--- Day changed Thu Jul 13 2017
00:04 -!- kexkey [~kexkey@68.168.119.230] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
00:11 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:14 -!- treebeardd [~treebeard@70-36-147-41.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving...]     
00:21 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e4fcbf797ed3...7666250ffb4e
00:21 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 69a4339 Lawrence Nahum: missing white space in function arg
00:21 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7666250 Jonas Schnelli: Merge #10810: missing white space in function arg...
00:22 -!- tripleslash [~triplesla@unaffiliated/imsaguy] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
00:22 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10810: missing white space in function arg (master...missing_white_space) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10810
00:24 -!- tripleslash [~triplesla@unaffiliated/imsaguy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:26 -!- btcdrak [uid237747@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-kxyfvfjpzlnglttn] has quit []     
00:27 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10731: SanitizeString: Expand upon allowed characters in logging to include "!#%&*+=^{}~" (master...log_more_uacomment) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10731
00:28 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: how do we fix the current bug in Core then?
00:28 < luke-jr> #10731 is a bug fix for a present issue
00:28 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10731 | SanitizeString: Expand upon allowed characters in logging to include "!#%&*+=^{}~" by luke-jr · Pull Request #10731 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
00:36 -!- btcdrak [uid239175@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-xurryifwlvdjxlcw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
00:46 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli reopened pull request #10731: SanitizeString: Expand upon allowed characters in logging to include "!#%&*+=^{}~" (master...log_more_uacomment) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10731
00:50 -!- coredump_ [~quassel@vpn-qld171.vpnsolutions.com.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
00:50 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: Your description: "Current Core strips out the !, + and = characters used by Knots to indicate whether BIP148 enforcement is enabled."
00:50 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: Can you describe the bug more precise?
00:51 < jonasschnelli> I fail to see the bug in Core
00:53 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: 2017-07-13 07:37:02 receive version message: /Satoshi:0.14.2(BIP148)/Knots:20170618/: version 70015…
00:53 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: Core logs this regardless of whether it's !BIP148= or +BIP148 or !BIP148
00:53 < jonasschnelli> Well.. why is this a bug in core?
00:53 < luke-jr> because they are all valid UA characters
00:53 < jonasschnelli> Yes. But invalid log prints.
00:53 < gmaxwell> because you just say they are valid?
00:53 < gmaxwell> They were never printed before.
00:54 < luke-jr> they don't violate BIP 14
00:54 < jonasschnelli> It's a log...
00:54 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: why?
00:54 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: BIP 14 is not about a log file
00:54 < luke-jr> there's no reason logs shouldn't have those characters. most do. Core does other places.
00:54 < jonasschnelli> Yes. I'm happy if you fix it. But don't break the SanitizeString assumption
00:54 < luke-jr> there are far worse characters also allowed in SanitizeString
00:54 < gmaxwell> BIP14 seems to also allow \n  nul  and so on
00:54 < gmaxwell> IOW: bip-14 is brain damaged
00:54 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: those are sane to forbid
00:55 < luke-jr> what if SanitizeString turns ! into \! ?
00:55 < jonasschnelli> No     
00:55 < jonasschnelli> It's not escaping
00:55 < jonasschnelli> Its sanitizing
00:55 < gmaxwell> Characters that will screw up shell processing and potentially lead to XSS in URL also are sane to forbid.
00:55 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: we already allow many of those
00:56 < jonasschnelli> Then make it better but not worse?
00:56 < gmaxwell> I am tempted to say we should change the printing to hex just as we do with other potentially malicious network input.
00:56 < gmaxwell> already people spam advertisements via UAs.
00:56 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: it's not a reasonable expectation. it's a log file, not a database query.
00:56 < luke-jr> what other log files forbid characters for such reasons?
00:57 < gmaxwell> why are we even logging these strings?
00:57 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: I'm fine about chaging the log print.. but not SanitizeString
00:57 < jonasschnelli> SanitizeString and the log file are conceptually two things.
00:57 < luke-jr> why is it when wumpus submits a PR doing this, it gets only ACKs and merged; yet when I do, people dig up obscure reasons to argue against it?
00:57 < gmaxwell> among other reasons, the privacy arguments we have for not logging IPs also applies, esp with so much diversity in stupid values people are setting in these strhings.
00:57 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: Can you refere to wumpus's PR?
00:58 < luke-jr> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/4983
00:58 < luke-jr> ‎[07:57:03] ‎<‎jonasschnelli‎>‎ luke-jr: I'm fine about chaging the log print.. but not SanitizeString <-- what do you mean by this?
00:59 < gmaxwell> I didn't ack wumpus; but as far as yours went, because you included a bunch of red-flag characters that I've personally been burned by.
00:59 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: () wumpus, yours: !#%&*+=^{}~
00:59 < gmaxwell> Again, why are we logging this in debug.log by default anyways?
00:59 < gmaxwell> We do not log IPs for privacy reasons.
01:00 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: I don't know an answer to that. This issue affects the GUI as well, though.
01:00 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: If you think those chars should be visible in the log, maybe find a way as gmaxwell mentioned via hex-representation of some partially-invalid (they turn to hex)...
01:00 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: I think it's a lot less of a concern in the GUI.  I think your new characters are probably okay there.
01:01 < jonasschnelli> GUI is isolated
01:01 < luke-jr> so URL escape in debug log?
01:01 < luke-jr> %xx     
01:01 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: % lets you escape arbritary characters for html/urls among other things. 
01:01 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: why not drop it from the debug log, and make the GUI more permissive?
01:01 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: I de facto have a script parsing the debug log to analyse this
01:01 < gmaxwell> though I question perhaps if we really should be showing these things in the gui.. not the characters, but third party sourced strings
01:02 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell, luke-jr: Hm.. yes. Maybe use the urlencode for the UA-string before printing to the log?
01:02 < gmaxwell> UA:  DANGER YOUR WALLET HAS BEEN COMPROMISED GO TO HTTP://fixwallet.eu/ NOW
01:02 < luke-jr> :|     
01:02 < jonasschnelli> I kinda agree with gmaxwell that BIP 14 is BD
01:02 < jonasschnelli> The original idea was also to place a donation bitcoin address there... :/
01:02 < sipa> gmaxwell: the .eu makes it totally legit
01:03 < luke-jr> lol     
01:03 < jonasschnelli> hahaha
01:03 < gmaxwell> UA: OFFICIAL BITCOIN NOTICE. BITCOIN HAS BEEN REPLACED BY ULTRACOIN BUY REPLACEMENT COINS AT BITCOIN.COM NOW
01:03 < gmaxwell> I mean this is why we don't try to do any fancy decoding of data stuffed in transactions either... :)
01:04 < sipa> let's print the hash of the UA; we do that for almost all data already anyway
01:04 < gmaxwell> similar risks exist in logs.
01:04 < luke-jr> I thought that was to discourage fancy encoding <.<
01:04 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: well advertisments in UA is also bad (which some people have been doing)
01:05 < gmaxwell> sipa: we display hex of many things too.
01:05 < gmaxwell> hex can be decoded but it's not going to trick anyone.
01:05 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: that's not clear to me. how is it bad?
01:05 -!- Maxime2 [~Maxime@ns334669.ip-5-196-64.eu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
01:05 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: spin up lots of sybil nodes just to get people to see DRINK MORE OVALTINE.
01:05 < luke-jr> hmm     
01:05 -!- Lisandro2 [~Lisandro@ns334669.ip-5-196-64.eu] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:05 < luke-jr> but people *don't* see it that much
01:06 < luke-jr> if they do, it's more often than not a website that doesn't care what we do here
01:06 < gmaxwell> (and god forbid people use the malicious messages like I suggested above, which they'd see in optimally bad situations: when they're wondering if their node is working right)
01:06 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: yea, thats those websites problems (actually a lot of them filter that stuff)
01:07 < luke-jr> should I make SanitizeString do the %xx escaping, or have a new function for this?
01:07 < gmaxwell> FWIW I protested the UAs to begin with. Just for the record. :P
01:08 < gmaxwell> nothing good ever comes from strings in protocols.
01:09 < luke-jr> I know a protocol that uses strings for commands
01:09 < gmaxwell> as far as url escaping the logs, that solves some problems not others... e.g. I think it doesn't make them necessarily safe for shell processing.
01:09 < luke-jr> … sortof XD
01:09 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: ?
01:10 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:10 < gmaxwell> or maybe it does. gah, part of my complaint is that these sorts of changes aren't worth the security review time.
01:10 -!- rockhouse [~rockhouse@h54110.upc-h.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:11 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: re wladimir adding ( and ) in 2014: at least those characters are specifically named in the BIP.
