This PR only fixes typos and spelling error. It does not change any functionality.
I’m just trying to do a very simple first PR, while reading and familiarizing with the code. I hope I’m not wasting anyone’s time, sorry if this is the case.
This PR only fixes typos and spelling error. It does not change any functionality.
I’m just trying to do a very simple first PR, while reading and familiarizing with the code. I hope I’m not wasting anyone’s time, sorry if this is the case.
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.
For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/32752.
See the guideline for information on the review process. A summary of reviews will appear here.
🚧 At least one of the CI tasks failed.
Task lint
: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/runs/44125887980
LLM reason (✨ experimental): The CI failure is caused by errors in the lint step due to the subtree directory being touched without a subtree merge.
Try to run the tests locally, according to the documentation. However, a CI failure may still happen due to a number of reasons, for example:
Possibly due to a silent merge conflict (the changes in this pull request being incompatible with the current code in the target branch). If so, make sure to rebase on the latest commit of the target branch.
A sanitizer issue, which can only be found by compiling with the sanitizer and running the affected test.
An intermittent issue.
Leave a comment here, if you need help tracking down a confusing failure.
Libsecp is a dependency, you have to fix those upstream.
And before doing cheap typo fixes, we often appreciate if you familiarize yourself with the code by doing code reviews and reproducers instead (running the new tests, benchmarks, checking for errors in other people’s work). Try to help out by validating existing work instead of giving us more.
Libsecp is a dependency, you have to fix those upstream.
And before doing cheap typo fixes, we often appreciate if you familiarize yourself with the code by doing code reviews and reproducers instead (running the new tests, benchmarks, checking for errors in other people’s work). Try to help out by validating existing work instead of giving us more.
Ho ok, I will try. I will look for a PR where I can find something to say :)
AdrienUfferte
DrahtBot
l0rinc
maflcko
Labels
CI failed