rkrux

@theStack Thanks for the quick update on this, reACK [57eb590](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30076/commits/57eb59024b4d5b776ddb08736a81585c2ea0e734)

Got it, nice. On Tue, Jun 18, 2024, 06:43 Sebastian Falbesoner ***@***.***> wrote: > ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. > ------------------------------ > > In test/functional/feature_framework_miniwallet.py > : > >...

@willcl-ark I just realised it would be great to commit the newly generated man pages here? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/doc/man There are already outdated man pages in that directory, might as well update...

> > I just realised it would be great to commit the newly generated man pages here? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/doc/man > > There are already outdated man pages in that directory, might...

@kevkevinpal Did you use a tool to generate the verification script?

Just realised this is similar to this PR: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29428

> re-ACK [61885ad](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/61885ad9d406e25ec3b6523d01918e886996f1c3) > > Dropped the else: [#31622 (comment)](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31622#discussion_r1963881147) @Sjors 61885ad9d406e25ec3b6523d01918e886996f1c3 commit seems to be outdated now.

I'm reviewing this PR again and will leave a review later. Re: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31622#discussion_r1963414552 > I still can't wrap my head around the logic of how and why we drop non_witness_utxos....

I don't have much idea about fuzz test cases currently but can't we exclude those seeds that generate PSBTs violating the new constraint? Because the new constraint renders those seeds...

The functional test failure seems unrelated to me. A re-run should fix it? `test_preferred_tiebreaker_inv()` in `p2p_tx_download.py`