01:11 < gmaxwell> (they are also not ones that I've personally ever had bite me in data, I think)
01:12 < gmaxwell> where ! %  very much have.
01:13 < gmaxwell> Lets only allow the characters BIP14 specifically mentions. :P
01:13 < sipa> jonasschnelli: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10810#issuecomment-314993972 ?
01:14 < sipa> you're agreeing with a NACK, and then proceed to merge it?
01:14 < jonasschnelli> sipa: Yes
01:14 < sipa> (i have little opinion either way, just trying to follow what's happening)
01:14 < gmaxwell> luke-jr: also, FWIW, I can promise it wasn't because it was you that I protested... I was into writing my opposition before noticing it was you that was pring it.
01:14 < jonasschnelli> sipa: The best way to stop such PR is to merge them quickly. We can't close them.
01:15 < sipa> why not?
01:15 < jonasschnelli> Trolling and because it's an improvement (the space was missing there).
01:15 < jonasschnelli> Closing because it may slow us down is somehow weak?
01:15 < jonasschnelli> A quick merge seems to be the best path forward
01:15 < jonasschnelli> "get it out of the way" style
01:18 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:18 < gmaxwell> lets hope it didn't conflict any other PRs and cause needed rebasing.
01:22 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: I checked that and it shouldn't
01:22 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:22 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:23 < jonasschnelli> Maybe that something we can discuss in todays meeting. These typo-fix/add-spaced PRs need a clear strategy how to avoid them in the long run.
01:23 < jonasschnelli> Maybe the quick merge is not ideal then
01:24 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:24 < jonasschnelli> But if we want to close them (not merge them), then we should have a quick part in the PR guidlines
01:24 < sipa> > Do not submit patches solely to modify the style of existing code.
01:25 < sipa> -- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/developer-notes.md#developer-notes
01:26 < jonasschnelli> Oh... I should read more.
01:27 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
01:27 < jonasschnelli> What about typo fixes?
01:28 < jonasschnelli> So yes. My quick merge was wrong.
01:28 < luke-jr> does #10731 look acceptable now?
01:28 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10731 | Escape rather than remove any printable characters in UAs by luke-jr · Pull Request #10731 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
01:32 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: looks good. But I guess the PR description could be a bit better (going to be in git history)
01:33 < luke-jr> done
01:35 < luke-jr> insofar as UA phishing, how hard would it be to add a red exclamation mark icon next to the UA string with a tooltip warning the user it's not to be trusted?
01:35 < luke-jr> (otoh, maybe that would make the problem worse?)
01:38 -!- Lisandro2 [~Lisandro@ns334669.ip-5-196-64.eu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
01:44 -!- promag [~joao@2001:8a0:fe30:de01:10ad:39bb:2562:2d6b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
01:46 -!- Victor_sueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
01:47 -!- Victor_sueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:02 -!- henrik_ [~henrik@62-243-108-58-static.dk.customer.tdc.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:07 -!- promag [~joao@2001:8a0:fe30:de01:10ad:39bb:2562:2d6b] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
02:25 -!- Raymundo [~Raymundo@ns334669.ip-5-196-64.eu] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:32 -!- promag [~joao@bl6-24-70.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:39 -!- alan_baker [~alan_bake@li1180-203.members.linode.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
02:40 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
02:40 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
02:47 -!- Lauda [~quassel@unaffiliated/lauda] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
02:55 -!- henrik_ [~henrik@62-243-108-58-static.dk.customer.tdc.net] has quit [Quit: henrik_]     
03:00 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
03:01 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:16 -!- justan0theruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:18 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
03:19 -!- justan0theruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Client Quit]     
03:19 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:24 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:28 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
03:34 -!- JackH [~laptop@176.74.242.65] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
03:34 -!- coredump_ [~quassel@101.165.147.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
03:53 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
04:10 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
04:11 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
04:25 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
04:28 -!- coredump_ [~quassel@101.165.147.38] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
04:30 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
04:33 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
04:39 -!- riemann [~riemann@84-10-11-234.static.chello.pl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
04:46 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
04:48 -!- promag [~joao@bl6-24-70.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
04:57 -!- coredump_ [~quassel@101.165.147.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:12 -!- dabura667 [~dabura667@p98110-ipngnfx01marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
05:26 < jonasschnelli> ryanofsky: I like your def __idiv__(self, relative_uri): approach
05:26 < jonasschnelli> Can you help me how I have to do this?
05:27 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:29 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
05:31 -!- clarkmoody [~clarkmood@47-218-249-135.bcstcmta04.res.dyn.suddenlink.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:41 -!- deep-book-gk_ [~1wm_su@94.242.252.58] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:42 -!- coredump_ [~quassel@101.165.147.38] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
05:43 -!- deep-book-gk_ [~1wm_su@94.242.252.58] has left #bitcoin-core-dev []     
05:49 -!- lucianor [~lucianor@200.68.122.122] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:56 -!- Guyver2_ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:58 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
05:59 -!- Guyver2__ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
05:59 -!- Guyver2__ is now known as Guyver2     
06:01 -!- Guyver2_ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
06:05 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
06:06 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:08 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ReneNyffenegger opened pull request #10814: Change type of op to agree with type of MAX_OPCODE. (master...MAX_OPCODE) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10814
06:13 -!- murchandamus [~murchghos@ghostdub.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
06:13 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
06:13 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:13 < ryanofsky> jonasschnelli, does suggested code in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10650#discussion_r123484826 not work?
06:14 -!- murchandamus [~murchghos@ghostdub.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:14 < ryanofsky> maybe it needs /v1/ string added
06:14 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake closed pull request #10814: Change type of op to agree with type of MAX_OPCODE. (master...MAX_OPCODE) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10814
06:18 < ryanofsky> actually should probably be __truediv__ not idiv: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/datamodel.html?highlight=truediv#object.__truediv__
06:20 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
06:22 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:26 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:26 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
06:30 -!- cheese_ [~Cheeseo@unaffiliated/cheeseo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:31 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
06:32 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:41 < jnewbery> jonasschnelli: what's the current status with 10814? Are you expecting to rebase/address feedback today?
06:42 < jnewbery> sorry, not 10814, 10650
06:43 < jnewbery> #10650
06:43 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10650 | Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10650 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
06:46 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery, ryanofsky: working on a rebase of 10650 with add points adressed
06:46 < jonasschnelli> But git history is somehow fucked up... will fix soon
06:46 < jonasschnelli> So I pushed the just rebased version now
06:47 < jonasschnelli> Because the fixed has a strange history.. will fix soon
06:47 < jnewbery> anything I can do to help?
06:49 -!- cheese_ [~Cheeseo@unaffiliated/cheeseo] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
06:50 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery: no all good.
06:52 -!- Guyver2_ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
06:54 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
06:55 -!- Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2     
06:56 -!- promag [~joao@2001:8a0:fe30:de01:10ad:39bb:2562:2d6b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:01 < instagibbs> morcos, displaying wallet name is still useful in case you have multiple wallets in same datadir and you've forgotten which one you loaded :)
07:01 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
07:01 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:01 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
07:02 < jonasschnelli> instagibbs you mean in getwalletinfo?
07:02 < instagibbs> yeah
07:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:02 < jonasschnelli> Yes. I think it's a must for getwalletinfo
07:03 < jonasschnelli> Its how users can be sure they interacting with the right wallet
07:03 < instagibbs> squinting at the hd key is the way I distinguish now
07:03 < jonasschnelli> yeah. that works too
07:05 < morcos> instagibbs: heh, i was joking about the listwallets feature.. but hopefully 10650 makes it!
07:06 < morcos> it lookes like #10706 could use one more ack, but it's close.  #10707 is then 2 simple commits on top of that.  But I'd like opinon on the second commit
07:06 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10706 | Improve wallet fee logic and fix GUI bugs by morcos · Pull Request #10706 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
07:06 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10707 | Better API for estimatesmartfee RPC by morcos · Pull Request #10707 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
07:06 < morcos> See this comment: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10707#issuecomment-314869251
07:06 < morcos> All this needs to go in before string freeze
07:11 -!- promag [~joao@2001:8a0:fe30:de01:10ad:39bb:2562:2d6b] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
07:14 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery or ryanofsky 
07:14 < jonasschnelli> i could not get that authproxy endoint thing running
07:14 < jonasschnelli> I guess python doesnt like me...
07:15 < jonasschnelli> Anyone of you willing to provide a commit for 10650?
