment with respect to pre-sw nodes? 07:43 < luke-jr> jtimon: re-deployment 07:43 < luke-jr> pre-sw nodes don't *think* they know segwit 07:44 < jtimon> "Very little research has been done into the work required to successfully and safely re-deploy segwit. " we knew bip9 deployments could be tried again if failed, I don't know what kind of research you want 07:44 < luke-jr> yes, in general; but segwit is more complicated than merely another bip9 deployment 07:44 < jtimon> pre-bip149 won't think segwit is activated 07:45 < luke-jr> you need to ensure that 07:45 < jtimon> I really see nothing special about redeployment 07:45 < jtimon> you need to ensure what? 07:45 < luke-jr> then you haven't thought it through 07:45 < jtimon> happy to learn 07:45 < luke-jr> you need to ensure 0.13.1-0.14.1 never get the witness data 07:45 < luke-jr> which they will try to do 07:46 < jtimon> not until activation 07:46 < jtimon> if the bip9 activation gets in, great, if not, that won't happen for pre-bip149 nodes, what am I missing? 07:50 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:52 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 07:58 -!- riemann [~riemann@84-10-11-234.static.chello.pl] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 08:10 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.14: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/321419bc06fdc19e3713b2bcfc10c3c9bbbb8b62 08:10 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.14 321419b Russell Yanofsky: Fix importwallet edge case rescan bug... 08:13 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:16 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit] 08:16 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:18 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:29 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 08:34 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 08:35 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:38 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 08:42 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:44 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit] 08:49 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:53 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@5.79.76.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:53 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@5.79.76.38] has quit [Changing host] 08:53 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:15 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 09:21 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)] 09:34 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:45 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e76a3927c3b0...15254e907e8c 09:45 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 399fb8f Matt Corallo: Add internal method to add new random data to our internal RNG state 09:45 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 888cce5 Matt Corallo: Add perf counter data to GetStrongRandBytes state in scheduler 09:45 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 15254e9 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10372: Add perf counter data to GetStrongRandBytes state in scheduler... 09:46 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10372: Add perf counter data to GetStrongRandBytes state in scheduler (master...2017-05-scheduler-rng) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10372 09:46 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/15254e907e8c...433c57aa6f30 09:46 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e49b868 practicalswift: [qt] Remove excess logic... 09:46 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 433c57a Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10421: [qt] Remove excess logic: Prefer "return foo;" to "if (foo) { return true; } else { return false; }"... 09:47 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10421: [qt] Remove excess logic: Prefer "return foo;" to "if (foo) { return true; } else { return false; }" (master...if-expr-return-true-else-return-false) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10421 09:52 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10336: Get actual path for EUID instead of HOME dir (master...contrib) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10336 09:55 -!- d_t [~textual@108-65-78-188.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:01 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!] 10:07 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:12 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/433c57aa6f30...46771514fa86 10:12 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 557c9a6 Matthew Zipkin: RPC: getblockchaininfo: BIP9 stats... 10:12 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4677151 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9571: RPC: getblockchaininfo returns BIP signaling statistics... 10:33 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 5 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/46771514fa86...ce8176d0389c 10:33 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ef8ca17 Russell Yanofsky: [test] Add tests for some walletmodel functions... 10:33 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d944bd7 Russell Yanofsky: [qt] Move some WalletModel functions into CWallet... 10:33 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 429aa9e Russell Yanofsky: [test] Move some tests from qt -> wallet... 10:33 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10295: [qt] Move some WalletModel functions into CWallet (master...pr/ipc-move) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10295 10:35 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:35 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit] 10:36 -!- BCBot_ [~BCBot@46.101.246.