Intro: Never change the prune checkbox after the user has touched it #658

1. 
   luke-jr commented at 6:57 pm on August 30, 2022: member

   Re-PR from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18729

   Now includes a bugfix too (-prune=2+ disabled the checkbox, but -prune=0/1 did not; this behaviour is necessary since -prune overrides GUI settings)

2. 
   DrahtBot commented at 1:08 pm on October 21, 2022: contributor

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	hebasto
   Stale ACK	hernanmarino

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

   Conflicts

   No conflicts as of last run.

3. DrahtBot cross-referenced this on Oct 23, 2022 from issue refactor: Extract MIB_BYTES constant for init.cpp by Empact
4. hebasto added the label UX on Oct 26, 2022
5. 
   hernanmarino commented at 7:49 pm on November 8, 2022: contributor

   cr ACK 76cb0898198e19c164f9d649560c472b7bc5fafd and tested ACK
6. in src/qt/intro.cpp:293 in 76cb089819 outdated

   288@@ -287,8 +289,9 @@ void Intro::setStatus(int status, const QString &message, quint64 bytesAvailable
   289         ui->freeSpace->setText("");
   290     } else {
   291         m_bytes_available = bytesAvailable;
   292-        if (ui->prune->isEnabled() && !(gArgs.IsArgSet("-prune") && gArgs.GetIntArg("-prune", 0) == 0)) {
   293+        if (ui->prune->isEnabled() && m_prune_checkbox_is_default) {
   294             ui->prune->setChecked(m_bytes_available < (m_blockchain_size_gb + m_chain_state_size_gb + 10) * GB_BYTES);
   295+            m_prune_checkbox_is_default = true;
   

   ---

   ---

   

   pablomartin4btc commented at 4:03 pm on November 9, 2022:

   Do we need to set m_prune_checkbox_is_default to true here? Wasn’t it true already having entered into this block?

   ---

   

   luke-jr commented at 11:24 pm on June 29, 2023:

   Yes, removed it
7. 
   pablomartin4btc commented at 10:16 pm on November 21, 2022: contributor

   Title and description mismatch of the PR confuse me, I tested bitcoin-qt before and after the change and I don’t see the difference in the behaviour (from the UI point of view, haven’t checked the proper prunning). I’ve ticked & unticked the prune checkbox and set a value, verifying the value is persisted in the config. Also combined the previous starting qt with -prune param set to 0, 1 and 600. Perhaps I’ve some config that bypass this change? Could you please clarify? Sorry if I miss anything too obvius here.
8. 
   hebasto commented at 6:48 pm on December 6, 2022: member

   -prune=2+ disabled the checkbox

   Looks like a bug in the master branch, as it should be like that:

   0$ ./src/bitcoind -prune=2
   1Error: Prune configured below the minimum of 550 MiB.  Please use a higher number.
   

9. 
   hebasto commented at 6:49 pm on December 6, 2022: member

   @ryanofsky Could you be interesting in reviewing of this PR?
10. DrahtBot cross-referenced this on Dec 16, 2022 from issue clang-tidy: Fix `modernize-use-default-member-init` in headers and force to check all headers by hebasto
11. DrahtBot cross-referenced this on Dec 17, 2022 from issue clang-tidy: Force checks for headers in `src/qt` by hebasto
12. DrahtBot added the label Needs rebase on Jan 17, 2023
13. 
    hebasto commented at 3:58 pm on May 26, 2023: member

    Closing due to a long period of inactivity here. Feel free to reopen.
14. hebasto closed this on May 26, 2023

    ---

15. Bugfix: GUI/Intro: Disable GUI prune option if -prune is set, regardless of set value 420a983e25
16. 
    achow101 commented at 11:22 pm on June 29, 2023: member

    Reopening by request
17. achow101 reopened this on Jun 29, 2023

    ---

18. luke-jr force-pushed on Jun 29, 2023
19. 
    luke-jr commented at 11:23 pm on June 29, 2023: member

    Rebased
20. GUI/Intro: Never change the prune checkbox after the user has touched it bee0ffbecf
21. luke-jr force-pushed on Jun 29, 2023
22. DrahtBot removed the label Needs rebase on Jun 30, 2023
23. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Aug 18, 2023
24. DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Aug 22, 2023
25. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Aug 31, 2023
26. DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Sep 4, 2023
27. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Sep 21, 2023
28. DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Sep 22, 2023
29. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Oct 13, 2023
30. DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Oct 18, 2023
31. DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Oct 25, 2023
32. 
    DrahtBot commented at 2:32 pm on February 5, 2024: contributor

    🤔 There hasn’t been much activity lately and the CI seems to be failing.

    If no one reviewed the current pull request by commit hash, a rebase can be considered. While the CI failure may be a false positive, the CI hasn’t been running for some time, so there may be a real issue hiding as well. A rebase triggers the latest CI and makes sure that no silent merge conflicts have snuck in.

33. hebasto approved
34. 
    hebasto commented at 12:00 pm on February 12, 2024: member

    ACK bee0ffbecf4f95b65f4084893924a1ab250ca77c, both commits are improvements of the current behaviour. Tested on Ubuntu 23.10.
35. DrahtBot requested review from hernanmarino on Feb 12, 2024
36. hebasto merged this on Feb 12, 2024
37. hebasto closed this on Feb 12, 2024

    ---

Contributors
luke-jr DrahtBot hernanmarino pablomartin4btc hebasto achow101

Review Requested
hernanmarino

Labels
UX CI failed