07:16 -!- promag [~joao@2001:8a0:fe30:de01:10ad:39bb:2562:2d6b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:20 -!- cheese_ [~Cheeseo@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/cheeseo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:21 < jnewbery> jonasschnelli: I'll give it a go now
07:21 < jonasschnelli> perfect. thanks
07:31 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
07:44 -!- Guyver2_ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:44 -!- juscamarena_ [~justin@47.148.176.74] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:44 -!- Guest97515 [~justin@47.148.176.74] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
07:45 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:45 < jnewbery> I've got authproxy working and written a test, but any requests to /v1/wallet/<wallet> get 404s
07:46 < jnewbery> I think because RegisterJSONEndpoint() isn't called anywhere?
07:46 < jnewbery> jonasschnelli ^
07:46 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
07:46 -!- Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2     
07:49 -!- Guyver2_ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:49 -!- juscamarena_ [~justin@47.148.176.74] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
07:50 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
07:51 -!- Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2     
07:53 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
07:54 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:55 < jnewbery> ok, here you go: https://github.com/jnewbery/bitcoin/tree/multiwallet_test2
07:55 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery: Yes. The PR is currently not working
07:56 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery: which commit is relevant? I'd like to cherry pick (and keep you as the author)
07:57 < jnewbery> that is (your PR #10650) MINUS (the authproxy commit) PLUS (my PR #10604 rebased on top) PLUS (ryanofsky's suggested authproxy change) PLUS (a functional test for multiwallet endpoints) PLUS (a hack in httprpc.cpp to get the test to pass)
07:57 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10650 | Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10650 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
07:57 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10604 | [wallet] [tests] Add listwallets RPC, include wallet name in `getwalletinfo` and add multiwallet test by jnewbery · Pull Request #10604 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
07:57 -!- Guyver2_ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
07:57 < jnewbery> 4597818... is the authproxy commit
07:58 -!- riemann [~riemann@84-10-11-234.static.chello.pl] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
07:59 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery: Ah.. is was looking for that one: https://github.com/jnewbery/bitcoin/commit/4597818e43900dc07271773f544f47d1da6d635c
07:59 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
07:59 < jonasschnelli> Thanks.. will finish 10650 soon. best to do hand off for now (until I'll comment its rebased)
07:59 < jonasschnelli> *hands
08:00 -!- Guyver2__ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:00 -!- Guyver2__ is now known as Guyver2     
08:02 < jnewbery> ok, ping me if you need anything else. It'd be great to get this ready for final review/merge before the meeting
08:03 -!- Guyver2_ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
08:03 -!- juscamarena_ [~justin@47.148.176.74] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:10 -!- jnewbery1 [~Thunderbi@static-100-38-11-146.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:14 -!- treebeardd [~treebeard@70-36-147-41.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:14 -!- Guyver2_ [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:17 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
08:17 -!- Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2     
08:28 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:32 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
08:32 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
08:33 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:33 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
08:41 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery with your AuthProxy thing I get also a 404
08:41 < jonasschnelli> But bitcoin-cli works.. so the endpoint must be registered
08:43 < jnewbery> can you push your latest branch and I'll test?
08:43 < jnewbery> suggest you tcpdump and compare the requests from bitcoin-cli and authproxy
08:44 < jonasschnelli> ah.. found!
08:44 < jonasschnelli> path='//v1/wallet/w0/'
08:45 < jonasschnelli> it should be AuthServiceProxy("{}{}" (for the __truediff__ op)
08:45 -!- jcorgan [~jcorgan@unaffiliated/jcorgan] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:45 -!- ivan- [~ivan@unaffiliated/ivan/x-000001] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:46 -!- ivan- is now known as ivan     
08:47 < ryanofsky> shouldn't you just write / "path" instead of / "/path"?
08:48 < jnewbery> ryanofsky: right. That's what's in the test I provided https://github.com/jnewbery/bitcoin/commit/53be2f334979f2cd979554fe81c4837ad02328cd
08:48 < jnewbery> doesn't matter either way, as long as you're consistent
08:48 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Snoozing.]     
08:48 -!- lucianor_ [~lucianor@200.68.122.122] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:50 < ryanofsky> / "path" is more consistent with python path api
08:51 -!- Giszmo [~leo@ip-90-233.219.201.nextelmovil.cl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
08:52 -!- lucianor [~lucianor@200.68.122.122] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
08:59 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery, ryanofsky: I just pushed the new version.. now its ready for a review
08:59 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-72-83-36-237.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
08:59 < jonasschnelli> I think usually its better to wait for a 2nd rebase until the author said its overhauled... :)
09:00 < jonasschnelli> But I guess Github sends those code-push mails.
09:00 -!- promag [~joao@2001:8a0:fe30:de01:10ad:39bb:2562:2d6b] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
09:01 -!- Victorsueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:02 -!- Victor_sueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
09:05 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:16 -!- cheese_ [~Cheeseo@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/cheeseo] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
09:17 -!- Dizzle [~dizzle@108.171.182.16] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:20 -!- lucianor_ [~lucianor@200.68.122.122] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
09:26 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:29 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:33 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
09:39 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:48 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
09:50 -!- Raymundo [~Raymundo@ns334669.ip-5-196-64.eu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
09:51 -!- Ricky2 [~Ricky@ns334669.ip-5-196-64.eu] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
09:52 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
09:54 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:01 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Snoozing.]     
10:01 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]     
10:06 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:15 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
10:19 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
10:25 < morcos> Can someone please remove 0.15 milestone from: #8501 and #10418  and add 0.15 milestone to: #10815
10:25 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8501 | Add mempool statistics collector by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #8501 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
10:25 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10418 | Need fee estimation migration for 0.15 · Issue #10418 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
10:25 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10815 | bitcoin-qt core dumps when bitcoin(d/-qt) is already running · Issue #10815 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
10:26 < morcos> Actually 10418 can just be closed, although it should be addressed in the release notes
10:27 -!- Giszmo [~leo@ip-90-233.219.201.nextelmovil.cl] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
10:31 -!- lucianor_ [~lucianor@200.68.122.121] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:33 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:40 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:43 -!- Giszmo [~leo@ip-118-233.219.201.nextelmovil.cl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:45 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
10:46 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
10:54 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] morcos opened pull request #10816: Properly forbid -salvagewallet and -zapwallettxes for multi wallet. (master...multiwallet_parameters) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10816
10:54 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
11:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
11:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:03 < wumpus> 10815 is crazy, when did that start to happen? I'm sure it was ok on 0.14 :/
11:04 < wumpus> we really need tests for the init sequence, it's too easy to mess it up
11:06 < morcos> wumpus: i don't know.. i've been noticing for a while now that occasionally i don't seem to be able to get RPC credentials..  what causes that aspect of the problem? 
11:06 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:07 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:07 < morcos> don't know if those other cases were related to this problem, its kind of easy to miss the core dumps when you expect it to not start properly anyway
11:08 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-72-83-36-237.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:09 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
11:09 < morcos> by the way, general request for anyone who has open PR's please check whether your 0.15 milestone status is correct or not.  would be nice to focus on the right things and make sure we don't miss anything important.
11:12 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]     
11:13 < wumpus> well if it continues after not being able to lock the data directory it could do all kinds of things, such as deleting files that are used by the running instance
11:14 < sipa> it seems 0.15 will use around 1.4x less CPU for validation than 0.14.2 (with infinite dbcache, before assumevalid point)
11:14 < wumpus> great!
11:15 < sipa> and at the tip, it's probably even more due to tx validation cache
11:18 < sipa> wumpus: the whole type punning thing is complicated
11:18 < morcos> negative CPU usage sounds awesome!
11:18 < sipa> morcos: haha
11:18 < wumpus> sipa: I'm sometimes thinking about giving up on C++ completely, I really can't keep up anymore
11:19 < sipa> wumpus: in C11, type punning through a union is officially supported, and it's ambiguous in C99
11:19 < sipa> but in C++, there seems to be nothing in the standard to indicate that it is legal
11:19 < wumpus> everyone uses it though, we were all told to use it, after punning through a pointer was no longer allowed
11:19 < wumpus> now this is no longer allowed either?
11:19 < sipa> however, it's been supported in actual compilers since forever
11:19 < sipa> it was never allowed by standards, but in practice everyone used it, so compilers support it
11:20 < wumpus> so is this a question of language lawyering or a practical problem?