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:37 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@unaffiliated/waxwing] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 10:40 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ce8176d0389c...7e96ecf075e8 10:40 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5844609 practicalswift: [net] Avoid initialization to a value that is never read... 10:40 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7e96ecf Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #9539: [net] Avoid initialization to a value that is never read... 10:40 -!- BCBot [~BCBot@46.101.246.115] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 10:41 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@91.216.245.111] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:45 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: mining] 10:47 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:55 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Quit: laurentmt] 10:59 -!- LeMiner [LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:01 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@91.216.245.111] has quit [Changing host] 11:01 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@unaffiliated/waxwing] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:02 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:09 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:14 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: mining] 11:29 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:37 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:41 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: mining] 11:44 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] pinheadmz closed pull request #10385: RPC: getblock returns coinbase scriptsig (master...cbtext) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10385 11:45 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.237.91.137] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 11:47 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:53 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 11:54 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:00 -!- harrymm [~wayne@45.56.152.59] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:25 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:25 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:33 < ryanofsky> could 10244 be swapped for 10295 in the review list https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8, since 10295 is now merged? 12:41 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: mining] 12:50 -!- BCBot_ [~BCBot@46.101.246.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:51 -!- BCBot [~BCBot@46.101.246.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:05 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 13:06 -!- rgod [~rgod@199.195.247.252] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:19 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 13:21 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:22 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@5.79.76.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:22 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@5.79.76.38] has quit [Changing host] 13:22 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:24 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 13:31 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:40 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:42 -!- jeremyru1in is now known as jeremyrubin 13:48 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 13:53 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:05 -!- cryptapus_afk is now known as cryptapus 14:11 -!- Sprh [~Sprh@12.20.48.10] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 14:17 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:22 -!- talmai [~T@c-76-24-28-74.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: mining] 14:36 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f2f7e97e8cc2...4cb8757aae1a 14:36 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master cb184b3 Gregory Sanders: Add constant for maximum stack size 14:36 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4cb8757 Pieter Wuille: Merge #10313: [Consensus] Add constant for maximum stack size... 14:36 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #10313: [Consensus] Add constant for maximum stack size (master...stackconst) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10313 14:44 -!- cryptapus is now known as cryptapus_afk 14:49 < gmaxwell> Why does the test framework have seperate init code for a 'clean' chain vs not? I would have expected it to have a single clean init and then one or more standard setup functions. 14:49 < gmaxwell> The way it's constructed now makes it hard to use the standard setup but perform some tests before it happens. 14:50 < gmaxwell> E.g. I want to make the gettxoutsetinfo test also run before the setup and verify that the txout set starts empty. 14:50 < sipa> you can write a test that doesn't use the default state, iirc? 14:51 < gmaxwell> yes, but then you can't get the default state. so it's hard to write a test that does both. just seemed odd. 15:00 < gmaxwell> I'll just reorg back... 15:09 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jameshilliard opened pull request #10444: Implement BIP91 Reduced threshold Segwit MASF (0.14...segsignal-v0.14.1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10444 15:10 -!- eragmus_ is now known as eragmus 15:11 < jnewbery> probably because _initialize_chain() is copying the datadir from the cache (or creating a new one if it doesn't exist). If you ran it after your initial tests, it'd break all your assumptions 15:11 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] gmaxwell opened pull request #10445: Add test for empty chain and reorg consistency for gettxoutsetinfo. (master...test_more_gettxoutset) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10445 15:13 < gmaxwell> oh that would be a good reason why, caching. 15:13 < gmaxwell> okay. 15:21 -!- vicenteH [~user@135.234.15.