-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
backport: merge bitcoin#21523, #17954, #17905, #17993, #19132, #20494, #19425, #17513, bitcoin-gui#8, partial bitcoin#17938, #18587 (auxiliary backports: part 9) #5246
Conversation
fc0a846
to
79e7ae6
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think these 2 backports should be included in this PR:
- Merge qt: lock cs_main, m_cached_tip_mutex in that order bitcoin/bitcoin#19132: qt: lock cs_main, m_cached_tip_mutex in that order
- Merge Fix regression in TransactionTableModel bitcoin-core/gui#8: Fix regression in TransactionTableModel
Because they contains fixes for:
Merge bitcoin#17993: gui: Balance/TxStatus polling update based on last block hash.
bitcoin#19425 partial due to missing changes in these lines?
m_node.chain->broadcastTransaction
(after comment "Load wallet again, this time creating new block and mempool")
Better to wait #5173 to be merged and after that complete 19425.
I think better to avoid adding extra functions to interface of BaseHash in standard.h
e74ef38
to
8c48c41
Compare
sorry, forgot to attach a link to a comment. Here is it: Nuke IsNull |
This pull request has conflicts, please rebase. |
da1cf22
to
383f109
Compare
This pull request has conflicts, please rebase. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
utACK
why 284a20a is here? it looks unrelated. |
Was running the extended test suite locally and found this test to be consistently failing, CI excludes |
I'd say drop it cause it's not a backport and it's not a fix for any backport listed here |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, utACK
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
light-ACK for merging via merge commit
16d0af0
to
be54c1a
Compare
Additional Notes