11:20 < sipa> in this PR, it's purely theoretical... i gave 3 reasons why it's not a problem :)
11:20 < wumpus> if everything supports it in practice and all code out there uses something, then it's very hard to argue avoiding it
11:21 < morcos> #10235 should be milestoned 0.15 but is ready for merge
11:21 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10235 | Track keypool entries as internal vs external in memory by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #10235 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
11:21 < wumpus> unless there is an official way of doing it, of course, which is better, then we should move to that, but it's tiring
11:21 < wumpus> there's always something that is UB lately
11:21 < wumpus> c++ sucks
11:21 < sipa> wumpus: yes, you're always allowed to access a type's byte representation through a char pointer
11:22 < wumpus> but we don't want to access the type's byte representation
11:22 < wumpus> it was to initialize a pointer in a structure
11:22 < sipa> yes, but the wrong one :)
11:22 < wumpus> or do you want to use offset_of and clear the byte range?
11:23 < sipa> the compiler _incorrectly_ thinks that the indirect pointer may be used uninitialized
11:23 < sipa> this is not possible, the size field is used as a union tag
11:24 < wumpus> morcos: the problem in 10815 is that it does a shutdown, even though the init didn't complete
11:24 < sipa> we're trying to silence it by initializing that pointer, even though the other union field is the only one that's being used
11:24 < wumpus> morcos: so it shuts down the HTTP server, which deletes your authentication cookie etc, even though it was never started
11:24 < wumpus> sipa: bleh
11:25 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:25 < sipa> wumpus: forget i brought it up; there are plenty of reasons why it should be fine
11:25 < morcos> wumpus: and what causes core dump?
11:26 < wumpus> morcos:  g_signals.m_internals->BlockChecked.disconnect(boost::bind(&CValidationInterface::BlockChecked, pwalletIn, _1, _2));
11:26 < morcos> 10799 can be tagged 0.15 too
11:26 < wumpus> morcos: probably disconnecting something that was never connected in the first place
11:26 < morcos> hmm.. that sucks
11:28 < morcos> while i have you, can i have your opinion on another RPC agument name change issue, this time all messed up solely by me:   https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10707#issuecomment-314869251
11:28 < morcos> i don't want to miss string freeze, so just want to be sure we all agree on what the final API should look like so i can make sure commits are updated
11:29 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:30 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:30 < wumpus> morcos: sure, it's good to use a consistent name over multiple calls, if it is used for the same thing
11:30 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:31 < wumpus> and if it hasn't been in any release it's ok to change it
11:31 < morcos> yep only issue is the only one in stable release is using the wrong convention confTarget instead of conf_target.   make all the new ones wrong, or just allow that old one to stick around unchanged.
11:31 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit]     
11:31 < wumpus> also the string freeze doesn't apply to RPC help or api, because it's not translated
11:31 -!- Lauda [~quassel@unaffiliated/lauda] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:31 < wumpus> it's just for GUI messages _(...) and tr(...)
11:32 < morcos> nblocks has been in release, but already changing estimatesmartfee anyway based on the unstable warning
11:32 < morcos> oh...
11:32 < morcos> whew, ok
11:32 < cfields> sipa: why not use aggregate initialization: prevector() : _size(0), _union{{}}
11:32 < cfields> or give the union a ctor?
11:32 < luke-jr> yeah, string freeze is to give translators time ;)
11:32 < sipa> cfields: oh?
11:33 < sipa> cfields: which field of the union does that initialize?
11:33 < cfields> sipa: the first
11:34 < sipa> cfields: go comment on the PR
11:35 < luke-jr> unions can have a ctor? :o
11:35 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
11:35 < sipa> luke-jr: yup, and other methods
11:35 < sipa> (but not virtual ones)
11:35 < cfields> sipa: sure. I'm not seeing the warning without the change, though.
11:36 < sipa> cfields: neither do it
11:36 < sipa> *do i
11:47 -!- Giszmo [~leo@ip-118-233.219.201.nextelmovil.cl] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
11:48 -!- Victorsueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
11:48 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] morcos opened pull request #10817: Add a discard_rate to avoid small change (master...discardmore) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10817
11:49 -!- Victorsueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:49 < morcos> gmaxwell: ^ probably too late, but was waiting on my other PR's to move forward, its still depending on 10706
11:51 -!- dom_king [bb48f601@gateway/web/freenode/ip.187.72.246.1] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:53 -!- jtimon [~quassel@102.30.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:53 -!- EBM [c89b577c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.200.155.87.124] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:57 -!- LFiuza [b1137afb@gateway/web/freenode/ip.177.19.122.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:58 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.43.245] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
11:58 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #10818: init: Keep track of whether data directory locked, don't cleanup if not (master...2017_05_locked_datadir) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10818
11:59 -!- Victorsueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
12:00 < luke-jr> It is time.
12:00 -!- Victorsueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:00 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:01 < gmaxwell> Neat: luke-jr found a way to abuse the coinbase api to create a sybil resistant poll based on coinbases' KYC process: https://luke.dashjr.org/programs/kycpoll/answers.php
12:01 -!- lupape [bb6c25f3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.187.108.37.243] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:01 < petertodd> gmaxwell: nice
12:01 < achow101> meeting?
12:01 < gmaxwell> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr btcdrak sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier
12:01 < instagibbs> hi     
12:01 < wumpus> #startmeeting
12:01 < jonasschnelli> Hi     
12:01 < lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Jul 13 19:01:40 2017 UTC.  The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
12:01 < lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
12:01 < morcos> i'm here for 30 mins
12:01 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.43.245] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
12:01 < petertodd> hi     
12:01 < luke-jr> I'm here until I pass out <.<
12:01 < jtimon> hi     
12:02 < wumpus> proposed topics?
12:02 < paveljanik> hi     
12:02 < achow101> possible topic: 0.15 feature freeze
12:02 < achow101> it's soon, july 16th
12:02 < cfields> hi     
12:02 < jtimon> review begging as first topic ?
12:02 < wumpus> PSA: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9961, feature freeze is sunday (which is an awful day, it'll probably be monday in practice)
12:03 < wumpus> #topic high priority for review
12:03 < wumpus> #link https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
12:03 < achow101> everything marked as 0.15?
12:03 < achow101> :p     
12:03 < luke-jr> we can delay the feature freeze to July 16th, 2018 to avoid a Sunday
12:04 < kanzure> hi.     
12:04 < morcos> #10711 can be removed from high-priority as its not for 0.15
12:04 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10711 | [tests] Introduce TestNode by jnewbery · Pull Request #10711 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:04 < wumpus> agree with that jnewbery?
12:04 < morcos> Please add #10706 to high priority i guess, since the PR's it was depending on were merged
12:04 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10706 | Improve wallet fee logic and fix GUI bugs by morcos · Pull Request #10706 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:04 < morcos> i think i asked him, but he stepped away
12:04 < jonasschnelli> I'm removing the 0.15 milestone from #10240 (will def. not make it)
12:04 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10240 | Add HD wallet auto-restore functionality by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10240 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:05 < sipa> jonasschnelli: no
12:05 < jtimon> since it seems #8498 cannot be priority for some reason that scapes me, what about #10757 from me ?
12:05 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8498 | Near-Bugfix: Optimization: Minimize the number of times it is checked that no money... by jtimon · Pull Request #8498 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:05 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10757 | RPC: Introduce getblockstats to plot things by jtimon · Pull Request #10757 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:05 < jonasschnelli> sipa: you want that in?
12:05 -!- treebeardd [~treebeard@70-36-147-41.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
12:05 < sipa> jonasschnelli: if we remove that from 0.15, we must revert the hd split
12:05 < wumpus> I tend to agree with achow101 - it's better to use the 0.15 tag now for high priority for review
12:05 < instagibbs> sipa, ?
12:05 < jonasschnelli> proposed topic then: Hd split / hd restore
12:05 < cfields> #9566 can be removed from 0.15
12:05 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9566 | threading: use std::chrono for timestamps by theuni · Pull Request #9566 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:05 < morcos> wumpus: i think its still helpful to distinguish between hope for 0.15 and really need
12:06 < wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/milestone/25
12:06 < gmaxwell> I think if we do not fix the restore we need to disable HD by default. The current situation can pretty easily lead to funds loss.
12:06 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
12:06 < morcos> but yes i also agree we need to clean up the 0.15 milestone list
12:06 -!- ivan [~ivan@unaffiliated/ivan/x-000001] has quit [Quit: lp0 on fire]     
12:06 < wumpus> cfields: bumped to 0.16
12:06 < cfields> thanks
12:06 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.43.245] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:06 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: that would be very confusing to users, since older versions have HD
12:07 < jnewbery> wumpus: yess please remove 10711
12:07 -!- GM_ [bb48f601@gateway/web/freenode/ip.187.72.246.1] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:07 < jonasschnelli> I can work on the HD restrore. But It's pretty complex with pruning / encrypted wallets... the PR is already large and will get bigger...