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 15:34 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 15:34 -!- twistedline [~quassel@unaffiliated/twistedline] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 15:35 -!- twistedline [~quassel@unaffiliated/twistedline] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 15:39 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 15:47 -!- jannes [~jannes@095-097-246-234.static.chello.nl] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 16:06 -!- musalbas [~musalbas@2001:bc8:30c2:ff00::] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 16:21 -!- musalbas [~musalbas@2001:bc8:30c2:ff00::] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:23 -!- harrymm [~wayne@45.56.152.59] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 16:29 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 16:31 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:57 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com] 17:29 -!- marcoagner [~user@177.41.207.75] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 17:31 -!- marcoagner [~user@177.41.207.75] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:05 -!- marcoagner [~user@177.41.207.75] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:06 -!- rgod [~rgod@199.195.247.252] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:08 -!- marcoagner [~user@177.41.207.75] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:22 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 18:25 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:30 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:31 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-daljvfyxkycbhxvf] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity] 18:32 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #10446: net: avoid extra dns query per seed (master...no-double-resolve) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10446 18:33 -!- jtimon [~quassel@117.29.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 18:36 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:37 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:58 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.237.91.189] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:58 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 19:08 -!- talmai [~T@c-24-147-97-55.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:25 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:38 -!- talmai [~T@c-24-147-97-55.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: mining] 20:49 < murchandamus> gmaxwell: Stupid question perhaps. If #frankensegwit activated by signaling on bit4, wouldn't that just get ignored by all current segwit-ready nodes? Except that those nodes wouldn't grok #frankensegwit, would there be more issues? 20:51 < murchandamus> since #frankensegwit would be forking off at the same moment with their blocksize increase also, wouldn't it be a non-issue? :p 20:53 < gmaxwell> murchandamus: they'd all end up banning each other. 20:54 < gmaxwell> murchandamus: because frankensegwit nodes would hand witnesses to 0.14 nodes, and then get punted because things aren't supposted to have wittnesses yet. 20:54 < gmaxwell> Segwit is more than the consensus rule, it's also a set of P2P changes. 20:54 < gmaxwell> And the p2p parts are already in effect. 20:55 < gmaxwell> Because we didn't want to have the p2p behavior suddenly change and light up a lot of new codepaths when segwit enforcement started. 20:55 < gmaxwell> (as that sounded like a receipy for disaster! :) ) 20:56 < gmaxwell> Segwit has the bip9 activiation, and a network service type which is used to make sure the graph of segwit capable nodes is not partitioned, and new p2p messages for transfering messages (tx, blocks, compact blocks) with witnesses if they have them. 20:56 < murchandamus> Ah right, I didn't realize that they'd actually hand over the full witness transactions 20:57 < gmaxwell> Only the BIP9 part isn't triggered... so to redeploy segwit we have to also replace all those other parts, not just the bip9 bit. 20:57 < gmaxwell> Which is a simple search and replace, but only if the BIP9 activation has reached its limit... otherwise we have the potential that it might activate under either. 20:57 < murchandamus> gmaxwell: But since #frankensegwit would activate with the blocksize increase in unisono, the hardfork would be there anyway, right? 20:57 < gmaxwell> Just thinking about making the tests for that makes my head hurt. 20:58 < gmaxwell> murchandamus: maybe? people are saying directly contradictory things. 20:58 < gmaxwell> if it's a hardfork why are they talking about percentages? e.g. The thing DCG linked to was sergios proposal that had the hardfork and segwit as seperate things. 20:59 < gmaxwell> thats also what bitfury was saying (seperate), but not what jihan was saying. 21:00 < murchandamus> garzik stated that on Twatter. But since they can't even properly phrase the agreement to make it in anyway specific, I sincerely doubt that they came to agreement on details in that regard yet. 21:01 < murchandamus> Anyway, I guess it'll fall apart anyway when they try to specify what they're trying to achieve exactly with the proposal. :p 21:02 < murchandamus> gmaxwell: Did Adam or Samson finally attend at the meeting? 21:04 < gmaxwell> murchandamus: no, we were expicitly disinvited. (then reinvited, then disinvited-- samson ended up cancling a flight) 21:05 < gmaxwell> Yea, details matter, and not just to engineers. 21:05 < murchandamus> gmaxwell: Ah, I see. I was only up to date with "invited, disinvited, reinvited". Samson is in NYC though, right? Saw him in some pictures, I think. 21:06 < gmaxwell> murchandamus: their meeting was on sunday, so I guess he went later. 21:06 < murchandamus> gmaxwell: It just pisses me off that after two years of debate, somebody trying to forge an agreement doesn't even invest the time to run it by someone to make the text any sort of clear. E.g. "2MB hardfork", "immediately/within six months" gnarf 21:07 < murchandamus> Ah, I C 21:08 < murchandamus> I'm so done with the debate. I want all the shiny things that come with SegWit.