12:07 < jonasschnelli> If there is enough review power, we can try for 0.15
12:07 < gmaxwell> E.g. just pick up a walled you'd previously saved, rescan won't move the keypool forward, and you'll end up missing transactions (then discarding wallets with money), and handing out addresses to people you already gave to other people and misattributing payments.
12:07 < jonasschnelli> I can have it overhauled by tuesday
12:07 < wumpus> jnewbery: done
12:07 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: Yeah.. is also true for all other wallets with gap limits of 5 (most do)
12:07 < jonasschnelli> We should def. do better
12:08 < luke-jr> can just the wallet-format-touching parts of HD restore be prioritised? eg, move out the actual restoring logic?
12:08 < sipa> jonasschnelli: this is not true for anything that automatically tops up the keypool
12:08 < jonasschnelli> What about just provide HD restore for non-pruning (to reduce the size)?
12:08 < jtimon> mhm, only #10652 in project 8...
12:08 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10652 | Small step towards demangling cs_main from CNodeState by TheBlueMatt · Pull Request #10652 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:09 < jonasschnelli> sipa: most HD wallets in the wilde stop topping the window futher up if a gap of >5< keys where found
12:09 < sipa> jonasschnelli: yes
12:09 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: to that extent that thats true at least in other cases those wallets behaviors are well documented and the interfaces is built around them, they're also used almost exclusively for personal use, rather than industrial use... (and it's not completely true because if there isn't a long gap they do handling it right and we do not)
12:09 < sipa> jonasschnelli: but we don't top up at all
12:09 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.43.245] has quit [Client Quit]     
12:09 < jonasschnelli> sipa: Yes. Not saying that is better. :)
12:09 < sipa> jonasschnelli: and hd split makes it worse, because it risks reusing a key that was previously used as change as a payment address
12:09 < jonasschnelli> I just wanted to re-state the HD restore in general is a broken thing
12:09 < sipa> making you miss it as incoming payment
12:09 < jonasschnelli> So what should we do?
12:10 < sipa> fix it
12:10 < sipa> #10240 is a bug fix
12:10 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10240 | Add HD wallet auto-restore functionality by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10240 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:10 < jonasschnelli> Agree
12:10 < jonasschnelli> Okay. Then we have more time.. :)
12:10 < gmaxwell> Right now this is responsible for several serious bugs in our behavior, which regressed vs the past, and will predictable result in funds loss through several different vectors.  I don't see an easy workaround to prevent exposure-- I thought perhaps refusing to load a wallet if the tip doesn't match the chain tip, but thats too cumbersome and disruptive.
12:10 < jonasschnelli> Since we have great reviewers, .. I'm convinced we get it in
12:11 < morcos> 10240 (when ready) is an example of something that should also be on high-priority...  it's going to take some review time and its important to get in  (in addition to 0.15 milestone)
12:11 < jonasschnelli> Okay. I though it not going to make it for 0.15 thats why I moved focus away.. but I see the issue now better
12:11 < jonasschnelli> *thought
12:11 < jnewbery> jonas: anything I can do to help for 10240? Would you like me to rebase it?
12:12 < wumpus> ok, will add 10240
12:12 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery: Please take over if you can
12:12 < sipa> jonasschnelli: rescanning beyond your pruning depth should already be an issue? what do we do in that case?
12:12 < morcos> achow101: what about the signrawtransaction splitting stuff, is that still aimed for 0.15?
12:12 < jnewbery> sure. I'll take it
12:12 < jonasschnelli> sipa: the PR halts validation
12:12 < gmaxwell> jnewbery: You are now my personal hero for the day.
12:12 < sipa> jonasschnelli: no, i mean right now
12:12 < sipa> what do we do if we try to rescan beyond the prune depth
12:12 < achow101> morcos: I'd like it to be. and the validateaddress stuff as that is related to #7965
12:12 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7965 | Remaining instances of ENABLE_WALLET in `libbitcoin_server.a` · Issue #7965 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:13 < jonasschnelli> sipa: I don't know: :/
12:13 < jonasschnelli> I guess you get an expection
12:13 < sipa> so, i think pruning is not relevant for 10240
12:13 -!- rhavar [uid237883@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-qprfelvnqzuiziec] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:13 < gmaxwell> the rescan calls just say no if you try that.
12:14 < sipa> it's a problem right now if you rescan beyong the pruning depth, and it remains so
12:14 < jonasschnelli> A large part of 10240 is about haling the full node in pruning... dropping that would reduce the review workload
12:15 -!- EBM [c89b577c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.200.155.87.124] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
12:15 < sipa> jonasschnelli: i think it should stop regardless of pruning
12:15 < jonasschnelli> So. Drop the pruning option from 10240?
12:15 < sipa> it's crazy that your wallet would go out of sync with your node
12:15 < sipa> that's a totally unsupported state right now
12:15 < jonasschnelli> From the PR on encrypted wallets:
12:15 < jonasschnelli> Same as above, but, If we hit the gap limit with an encrypted wallet, we can't topup the keypool. In that case, we just pause the sync (not the node, only the wallet).
12:15 < sipa> maybe that can be enabled later, once the wallet is more independent from the node
12:16 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.43.245] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:16 < sipa> but i think 10240 should just stop sync entirely if your wallet is encrypted and the keypool runs out
12:16 < rhavar> Anyone familiar enough with constraint solving to help me out with this model? https://gist.github.com/RHavar/0710144c713033d42f8f443a99fefbb7
12:16 < jonasschnelli> sipa: well, if you use a backup wallet you have the same state
12:16 < sipa> rhavar: not now, meeting
12:16 < instagibbs> rhavar, ask again in 45 min :P
12:16 < sipa> jonasschnelli: at startup; not anymore after rescan
12:16 < sipa> during normal operation the wallet is always in sync with the node
12:16 < jonasschnelli> Yes. Thats true
12:16  * luke-jr wonders if a halted node will rewind based on headers
12:17 < jonasschnelli> All that because of hardened derivation!
12:17 < sipa> it's also easy to avoid; using 10000 keys in the keypool
12:17 < gmaxwell> (indeed, which I also keep recommending)
12:17 < jonasschnelli> You don't avoid it, you just make the timespan for the possible impact smaller
12:18 < sipa> okay
12:18 < jonasschnelli> And 10000 is just inefficient
12:18 < sipa> well, i think all of that isn't the priority now
12:18 < jonasschnelli> What about only allowing non-hardened derivation for encrypted wallets and disable all pkey export calls?
12:18 < sipa> for 0.15, we need to have automatic marking of seen keys
12:19 < sipa> jonasschnelli: yes, i like that, but not 0.15
12:19 -!- ivan [~ivan@unaffiliated/ivan/x-000001] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:19 < jonasschnelli> Okay. jnewbery will focus on 10240 (he will rebase and overhaul I guess)
12:19 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: we have a program that requires >1GB ram, runs best with >8GB ram, that does hours of processing just to start up-- I don't think worrying about 320k of key material is a major concern.
12:19 < sipa> awesome; let's discuss further on the 10240 PR
12:20 < gmaxwell> (also 1000 works too, it 10k is really too much.)
12:20 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: should not be a concern. But it's still an inefficient fix for the problem we have
12:20 < jonasschnelli> sipa: ack. Thanks jnewbery 
12:20 < gmaxwell> Inefficient compared to what?  Inefficient to taking away private key export? In efficient compared to even one moment of one users time?
12:21 < jnewbery> no problem. Topic suggestion: #10650
12:21 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10650 | Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10650 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:21 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: Inefficient compared to support pub key derivation for encrypted keys or to topup the keypool on the fly
12:21 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: are you actively trying to sabotage the project?
12:22 < sipa> gmaxwell: please
12:22 < jonasschnelli> ?     
12:22 < sipa> jonasschnelli: there are good reasons to support hardened and unhardered derivation both; adding a feature is not a substitute for fixing a problem we have
12:22 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: was that a joke or a serious question?
12:22 < sipa> jonasschnelli: using non-hardened derivation implies you'll need to have a big keypool; it comes with that design choice
12:23 < gmaxwell> Sorry to be rude, but I am just gobsmacked about aruging that setting the keypool to be big "on the order of tens or hundreds of kilobytes" is opposed compared to this long saw about public derrivation; which we aren't doing for the wallet at least now.
12:23 < gmaxwell> So it seems to me like that you're intentionally in broken directions because you disagree with another decision.
12:24 < gmaxwell> er intentionally pushing in
12:24 < jonasschnelli> I though avoiding keypool with non-hardened derivation may be seen as a benefit for some of the users.. but it seems that i'm wrong. But at least it's not intentional sabotage
12:24 < morcos> let's move on from this at least duing the meeting, i think we all agree that the keypool can be bigger than 200 regardless of otehr chnages we make
12:25 < gmaxwell> Do we? it keeps getting argued against.
12:25 < morcos> thats why i ended it by saying we all agree. :)
12:25 < sipa> well, having non-hardened derivation with disabled key export is a perfectly fine _feature_ - but it's not usable for everyone (some people need key export), and for those users, we'll need to be able to deal with hardened derivation
12:25 < sipa> so let's do that
12:25 < sipa> next topic
12:25 < instagibbs> ack     
12:25 < jtimon> NicolasDorier: how does #9728 interact with rescan ?
12:25 < jonasschnelli> Yes. Agree
12:25 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9728 | Can create Watch Only HD wallet with -hdwatchonly by NicolasDorier · Pull Request #9728 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:25 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.43.245] has quit [Quit: Mutter: www.mutterirc.com]     
12:25 < instagibbs> jtimon, it doesn't do anything special for now
12:26 < instagibbs> same as hardened
12:26 < wumpus> other topics?
12:26 < morcos> jnewbery suggested 10650
12:27 < jnewbery> I think we're almost there with 10650. Only major sticking point is not having a default wallet when there are multiple wallets loaded
12:27 < jtimon> instagibbs: I see, so it kind of depends on #10240 ?
12:27 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10240 | Add HD wallet auto-restore functionality by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10240 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:27 < instagibbs> jtimon, we can chat offline about that after meeting 
12:27 < wumpus> #topic Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support
12:27 < jtimon> sure
12:28 < jonasschnelli> I just pushed the overhaule of 10650 that fixes the points reported by ryanofsky jnewbery and morcos 
12:28 < jonasschnelli> *overhaul
12:28 < sipa> jonasschnelli: cool
12:28 < luke-jr> #10650
12:28 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10650 | Multiwallet: add RPC endpoint support by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10650 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
12:28 < jnewbery> great! Will review
12:28 < jnewbery> thanks jonas
12:29 < wumpus> nice
12:29 < morcos> yes, excellent.  woo!
12:29 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:29 < luke-jr> I very much dislike passing wallet by name. That just makes the GUI side ugly
12:29 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
12:29 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: you mean the selecting walltes by name?
12:29 < sipa> luke-jr: as opposed to what? (sorry, i'm not up to date)
12:29 < luke-jr> sipa: as opposed to passing a CWallet* on the JSONRPCRequest
12:30 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:30 < sipa> that seems like something that's easy to change later
12:30 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: the GUI would have to go CWallet* -> string -> CWallet*
12:30 < luke-jr> and hope it matches the right one up
12:30 < luke-jr> sipa: I suppose, yes
12:30 < wumpus> yes, indeed, can we avoid long discussions about small details that don't matter for correctness?
12:30 < wumpus> we really want this in before the feature freeze
12:30 < wumpus> so let's be pracical about it
12:30 < gmaxwell> <3     
12:30 < jonasschnelli> Yes. WalletID or similar can be done later.
12:31 < wumpus> yep     
12:32 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:32 < jonasschnelli> One thing that is a bit cumbersome is that you have to remove the -wallet argument from bitcoin-cli when calling a non wallet command
12:32 < jonasschnelli> The endpoint node/wallet split is not very practical from the -cli use perspective
12:32 < wumpus> well it makes some sense
12:32 < luke-jr> hmm, bitcoin-cli reads bitcoin.conf, doesn't it? how does that interact? :/
12:32 < gmaxwell> then make the cli command handle that internally?
12:33 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.41.137] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:33 < gmaxwell> also, we can take some clunkyness with this expiremental feature in 0.15.
12:33 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: Yes. I though of that.
12:33 < gmaxwell> e.g. fix cli later.
12:33 < jonasschnelli> Yes. Sure.
12:33 < jonasschnelli> If you want to use multiwallet now, you need to add/remove -wallet when fiddling with -cli
12:33 < wumpus> IMO a clean separation between wallet and non wallet commands is good
12:33 < luke-jr> fixing cli could mean changing the -wallet= to something else
12:33 < wumpus> even if it seems cumbersome in the beginning
12:33 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
12:34 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: how do yuo remove it, if it's in bitcoin.conf?
12:34 < instagibbs> luke-jr, yeah, something that means "use wallet" not "load wallet"
12:34 < jonasschnelli> Yes. Its good.
12:34 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: ? I can't follow
12:34 < jtimon> bitcoin-cli calls with -wallet that don't need it could just ignore the extra argument and spit a warning somehwere or something?
12:34 < wumpus> I mean it'd be easy to put every non-wallet command on wallet endpoints as well, but that's something that is awfullly hard to change later
12:34 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: typical multiwallet use case has wallet=abc.db \n wallet=def.db in bitcoin.conf
12:34 < sipa> jonasschnelli: there are a bunch of things that the wallet - even after separation - will need access to (like fee estimates, mempool, ...)... i think it's fine if those remain inside the v1/wallet API (and also accessible as node commands)
12:34 < jonasschnelli> wait.. that's actually a good point!
12:34 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: bitcoin-cli will get these options too.
12:34 < jonasschnelli> Yes.. haven't tested that. :/
12:35 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:35 < luke-jr> instagibbs's -usewallet or similar seems like a good solution
12:35 < instagibbs> it likely takes the first wallet arg and uses that
12:35 < jonasschnelli> Yes. I think -usewallet is better
12:35 < sipa> so i think i may agree with having pretty much everything available through the wallet endpoint
12:35 < instagibbs> luke-jr, something like that, if it's not complicating something else
12:35 < sipa> (but not getinfo) *ducks*
12:36 -!- unholymachine [~quassel@2601:8c:c003:9f16:28fc:ece8:8cd2:4f58] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
12:36 < gmaxwell> It's an expiremental feature, API isn't table. The endpoint can be leaky for now.
12:36 < luke-jr> it's also easier to collapse args later than to split them, if we end up regretting it
12:36 < jonasschnelli> I guess we can leave it for now we just need to mark the /v1 *EXPERIMENTAL* in the release notes
12:36 < instagibbs> yes please
12:36 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
12:36 < sipa> ack     
12:36 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.41.137] has quit [Client Quit]     
12:36 < gmaxwell> s/table/stable/
12:37 < gmaxwell> And I think the alternative is to not have it at all, which isn't preferable.
12:37 < wumpus> should do that anyway
12:37 -!- unholymachine [~quassel@2601:8c:c003:9f16:e18d:5bfe:3c1:754f] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:37 < wumpus> absolutely
12:37 < wumpus> as long as it doesn't cause regressions for single-wallet mode
12:38 < wumpus> that would be unacceptable - but everything new is experimental
12:38 < sipa> agree
12:39 < jonasschnelli> I guess user feedback will also help us how to extend this further
12:39 < wumpus> indeed
12:40 < jonasschnelli> But once 10650 is in, we have finally usable multiwallet in Core! That's a big step.
12:40 < sipa> jonasschnelli: it is!
12:40 < jonasschnelli> And it wasn't the first try.
12:41 < wumpus> hehe multiwallet slipped so many releases it's a shame
12:41 < jtimon> yeah, is a nice feature to anounce in 0.15, even if as experimental
12:42 < sipa> just to repeat some other happy results briefly: my reindex-chainstate to 450k with infinity dbcache runs about 40% faster on master than on 0.14.2
12:42 < petertodd> sipa: what do you mean by "infinity dbcache"?
12:42 < jtimon> wow     
12:42 < wumpus> which reminds me, someone should really write a release notes section about all the wonderful perf improvements in 0.15
12:42 < sipa> petertodd: dbcache sufficient for the entire utxo sets
12:42 -!- lupape [bb6c25f3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.187.108.37.243] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
12:43 < gmaxwell> wumpus: I've already been talking to drak about some blog posts and whatnot on it.
12:43 < wumpus> everything from crc instruction support in leveldb to the new and better database formats, to faster validation, etc
12:43 < petertodd> sipa: ah, cool!
12:43 < sipa> wumpus: don't forget tx validation caching; that's massive for performance at the tip
12:43 < instagibbs> ^     
12:43 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
12:43 < wumpus> sipa: +1
12:43 < sipa> (just somewhat harder to benchmark and give cool numbers for)
12:43 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:44 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.43.245] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:44 < sipa> petertodd: around 6-8GB in 0.15, in practice (and more in 0.14.2, due to the blowup at flushing time)
12:44 < petertodd> sipa: that's still pretty small fortunately :)
12:44 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
12:45 < gmaxwell> Was 2GB not that long ago.
12:45 < petertodd> gmaxwell: be interesting to know why UTXO growth has stopped temporarily...