— I'm sick of having 10 "unconfirmed transaction" questions on Bitcoin.SE every day. 21:09 < gmaxwell> look on the bright side, -- someone tries to add some kind of crazy AML thing to Bitcoin, good luck to them! :P 21:13 < murchandamus> gmaxwell: heh. Indeed. — Although I just realized. within six months would end just after the BIP9 timeout of segwit, perhaps they suggest to activate it right then? 21:16 < luke-jr> on the bright side, BIP148 is up to 10% of listening nodes 21:22 < murchandamus> I wouldn't be surprised if Frankensegwit becomes a large motivator for more people to adopt UASF. j) 21:22 < murchandamus> ;) 21:32 -!- ensign [~ensign@2001:41d0:8:d711::1] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 21:34 -!- nsh [~lol@wikipedia/nsh] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 21:36 -!- d_t [~textual@108-65-78-188.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] 21:41 -!- nsh [~lol@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 21:43 -!- ensign [~ensign@2001:41d0:8:d711::1] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:00 -!- ensign [~ensign@2001:41d0:8:d711::1] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 22:02 -!- nsh [~lol@wikipedia/nsh] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 22:13 -!- nsh [~lol@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:19 -!- ensign [~ensign@2001:41d0:8:d711::1] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:29 < paveljanik> luke-jr, you mean that 10% of nodes match /UASF/? 22:29 < paveljanik> or how do you know that run it? 22:30 < paveljanik> ...they... 22:35 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has quit [Quit: bye] 22:52 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 23:00 -!- dermoth [~thomas@dsl-199-102-156-55.mtl.aei.ca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 23:01 -!- dermoth [~thomas@dsl-199-102-156-55.mtl.aei.ca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:03 < wumpus> the bright side, for me, is that people are finally enthousastic about running their own node. So much activity! More (direct) users in the longer run run will likely result in more contributors to the project. 23:04 < wumpus> Gavin's tweet (combined with BIP148) seems to have the complete opposite effect of what he probably imagined. 23:06 < gmaxwell> https://twitter.com/bergealex4/status/867241659897171968 tehehe 23:07 < wumpus> even one of my (non bitcoin) friends asked me about how to do it 23:07 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:07 < jcorgan> gmaxwell: three blind men and an elephant 23:08 < gmaxwell> "oh. thats not its trunk." 23:09 < wumpus> rofl 23:09 < jcorgan> heh 23:12 -!- RubenSomsen [~RubenSoms@1.217.138.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 23:28 < jonasschnelli> Why does addrman needs to remember the IPs of the seeders? 23:28 < jonasschnelli> -> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10446/files#diff-9a82240fe7dfe86564178691cc57f2f1R1603 23:29 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: because it tracks where it learns addresses from, so no single source can get excessive influence on the table. 23:29 < wumpus> the origin of an address is kept around to make sure the connections are balanced, e.g. a not all to those from a single dns seed 23:30 < wumpus> right 23:30 < jonasschnelli> Okay. That makes sense. Thanks. 23:31 < jonasschnelli> I somehow though addrman does relay the seeders IP which sets the assumption that a seeder should also run a node on the same IP (my seeder runs no node on the same IP). 23:31 < jonasschnelli> *thought 23:31 < sipa> nope 23:31 < wumpus> I was confused about that too in the past, but no, that's never an assumption 23:31 < sipa> addrman is also just a database 23:32 < sipa> indeed, it just uses the source ip to balance in the buckets 23:32 < sipa> this is to prevent that a single source could poison your entire cache 23:36 < wumpus> gah it's painful to read how some people are juggling wallet.dat files, let's please get multiwallet in for 0.15 23:41 < gmaxwell> oh it's finally been rebased. 23:42 < jonasschnelli> Whats the etymological source of "bogo"(size)? My humble english understanding does only point me to buy-one-get-one-for-free? 23:43 < sipa> jonasschnelli: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BogoMips 23:44 < jonasschnelli> sipa: Ah. Thanks. bogus is it then... 23:44 < sipa> indeed 23:47 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/4cb8757aae1a...4314544d46e8 23:47 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5749a48 Russell Yanofsky: Add Qt tests for wallet spends & bumpfee... 23:47 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4314544 Jonas Schnelli: Merge #10420: Add Qt tests for wallet spends & bumpfee... 23:47 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10420: Add Qt tests for wallet spends & bumpfee (master...pr/btest) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10420 23:48 < jonasschnelli> Anyone working on the network code willing to review: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9502? 23:50 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 23:51 < wumpus> yes it's orignally a Linux thing, they needed an estimate to calibrate a delay loop. They called it 'bogo' to prevent people from using it as an actual measure of processor speed, though some people still were using it for that in the 90's. 23:52 < wumpus> bogosize is bogus in that it doesn't measure the actual size, it can be used for relative comporisons, but keeping in mind that it's... bogus 23:53 < wumpus> the definition is fixed and shouldn't change between client versions, unlike the leveldb size, which is entirely implementation dependent 23:56 < gmaxwell> also history of reorgs dependant. 23:59 < wumpus> yep, noisy and path-dependent, makes you wonder what is the bogus one :)