12:46 < sipa> if you know, post it here: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/56513/why-has-utxo-set-stopped-growing-since-2017-06-03
12:46 < instagibbs> (total size has been shrinking for a month now)
12:46 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:47 < petertodd> could easily be someone ran out of money for an attack, and is spending the coins again
12:47 < wumpus> #link https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/56513/why-has-utxo-set-stopped-growing-since-2017-06-03
12:49 < wumpus> any other topics?
12:49 < jtimon> many more possible explanations...
12:49 < luke-jr> maybe a reminder that Tokyo Core is in a few weeks
12:50 -!- treebeardd [~treebeard@70-36-147-41.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:50 < instagibbs> 2 weeks specifically 
12:50 < luke-jr> https://coredev.tech/tokyo.html lots of unconfirmed invites still
12:51 < instagibbs> kind of a hike for those not already in area for other reasons
12:51 < jtimon> oh, missed that one, I guess I can confirm now I'm not attending
12:51 < wumpus> I'm not coming to tokyo core, but will be in the SF one in september
12:51 < sipa> wumpus: great!
12:51 < jonasschnelli> SF is pretty full booked.. 
12:52 < jonasschnelli> Not saying we running out of space, but >20 confirmed
12:52 < wumpus> sipa: you're coming too? great
12:52 < sipa> wumpus: yes, of course
12:53 < sipa> (i live nearby)
12:53 < achow101> do we have a location for the sf meetup?
12:54 < luke-jr> achow101: https://coredev.tech/nextmeeting.html
12:54 < wumpus> yes, but it's still possible it will change
12:55 < wumpus> depending on just how large the room needs to be I guess :-)
12:55 < instagibbs> will we finally activate segwit there? *ducks*
12:55 < rhavar> petertodd: the day it stopped growing is the day alphabay shut down
12:55 < luke-jr> instagibbs: it'll already be active by then
12:56 < achow101> luke-jr: hopefully
12:56 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.43.245] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
12:56 < petertodd> rhavar: interesting!
12:56 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.11.95] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:56 < instagibbs> rhavar, ? what date did it go down
12:56 < rhavar> the 3rd i think
12:56 < instagibbs> been holding/dropping since 3rd of June though
12:56 < instagibbs> might be contributing factor still..
12:57 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.11.95] has quit [Client Quit]     
12:57 < instagibbs> sorry, is meeting done
12:57 < rhavar> oh, sorry -- I'm a month off
12:57 < instagibbs> 3 minutes
12:57 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.11.95] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
12:57 < rhavar> alphabay shut down the 3rd of july
12:57 < rhavar> and that question was 3rd of june
12:57 < instagibbs> my SWAG: I think internalizing customer transaction costs did the equiv of fees for exchange trading in China
12:58 < wumpus> seems time to end the meeting, speculation about the reason for the stop of utxo growth is interesting but not a bitcoin core meeting topic
12:58 < wumpus> #endmeeting
12:58 < lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Jul 13 19:58:08 2017 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
12:58 < lightningbot> Minutes:        http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2017/bitcoin-core-dev.2017-07-13-19.01.html
12:58 < lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2017/bitcoin-core-dev.2017-07-13-19.01.txt
12:58 < lightningbot> Log:            http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2017/bitcoin-core-dev.2017-07-13-19.01.log.html
12:58 < rhavar> So anyway, anyone familiar with constraint solving (and minizinc in particular)? https://gist.github.com/RHavar/0710144c713033d42f8f443a99fefbb7
12:59 < rhavar> That model works, just give shit results
12:59 < sipa> in a previous life, i've used minizinc
12:59 < rhavar> Since the ideal solution is blindly obvious, can you can convince minizinc to pick it `constraint count_selected_optional_outputs = 1;`
12:59 < rhavar> But it doesn't find it on it's own
13:00 < rhavar> But it shows that the ideal solution doesn't violate any constraints (and has a lower cost than the one it picks)
13:00 < rhavar> I'm kind of wondering if the problem is just formatted in a stupid way or not
13:01 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.11.95] has quit [Client Quit]     
13:01 < rhavar> (in general, I can pretty much always out-perform that model by hand. Makes me think something is seriously fundamentally screwed up)
13:01 < jtimon> one could also argue that simply usage has been reduced in fear of a possible fork
13:02 < rhavar> I got like 10-15 emails yesterday from people freaking out after the bitcoin.org notice lolz ><
13:04 < rhavar> (which imo was reckless and alarmist. If they did enough mental gymnastics to convince themselves that bip148 would split the chain, they should have at least waited to be sure that segwit2x isn't going to activate in time)
13:04 < jtimon> I guess that further disproves the argument that "people that will support uasf already know about bip148 already know about it and already 'upgraded', waiting for bip149 won't result in more people or businesses on board"
13:04 < jtimon> sorry, getting offtopic...
13:04 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.11.95] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:05 < rhavar> For every 1 person who understands the technical details of forks and chain splits etc. there are 1000 who don't
13:05 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
13:05 < clarkmoody> rhavar I've done some constrained optimization stuff, but never with minizinc
13:06 < clarkmoody> I've found that you can make a constraint solver do anything you like depending on the objective function
13:06 < rhavar> If you can see why that model doesn't pick the obvious solution (the one you can force it to), I'd be happy to give you a $100 in bitcoin or something :P
13:07 < rhavar> (It's obviously really easy to hack it, so it picks the obvious solution. But i'm more interested to why it sucks in general, like if the problem is phrased badly or something)
13:10 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:12 -!- Victor_sueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:13 -!- SopaXorzTaker [~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
13:14 < clarkmoody> Could you enumerate the combinations and print cost for each, then see where on the scale the solver is choosing? Like is it the worst, or near the best, etc?
13:15 -!- Victorsueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
13:16 -!- V3110C3T [~Mutter@177.79.11.95] has quit [Quit: Mutter: www.mutterirc.com]     
13:20 < rhavar> Well in this simple example, it's the 2nd best solution or something
13:20 < rhavar> but considering it's a trivial example that you can do by hand in under a minute -- i think it's pretty embarrassing :P
13:20 -!- treebeardd [~treebeard@70-36-147-41.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
13:21 < clarkmoody> I know the feeling :-)
13:21 < rhavar> There's also cases it say are not solvable, that are trivial  (pick all the inputs, for instance)
13:22 < rhavar> I actually have had some moderate success by splitting the model into two different problems (1 pick coins without change) and 1 pick coins always using change
13:22 < rhavar> and then compare which is better
13:22 < rhavar> But I feel like there must be something wrong at a more fundamental level if you need to do that
13:27 -!- tripleslash is now known as [\\\]     
13:31 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:31 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
13:32 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
13:32 < jtimon> can someone close https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10768 ? the author said it but for some reason didn't closed it himself
13:32 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:32 < jtimon> wait, #10714 didn't solved the warning...
13:32 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10714 | Avoid printing incorrect block indexing time due to uninitialized variable by practicalswift · Pull Request #10714 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
13:38 < jtimon> oh, yes, it does, sorry
13:41 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
13:41 -!- promag [~joao@bl22-247-244.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:42 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:42 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
13:42 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:43 -!- LFiuza [b1137afb@gateway/web/freenode/ip.177.19.122.251] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
13:47 -!- ulrich [b18763a7@gateway/web/freenode/ip.177.135.99.167] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
13:47 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
13:53 -!- ulrich [b18763a7@gateway/web/freenode/ip.177.135.99.167] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
13:55 < instagibbs> what could cause "no response from server"? It connects but gets no response?
13:58 -!- GM_ [bb48f601@gateway/web/freenode/ip.187.72.246.1] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
14:00 -!- dermoth [~dermoth@gateway/tor-sasl/dermoth] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
14:00 -!- dermoth [~dermoth@gateway/tor-sasl/dermoth] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:06 -!- ivan [~ivan@unaffiliated/ivan/x-000001] has quit [Quit: lp0 on fire]     
14:13 < instagibbs> oh, likely my -cli not matching bitcoind (testing multiwallet endpoints)
14:16 < instagibbs> jonasschnelli, it seems I get "trapped" if I specify a wallet in my conf file, unable to use -cli to stop the node, complains that the call is trying to use a /node/ endpoint call
14:17 < instagibbs> so yeah we really need something other than "wallet" for -cli usage
14:17 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
14:17 -!- cheese_ [~Cheeseo@unaffiliated/cheeseo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:19 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:21 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:23 -!- vicenteH [~user@135.234.15.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
14:24 < jtimon> do we have a list of new rpc calls so far for 0.15 ?
14:25 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
14:28 -!- twistedline [~quassel@unaffiliated/twistedline] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
14:29 -!- Victor_sueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
14:30 -!- Victor_sueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:33 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:37 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
14:37 -!- lucianor_ [~lucianor@200.68.122.121] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
14:37 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
14:39 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:49 -!- twistedline [~quassel@unaffiliated/twistedline] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
14:50 -!- echonaut [~echonaut@46.101.192.134] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
14:50 -!- echonaut [~echonaut@46.101.192.134] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:01 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
15:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:04 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
15:05 -!- corebob [~drb@2a02:fe0:c150:1a00:8958:6277:6ca3:b2cf] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:06 -!- dom_king [bb48f601@gateway/web/freenode/ip.187.72.246.1] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
15:06 -!- corebob [~drb@2a02:fe0:c150:1a00:8958:6277:6ca3:b2cf] has quit [Client Quit]     
15:07 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
15:09 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:10 -!- cheese_ [~Cheeseo@unaffiliated/cheeseo] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
15:15 -!- ProfMac [43c671dc@gateway/web/freenode/ip.67.198.113.220] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:16 -!- goatpig [56f75436@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.247.84.54] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
15:23 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]     
15:28 -!- corebob [~corebob@2a02:fe0:c150:1a00:8958:6277:6ca3:b2cf] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:32 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #10819: Fix uninitialized atomic variables (master...2017-07-fix-unitialized-atomic) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10819
15:37 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:41 -!- Dizzle [~dizzle@108.171.182.16] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
15:42 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
15:46 -!- owowo [~ovovo@s1349015191.blix.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:46 -!- owowo [~ovovo@s1349015191.blix.com] has quit [Changing host]     
15:46 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
15:52 < promag> I got this output: Fee Calculation: Fee:4520 Bytes:226 Tgt:6 (requested 6) Reason:"Fallback fee" Decay 0.00000: Estimation: (-1 - -1) -nan% 0.0/(0.0 0 mem 0.0 out) Fail: (-1 - -1) -nan% 0.0/(0.0 0 mem 0.0 out)
15:53 < promag> buggy output right?
16:02 -!- promag [~joao@bl22-247-244.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
16:20 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
16:22 -!- coredump_ [~quassel@vpn-qld171.vpnsolutions.com.au] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
16:43 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
16:44 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #10820: Use cpuid intrinsics instead of asm code (master...20170717_cpuid) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10820
16:44 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
16:54 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:15 -!- juscamarena [~justin@47.148.176.74] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:15 -!- juscamarena is now known as Guest98158     
17:16 -!- juscamarena_ [~justin@47.148.176.74] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
17:18 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@ip72-209-228-52.dc.dc.cox.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
17:19 -!- PaulCape_ [~PaulCapes@ip72-209-228-52.dc.dc.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:25 -!- juscamarena_ [~justin@47.148.176.74] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
17:25 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
17:26 -!- Guest98158 [~justin@47.148.176.74] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
17:40 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
17:50 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Snoozing.]     
17:54 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:03 -!- wumpus [~quassel@pdpc/supporter/professional/wumpus] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
18:05 -!- wumpus [~quassel@pdpc/supporter/professional/wumpus] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:26 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:42 -!- corebob [~corebob@2a02:fe0:c150:1a00:8958:6277:6ca3:b2cf] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.9]     
18:49 -!- str4d [~str4d@107-130-248-176.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
18:56 -!- str4d [~str4d@107-130-248-176.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
18:56 -!- PaulCape_ [~PaulCapes@ip72-209-228-52.dc.dc.cox.net] has quit [Quit: .]     
18:58 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@ip72-209-228-52.dc.dc.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:01 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
19:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:02 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
19:15 -!- sanada` [sanada@36-2-119-80.chiba.ap.gmo-isp.jp] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
19:21 -!- Victor_sueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
19:22 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
19:22 -!- Victor_sueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:23 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:30 -!- dabura667 [~dabura667@240f:d:e193:1:89a6:c645:a7fa:7aac] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:33 -!- rhavar [uid237883@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-qprfelvnqzuiziec] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
19:51 -!- arowser [~quassel@45.32.248.113] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
19:57 < luke-jr> wumpus: poke, can you build v0.14.2-uasfsegwit1.0?
19:58 -!- arowser [~quassel@45.32.248.113] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
19:58 -!- dabura667 [~dabura667@240f:d:e193:1:89a6:c645:a7fa:7aac] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
20:19 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
20:20 -!- jamesob [~jamesob@c-73-241-180-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:31 -!- alan_baker [~alan_bake@li1180-203.members.linode.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:39 -!- Victor_sueca is now known as VIctorsueca     
20:39 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@host-69-144-45-132.static.bresnan.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:40 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-72-74-34-138.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:40 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:306:b8e0:8160:4c19:b26a:1b01:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:41 -!- alan_baker [~alan_bake@li1180-203.members.linode.com] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]     
20:50 < phantomcircuit> there's functional tests that seem to randomly fail
20:51 < kanzure> is there a trick to getting the test framework to let node[3].generate(10) actually cause additions to listunspent output
20:52 < sipa> kanzure: maturity is a bitch
20:52 < sipa> you need mine 100 more blocks first
20:54 -!- sanada [sanada@36-2-119-80.chiba.ap.gmo-isp.jp] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
20:56 < kanzure> but 105 didn't work either.
20:58 < kanzure> oh.     
21:01 -!- Squidicc [~squid@pool-72-74-34-138.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
21:01 -!- Squidicc [~squid@pool-72-74-34-138.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
21:08 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
21:09 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-kndpibpfcebfxcjg] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
21:11 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ReneNyffenegger closed pull request #10768: Build System: Prevent warning about "maybe uninitialized variable" nStart in init.cpp (master...init-nStart) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10768
21:22 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
22:05 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:306:b8e0:8160:4c19:b26a:1b01:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
22:07 -!- juscamarena [~justin@47.148.176.74] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
22:07 -!- juscamarena_ [~justin@47.148.176.74] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
22:08 -!- juscamarena is now known as Guest38607     
22:08 -!- VIctorsueca is now known as Victorsueca     
22:17 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@host-69-144-45-132.static.bresnan.net] has quit []     
22:23 -!- arowser [~quassel@45.32.248.113] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
22:29 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-72-83-36-237.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]     
22:29 -!- arowser [~quassel@45.32.248.113] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
22:37 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-72-83-36-237.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
22:40 < jtimon> what is src/wallet.backup ? and what is making my unittests fail?
22:43 -!- ula [~kvirc@b2b-78-94-9-226.unitymedia.biz] has quit [Quit: KVIrc 4.2.0 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/]     
22:49 -!- hjkghujk [b51cc95a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.181.28.201.90] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:01 -!- hjkghujk [b51cc95a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.181.28.201.90] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
23:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
23:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:13 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
23:22 < wumpus> luke-jr: sure
23:23 < gmaxwell> I'd seen an shorter version of this presentation before (and I think linked it here),  on failures in fault tolerant systems... some good nightmare fuel (it's on HN right now) https://c3.nasa.gov/dashlink/static/media/other/ObservedFailures1.html
23:26 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:29 < wumpus> wtf is up with https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10805
23:30 < luke-jr> wumpus: he's saying we should make manpages and ONLY document in those
23:30 < luke-jr> ie, get rid of the --help details and RPC help stuff
23:30 < gmaxwell> why wouldn't we just improve the --help and improve the autogen
23:31 < luke-jr> he seems to think documentation simply belongs in manpages
23:31 < luke-jr> I don't necessarily agree (nor disagree).
23:34 < gmaxwell> documentation in the system is very helpful, from a pratical perspective.
23:34 < gmaxwell> and much easier to keep updated, and acts as source code documentation too
23:35 < wumpus> no one is going to maintain external manpages, the generation is useful imo
23:36 < wumpus> I agree that creates an overlap between --help output and the man page, but I don't see it as a problem
23:37 < luke-jr> the only ways I see to improve on how we do it now are 1) we lost a manpage for bitcoin.conf, and 2) they ideally would be auto-generated during the build
23:38 < wumpus> and moving the manpages from doc/man to src makes no sense either, that directory is already cluttered enough
23:42 -!- alan_baker [~alan_bake@li1180-203.members.linode.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:44 -!- alan_baker [~alan_bake@li1180-203.members.linode.com] has quit [Client Quit]     
23:44 -!- alan_baker [~alan_bake@li1180-203.members.linode.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev     
23:46 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #10821: Add SSE 4.2 optimized SHA256 (master...20170713_shasse) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10821
23:56 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:306:b8e0:8160:4c19:b26a:1b01:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev