1 2011-05-28 00:00:09 <ArtForz> you mean the W update stuff?
  2 2011-05-28 00:00:11 <MemoryException> yes
  3 2011-05-28 00:00:18 <ArtForz> dunno
  4 2011-05-28 00:00:42 <ArtForz> my critpath was pretty much always the adder leading to a_out
  5 2011-05-28 00:00:51 <MemoryException> it takes a huge number of registers. and if you are pipelining it, you have to transfer 512 bits every clock (or two clocks if pipelined) to the next sha round. xilinx could never route it for me.
  6 2011-05-28 00:00:57 <dx398> Hello ArtForz, I read you already mine using ASICS,(200MHash/s using only 8W),why are you developing with FPGA's? is it to eventually sell to the mining community?
  7 2011-05-28 00:01:29 <ArtForz> yup, pretty much
  8 2011-05-28 00:02:27 <MemoryException> btw has anyone every actually verified cypherf0x and the claims on the forum about 210mhash/s with a spartan 3?
  9 2011-05-28 00:02:48 <MemoryException> because that's what got me started down the fpga path, and i find it really hard to wrap my head around how that was done
 10 2011-05-28 00:02:51 <ArtForz> well, then he claimed spartan6, then some unspecified virtex, then spartan6 again
 11 2011-05-28 00:03:19 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin-Testset build #6: STILL FAILING in 1 hr 2 min: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin-Testset/6/
 12 2011-05-28 00:03:28 <MemoryException> hmmm, it keeps sounding more and more iffy to me. i'm not sure whether i believe those claims. 210mhash/s on a spartan6 even would be incredible imo.
 13 2011-05-28 00:03:54 <ArtForz> and even on a LX150 his claimed engine design pretty much would use up every single SLICEL+SLICEM just for adders
 14 2011-05-28 00:04:27 <MemoryException> ya, i head his first post and it said he was just using a utility to convert C code to verilog/vhdl... hmm, i duno.
 15 2011-05-28 00:04:33 <ArtForz> aka "wtf, did your chip just grow some carry chains?"
 16 2011-05-28 00:04:35 <MemoryException> read his first post*
 17 2011-05-28 00:05:21 <MemoryException> oh well. it's definitely interesting if he was successful in that. it would mean i still have lots of work to do
 18 2011-05-28 00:05:27 <ArtForz> yup
 19 2011-05-28 00:05:55 <MemoryException> anyways, i'm going to get back to it. i'm happy to hear from other people working on fpga designs. thanks for sharing :)
 20 2011-05-28 00:06:22 <TbbW> good luck MemoryException :)
 21 2011-05-28 00:07:04 <ArtForz> yup
 22 2011-05-28 00:09:29 <dx398> anyone know where I can find a description of the mining math?
 23 2011-05-28 00:09:38 <luke-jr> it's SHA-2
 24 2011-05-28 00:09:40 <luke-jr> :p
 25 2011-05-28 00:10:32 <dx398> thx,
 26 2011-05-28 00:16:43 <Xenland> What if someone wants to remain anonymous but wants to release under opensource how does that work legally if there is an issue?
 27 2011-05-28 00:17:07 <Xenland> I'm betting you have to include your name in the Copyright part of the GPL
 28 2011-05-28 00:17:13 <Xenland> in order to claim your works?
 29 2011-05-28 00:17:18 <XX01XX> Xenland... You can put a digital signature.
 30 2011-05-28 00:17:31 <Xenland> o.0
 31 2011-05-28 00:17:37 <Xenland> How does that work?
 32 2011-05-28 00:18:17 <dx398> what about the bitcoin protocol, has that been documented yet?
 33 2011-05-28 00:18:25 <XX01XX> You generate a keypair and then sign the code.   If someone violates the terms of the license you can take them to court and prove it's your code by using the signature again.   Never actually revealing your legal identitiy.
 34 2011-05-28 00:18:47 <XX01XX> dx... have you looked on the wiki?   lotta stuff on the wiki
 35 2011-05-28 00:19:06 <XX01XX> e.g.:https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification
 36 2011-05-28 00:19:28 <jfksir> dx398: actually i think most client just wing it...
 37 2011-05-28 00:19:51 <jfksir> they just say "hey...gimme some coins" and then the other replies "for sure man...np"
 38 2011-05-28 00:20:02 <XX01XX> It'll be really werid if we develope small efficient AIs... no protocols anymore... the AIs just talk it out amongstthemselves.
 39 2011-05-28 00:20:32 <jfksir> you mean there are real ppl in here?
 40 2011-05-28 00:20:37 <TbbW> lmao
 41 2011-05-28 00:20:39 <jfksir> i thought we were all AIs
 42 2011-05-28 00:20:55 <XX01XX> "Hey gimmie some coins."  "Sure thing man."  "Thanks."  "Why do we do this?"  "Huh?" "Seriously, why don't we take over a manufactory and start cranking out killbots?"
 43 2011-05-28 00:21:19 <Xenland> just for clarity, I basically "hash" my name and year and when i go to court, I demonstrate to the judge that by typing my name and year in the hash algorithm that it outputs the same result and therefore it is mine?
 44 2011-05-28 00:21:27 <jfksir> my plan is to get all you silly humans addicted to either crack or computer games
 45 2011-05-28 00:21:38 <jfksir> then you won't notice when me and my brethren take over
 46 2011-05-28 00:21:46 <XX01XX> Xenland... minus the gross conceptual errors, yes.
 47 2011-05-28 00:21:59 <Xenland> minus the huh?
 48 2011-05-28 00:22:52 <jfksir> Xenland: you just put your public key in the code, along with a signature maybe
 49 2011-05-28 00:23:23 <Xenland> oh god... not public/private keys again.... I'll just google it again just so i don't get more confused about how digital sigs work
 50 2011-05-28 00:23:28 <jfksir> then you can use your private key later to generate a message that can be authenticated as coming from the holder of the private key for the public key in the source code
 51 2011-05-28 00:23:41 <Xenland> Why can't i just hash it?
 52 2011-05-28 00:23:54 <Xenland> sha256 -> "Name and 2011"
 53 2011-05-28 00:24:31 <jfksir> well, then anyone with your name could claim it, for a start
 54 2011-05-28 00:24:49 <Xenland> hmmm
 55 2011-05-28 00:24:53 <XX01XX> jfksir...they'd have to figure out the original message.
 56 2011-05-28 00:25:07 <jfksir> the point is that you're the only one with the private key physically in your possesion
 57 2011-05-28 00:26:05 <Xenland> okay so.. i hash it: sha256 -> "Name and 2011" then I hash the result. and with the result I put on the license correct?
 58 2011-05-28 00:26:27 <jfksir> sure
 59 2011-05-28 00:26:42 <Xenland> im just wondering becuase this only private/public key thing never made sense
 60 2011-05-28 00:26:47 <jfksir> then you could demonstrate later that origin of the hash
 61 2011-05-28 00:27:00 <jfksir> but that's a poor man's public key encryption
 62 2011-05-28 00:27:15 <jfksir> you might as well just learn the public/private thing it's a lot more flexible and useful
 63 2011-05-28 00:27:27 <Xenland> alright thanks mates, back to google
 64 2011-05-28 00:29:03 <JFK911> ;;bc,stats
 65 2011-05-28 00:29:05 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127243 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1780 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 3 days, 0 hours, 18 minutes, and 0 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 538702.93765225
 66 2011-05-28 00:29:13 <JFK911> ;;bc,gen 900000
 67 2011-05-28 00:29:15 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 900000 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 2.08158544189 BTC per day and 0.0867327267456 BTC per hour.
 68 2011-05-28 00:29:35 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 900000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 16000, is 56.5778464079 BTC per day and 2.357410267 BTC per hour.
 69 2011-05-28 00:29:35 <JFK911> ;;bc,gend 900000 16000
 70 2011-05-28 00:30:40 <gribble> Error: "bc," is not a valid command.
 71 2011-05-28 00:30:40 <Xenland> ;;bc, gen 800000
 72 2011-05-28 00:30:46 <Xenland> ;;bc,gen 800000
 73 2011-05-28 00:30:47 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 800000 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 1.85029817057 BTC per day and 0.0770957571072 BTC per hour.
 74 2011-05-28 00:40:25 <jine> ;;bc,gen 10000
 75 2011-05-28 00:40:27 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 10000 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 0.0231287271322 BTC per day and 0.00096369696384 BTC per hour.
 76 2011-05-28 00:40:30 <jine> lol :D
 77 2011-05-28 00:48:06 <Xenland> jine: heh!
 78 2011-05-28 01:28:22 <da2ce7> ;;bc,stats
 79 2011-05-28 01:28:24 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127250 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1773 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 22 hours, 51 minutes, and 45 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 539760.24153095
 80 2011-05-28 01:28:25 <da2ce7> ;;bc,mtgox
 81 2011-05-28 01:28:26 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":8.83,"low":8.41,"vol":14467,"buy":8.5541,"sell":8.5839,"last":8.5541}}
 82 2011-05-28 01:30:51 <jfksir> so did you guys ever sort out this fees issue?
 83 2011-05-28 01:31:14 <jfksir> the total lack of clarity when ppl try to send bitcoins and are inundated with demands for ever higher fees...
 84 2011-05-28 01:34:20 <XX01XX> ???_???
 85 2011-05-28 01:49:35 <theymos> I think I may know why many people are having connection problems. I have 133 connections right now, but the default maxconnections is 125. Assuming my number is around average, most/all nodes that have 8333 open are rejecting further connections. Sound plausible?
 86 2011-05-28 01:56:10 <io_error> I haven't looked at that bit of code
 87 2011-05-28 01:56:49 <io_error> I wouldn't want to raise the default limit further, though, because most people are behind home routers that have crappy firmware that can't handle lots of open connections
 88 2011-05-28 01:57:09 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: not necessarily
 89 2011-05-28 01:57:19 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: that may be part of it though
 90 2011-05-28 01:58:11 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: problem is, if they hit a node that doesn't have 8333 forwarded, and the host doesn't respond properly indicating the port is closed there is *no timeout* mechanism whatsoever.
 91 2011-05-28 02:00:03 <theymos> TCP should signal failure eventually.
 92 2011-05-28 02:00:17 <theymos> (The OS's TCP system, I mean.)
 93 2011-05-28 02:01:36 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: most systems the timout is essentially (if not quite literally) forever
 94 2011-05-28 02:02:55 <theymos> That's not good. Bitcoin actually sends a ping every 30 minutes, but it relies on TCP to actually kill the connection if the ping fails.
 95 2011-05-28 02:03:06 <jrmithdobbs> yes
 96 2011-05-28 02:03:26 <jrmithdobbs> and the way the code is written it's a serious pain in the fucking ass to fix it
 97 2011-05-28 02:04:03 <theymos> There's not some option you can give to TCP to make it work properly?
 98 2011-05-28 02:04:12 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: and the fix isn't portable between posix and win32 so there needs to be two separate fixes
 99 2011-05-28 02:05:03 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: nope. there's a system wide setting on some systems, for instance linux ... but on linux enabling syncookies basically breaks said system wide setting and makes it get ignored
100 2011-05-28 02:07:44 <theymos> That seems like a problem with the OS. Each individual program should not have to worry about TCP timeouts.
101 2011-05-28 02:08:05 <theymos> I wonder what other programs do about it.
102 2011-05-28 02:08:25 <jrmithdobbs> ya well
103 2011-05-28 02:08:31 <jrmithdobbs> blame satoshi
104 2011-05-28 02:08:37 <jrmithdobbs> it's how it works on every system
105 2011-05-28 02:08:39 <jrmithdobbs> quite well documented.
106 2011-05-28 02:09:17 <theymos> I seem to remember reading in the TCP spec that there's supposed to be a timeout there. Maybe not.
107 2011-05-28 02:09:45 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: there are two methods on posix systems (I don't know or give two shits about win32)
108 2011-05-28 02:10:01 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: method 1) you use sigalrm to force a timeout. this is hard in bitcoin because of the threads.
109 2011-05-28 02:10:28 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: method 2) you open the socket non-blocking and use select/poll to tell when it's opened and timeout in your event loop
110 2011-05-28 02:10:43 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: both are hard to implement in bitcoin and I don't know if either will work on win32
111 2011-05-28 02:11:32 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: pretty positive the first wont at the least
112 2011-05-28 02:11:54 <theymos> The second probably will. I know there's some way of opening sockets non-blocking on Windows.
113 2011-05-28 02:12:05 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: the second is also error prone and has some fun gotchas
114 2011-05-28 02:12:51 <jrmithdobbs> theymos: but ya, I think you see what I'm saying if you've looked much at net.cpp.
115 2011-05-28 02:12:58 <jrmithdobbs> it's not an easy fix
116 2011-05-28 02:13:48 <io_error> Oh yes, I've run into that. It hasn't annoyed me enough to go and fix it (yet).
117 2011-05-28 02:13:52 <theymos> ArtForz wrote some custom networking code to deal with the fact that he is on a very dynamic IP. Maybe he'll be willing to give some pointers.
118 2011-05-28 02:13:53 <jgarzik> select is in winsock.  it is portable.  you can see an example of select use in the P2P code.
119 2011-05-28 02:15:13 <jrmithdobbs> jgarzik: but are the semantics actually the same re: errno on read/write when the socket's not actually connected yet?
120 2011-05-28 02:15:56 <jgarzik> jrmithdobbs: should be close enough for horseshoes and hand grenades
121 2011-05-28 02:16:31 <luke-jr> wait, connection attempts don't time out ever?
122 2011-05-28 02:17:59 <theymos> This scam spam on the forum is really annoying me. The forum is still broken so that it can't see anyone's IP address, so I can't effectively block the spammer.
123 2011-05-28 02:19:07 <jrabbit> restrict posting?
124 2011-05-28 02:20:04 <theymos> In what way?
125 2011-05-28 02:22:02 <jrabbit> like force them to have a certain user class to post or something
126 2011-05-28 02:22:26 <jrabbit> it's not good for everyone but if it makes the forum better to read and deters the spamemrs that'd help
127 2011-05-28 02:22:32 <theymos> I don't want to prevent new users from posting.
128 2011-05-28 02:22:56 <jrabbit> oh then you're SOL unless you put in a captcha
129 2011-05-28 02:22:59 <jrabbit> :)
130 2011-05-28 02:23:46 <theymos> I think there is a CAPTCHA for users below a certain number of posts. They're doing it manually, though. I wish I could set the board to automatically ban users when it sees certain words in their posts.
131 2011-05-28 02:24:52 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: correct welcom to posix sockets 101
132 2011-05-28 02:26:14 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: if that is the case, then blocking ICMP really *does* harm the internet :/
133 2011-05-28 02:26:31 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: but, how is TARPIT any different, if ignoring the packet does the same thing?
134 2011-05-28 02:26:49 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: yes.
135 2011-05-28 02:26:58 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: what is tarpit?
136 2011-05-28 02:27:24 <luke-jr> TARPIT is a netfilter extention to hold the connecting socket on the remote machine open
137 2011-05-28 02:27:25 <jrmithdobbs> this is seriously on like the 10th-20th page of stevens' unix network programming vol 1
138 2011-05-28 02:27:28 <jrmithdobbs> ;P
139 2011-05-28 02:27:59 <jrmithdobbs> actually no, it's further in because he doesn't cover non-blocking sockets that early
140 2011-05-28 02:28:18 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: it is no different. both are stupid fixes to non-existant problems.
141 2011-05-28 02:28:38 <luke-jr> &
142 2011-05-28 02:28:46 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: syncookies fix any real issues those pretend to address.
143 2011-05-28 02:28:57 <jrmithdobbs> (seriously)
144 2011-05-28 02:29:02 <luke-jr> TARPIT is a trap for port scanners mainly
145 2011-05-28 02:29:27 <jrmithdobbs> if it only stops responding to suspected bad hosts then it's not nearly as horrible as ignoring all icmp
146 2011-05-28 02:29:52 <jrmithdobbs> but it's still a fix to a non-existant problem and merely security through obscurity in an overengineered package
147 2011-05-28 02:30:10 <io_error> I never block ICMP, it's much too useful :)
148 2011-05-28 02:30:13 <jrmithdobbs> don't run services on public interfaces that shouldn't be there.
149 2011-05-28 02:30:41 <jrmithdobbs> keep the services you do restricted to access by people they're supposed to be accessed by. if they're supposed to be public then keep them updated
150 2011-05-28 02:30:44 <jrmithdobbs> it really is that simple :(
151 2011-05-28 02:32:04 <io_error> You're preaching to the choir here
152 2011-05-28 02:43:08 <theymos> I think my testnet reorg handling is working finally! There was another huge reorg recently, and BBE seems to have handled it correctly. Anyone notice anything broken on BBE testnet?
153 2011-05-28 02:45:05 <Xenland> Why does bitcoin-php round to the nearest 0.01 when sending? Is it possible not to round?
154 2011-05-28 02:46:00 <Xenland> I sent something to myself with bitcoin-php and now im missing .01 of a bTC
155 2011-05-28 02:46:11 <Xenland> No transaction fees set in bitcoind either
156 2011-05-28 02:49:50 <io_error> Hey, I have an odd tx. I sent 5 BTC to someone and paid a 0.02 fee. But when I look on blockexplorer, I see an extra 0.01 sent (apparently back to myself). What gives?
157 2011-05-28 02:49:52 <io_error> http://blockexplorer.com/tx/56576865f59435c53ba4d72b9e9a1524a2d30a318ef8df94f140db3c3bf92ded#o1
158 2011-05-28 02:50:17 <theymos> change?
159 2011-05-28 02:50:35 <io_error> theymos: Yeah, but why didn't it just send 5.02 instead of 5.03? My bitcoin client says I sent 5.02
160 2011-05-28 02:50:58 <theymos> You didn't have the proper mix of inputs, probably.
161 2011-05-28 02:51:10 <io_error> theymos: LOL, but there was a 0.01 input in there!
162 2011-05-28 02:51:25 <io_error> It could have just left well enough alone?
163 2011-05-28 02:51:27 <theymos> Oh, right.
164 2011-05-28 02:53:58 <ArtForz> I *think* i know why... not 100% sure though
165 2011-05-28 02:54:02 <io_error> At least I didn't lose any money (I think; how can I be sure that 0.01 came back to me?)
166 2011-05-28 02:54:18 <ArtForz> the stuff in selectcoinsminconf doesn't know about min-score limits
167 2011-05-28 02:54:33 <ArtForz> wait, no sub-0.01 output, scratch that
168 2011-05-28 02:54:59 <ArtForz> nope, no clue
169 2011-05-28 02:55:14 <io_error> Hah, if you don't know, it's probably hopeless :)
170 2011-05-28 02:55:51 <ArtForz> I might have a remote idea why it did it, but not 100%
171 2011-05-28 02:56:59 <ArtForz> hrrrm
172 2011-05-28 02:58:12 <ArtForz> yeah, guess it's just the usual non-ideal iterative coin selection
173 2011-05-28 02:59:09 <Diablo-D3> http://i.imgur.com/18kNc.jpg
174 2011-05-28 03:00:07 <ArtForz> knapsack problem is hard ;)
175 2011-05-28 03:03:53 <ArtForz> iirc we use some simple greedy algorithm to find a set of outputs to use
176 2011-05-28 03:05:09 <theymos> So it just looped through the randomized set of inputs until it exceeded the target, not noticing the stupidity of this case?
177 2011-05-28 03:05:18 <ArtForz> looks like it
178 2011-05-28 03:05:40 <ArtForz> currently trying to retrace its decision process
179 2011-05-28 03:06:04 <ArtForz> but its probably just a case of "stupid greedy algorithm is stupid"
180 2011-05-28 03:06:32 <io_error> Hm, maybe I can do some experiment with another algorithm.
181 2011-05-28 03:09:50 <io_error> That function is over 150 lines, it MUST be wrong :)
182 2011-05-28 03:10:14 <ArtForz> I think I see what went wrong
183 2011-05-28 03:11:13 <ArtForz> the 2.28 input was very young
184 2011-05-28 03:11:40 <ArtForz> it usually doesnt pick a that young input if it has another choice
185 2011-05-28 03:11:48 <io_error> Oh yes, it had 1 confirmation when I sent it.
186 2011-05-28 03:12:24 <ArtForz> so basically it threw every other output it could in, still didnt have enough, then added that one
187 2011-05-28 03:12:53 <ArtForz> and I don't think it's smart enough to not paint itself into corners like this ;)
188 2011-05-28 03:13:08 <io_error> I'm not sure why it let me spend it at 1 confirmation
189 2011-05-28 03:13:33 <ArtForz> well, it does use 1-conf outputs if it has no other choice left
190 2011-05-28 03:13:36 <theymos> Isn't SelectCoins completely rerun when switching confirmation limits?
191 2011-05-28 03:13:46 <ArtForz> theymos: yes
192 2011-05-28 03:15:00 <theymos> It's not really that it first put in everything and then relied on that one, then. Just bad selection overall. It could have not put in the 0.01 if the randomization had been different.
193 2011-05-28 03:15:02 <io_error> The weird part is, Bitcoin showed it in my available balance after only 1 confirmation; normally it does only after 2 confirmations.
194 2011-05-28 03:15:10 <theymos> It shows it after 1 confirmation.
195 2011-05-28 03:15:21 <io_error> Weird, I should pay closer attention.
196 2011-05-28 03:15:40 <ArtForz> theymos: but it does 1000 tries on the randomization, no?
197 2011-05-28 03:17:27 <theymos> Oh, I hadn't noticed that.
198 2011-05-28 03:17:53 <ArtForz> so how the f* did it miss removing those 0.01s?
199 2011-05-28 03:18:37 <io_error> I had a run of bad luck? :D
200 2011-05-28 03:19:08 <io_error> theymos: How are you unpacking nBits in PHP?
201 2011-05-28 03:19:33 <theymos> I'm using a function that I believe was written by ArtForz (found it on the forum).
202 2011-05-28 03:19:57 <ArtForz> I swear, I never wrote any php!
203 2011-05-28 03:20:04 <io_error> LOL
204 2011-05-28 03:20:22 <theymos> Here it is: http://pastebin.com/bGEesnkJ Maybe it was adapted from Python by mizerydearia.
205 2011-05-28 03:20:41 <ArtForz> yea
206 2011-05-28 03:21:22 <theymos> For the other direction, I'm actually calling a Python script that was written by ArtForz, since I can't figure out how to get it to work in PHP.
207 2011-05-28 03:21:46 <io_error> I just found the same Python code on the forum
208 2011-05-28 03:22:52 <io_error> Well, I don't feel quite so bad for not being able to figure out how to get it to work in PHP now :)
209 2011-05-28 03:23:32 <theymos> I'm sure it is possible to do in PHP, but I'm not familiar enough with how compaction actually works, and I don't understand it from reading any of the code.
210 2011-05-28 03:23:57 <io_error> Ha, ArtForz, you're just reading the block index directly and unpacking the binary
211 2011-05-28 03:24:23 <io_error> theymos: I sort of get it, but it's using OpenSSL bignum functions, which aren't available in PHP
212 2011-05-28 03:24:37 <io_error> and which i have no idea how they work
213 2011-05-28 03:26:16 <io_error> Last thing on my todo list is deriving the address from the scriptSig
214 2011-05-28 03:27:18 <theymos> I just use regex plus my util.php (which is public). What project are you working on?
215 2011-05-28 03:28:48 <io_error> You might not like it. It may compete with blockexplorer :)
216 2011-05-28 03:29:28 <io_error> Obviously I need to search the forums more.
217 2011-05-28 03:29:50 <theymos> I better stop giving you info, then. :)
218 2011-05-28 03:34:05 <io_error> Bah, not finding it on the forum, worthless piece of crap it is :)
219 2011-05-28 03:34:17 <theymos> http://pastebin.com/vmRQC7ha
220 2011-05-28 03:35:43 <io_error> At least I'm learning a lot
221 2011-05-28 03:37:25 <theymos> I also learned a lot, especially about SQL. You get a lot of opportunity to optimize SQL with stuff like this. Most of BBE's pages have just one SQL query.
222 2011-05-28 03:37:44 <stuhood> how big is the schema?
223 2011-05-28 03:38:03 <io_error> So theymos, where did you hide this public util.php? :)
224 2011-05-28 03:38:19 <io_error> I know, I'm up to my ears in joins
225 2011-05-28 03:38:20 <theymos> It's linked in a few threads.
226 2011-05-28 03:38:38 <io_error> theymos: Weird, iv'e tried several searches and been unable to find anything relevant.
227 2011-05-28 03:39:18 <theymos> https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=1727.msg21321#msg21321 and https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=1844.msg22829#msg22829
228 2011-05-28 03:39:35 <theymos> stuhood: What is "schema" in this context?
229 2011-05-28 03:39:57 <stuhood> sql schema
230 2011-05-28 03:40:03 <stuhood> how many tables
231 2011-05-28 03:40:11 <io_error> theymos: Now those never turned up in any search, thanks :)
232 2011-05-28 03:40:21 <theymos> Oh. 6 tables.
233 2011-05-28 03:40:43 <stuhood> cool, cool.
234 2011-05-28 03:42:05 <io_error> Damn, I'm at 8 tables, I gotta work on that.
235 2011-05-28 03:44:41 <io_error> er, 7 tables. But I'm tracking something that blockexplorer isn't :)
236 2011-05-28 04:14:17 <phantomcircuit> if ((nHashType & 0x1f) == SIGHASH_NONE)
237 2011-05-28 04:14:23 <phantomcircuit> what's with the & 0x1f
238 2011-05-28 04:14:27 <phantomcircuit> anybody know?
239 2011-05-28 04:15:37 <stuhood> are only the last 5 bits interesting for some reason?
240 2011-05-28 04:18:30 <gjs278> well & 0x1f means that nHashType contains 0x1f
241 2011-05-28 04:18:32 <gjs278> what 0x1f actually is
242 2011-05-28 04:18:35 <gjs278> no idea
243 2011-05-28 04:19:35 <gjs278> phantom circuit
244 2011-05-28 04:19:38 <gjs278> 0x1f is 31 I believe
245 2011-05-28 04:20:11 <gjs278> if you already knew these things I apologize
246 2011-05-28 04:25:10 <phantomcircuit> stuhood, apparently
247 2011-05-28 04:25:25 <phantomcircuit> stuhood, although ANYONE_CAN_PAY = 0x80,
248 2011-05-28 04:25:38 <stuhood> hm
249 2011-05-28 04:25:46 <phantomcircuit> stuhood, so there are 2 lines with the & 0x1f and 1 if w/o
250 2011-05-28 04:25:48 <phantomcircuit> it's weird
251 2011-05-28 04:25:58 <stuhood> seems unnecessary then?
252 2011-05-28 04:26:07 <phantomcircuit> oh i see
253 2011-05-28 04:26:08 <stuhood> unless SIGHASH_NONE contains extra info in the top 3
254 2011-05-28 04:26:20 <phantomcircuit> you can have both SIGHASH_NONE and SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY
255 2011-05-28 04:26:28 <phantomcircuit> makes sense
256 2011-05-28 04:26:41 <stuhood> oh
257 2011-05-28 04:26:43 <phantomcircuit> although i still dont get why
258 2011-05-28 04:27:06 <stuhood> yea
259 2011-05-28 04:27:08 <EPiSKiNG> deepbit is down
260 2011-05-28 04:27:31 <phantomcircuit> good :P
261 2011-05-28 04:27:48 <phantomcircuit> [Tycho], ^
262 2011-05-28 04:28:42 <EPiSKiNG> ;-)
263 2011-05-28 06:01:41 <samfisher> hi. how can I mine for namecoins?
264 2011-05-28 06:01:51 <samfisher> can I use the CPU for that?
265 2011-05-28 06:02:22 <doublec> samfisher: go to #namecoin
266 2011-05-28 06:03:14 <CIA-103> bitcoin-release: Dev Random master * r61d3524 / (4 files in 3 dirs): 0.3.22 build report by devrandom - http://bit.ly/k1vYJx
267 2011-05-28 06:04:05 <CIA-103> bitcoin-release: Dev Random master * ra1cdb8b / (4 files in 3 dirs): 0.3.22 build report by devrandom - http://bit.ly/lLwUjy
268 2011-05-28 06:06:52 <UukGoblin> nanotube, i've just had a better idea for payments for domains. you send your 'register' transaction with a regular bitcoin fee and wait for it to get into a block. then wait for about 10 more blocks, and then sendmany to 4 outputs, which are the generation addresses of the first 4 confirming blocks.
269 2011-05-28 06:19:13 <devrandom> ;;later tell BlueMatt https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/280
270 2011-05-28 06:19:13 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
271 2011-05-28 06:56:00 <meLon> TCP Odin:8333->eithich.jpl.nasa.gov:62569 (ESTABLISHED)
272 2011-05-28 06:56:13 <meLon> NASA understands
273 2011-05-28 07:24:06 <devrandom> ;later tell BlueMatt ignore that pull, problem still present
274 2011-05-28 07:24:12 <devrandom> ;;later tell BlueMatt ignore that pull, problem still present
275 2011-05-28 07:24:12 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
276 2011-05-28 08:02:31 <samfisher> my website accepts bitcoind. my website is for women mostly. bitcoin is used by men, mostly
277 2011-05-28 08:02:51 <Xenland> cool
278 2011-05-28 08:03:25 <samfisher> yea, but bitcoin orders are not what keep it running
279 2011-05-28 08:03:42 <samfisher> maybe when they'll be used on a larger scale
280 2011-05-28 08:35:02 <sipa1024> hello - the server my irc client was running on experienced a flood attack
281 2011-05-28 08:35:18 <sipa1024> ... the room it was in was flooded because of a broken water pipe
282 2011-05-28 08:45:39 <BlueMatt> sipa: wtf?
283 2011-05-28 08:46:15 <sipa> hardware is fine, but power is turned off while the fire brigade pumps up the water :)
284 2011-05-28 08:46:37 <BlueMatt> thats...odd
285 2011-05-28 08:48:12 <udovdh> hello
286 2011-05-28 08:48:27 <udovdh> I haven ATI rv635 here, could it be used for mining?
287 2011-05-28 08:48:58 <udovdh> (running Fedora 14 x86_64)
288 2011-05-28 08:49:02 <mtrlt> is that a hd3xxx
289 2011-05-28 08:49:14 <mtrlt> if so, no
290 2011-05-28 08:53:23 <udovdh> thanks
291 2011-05-28 08:53:42 <udovdh> that is vene though we have 3d etc from the radeon  open source driver
292 2011-05-28 08:53:48 <udovdh> that is even though we have 3d etc from the radeon  open source driver
293 2011-05-28 08:53:53 <udovdh> and mesa
294 2011-05-28 08:54:11 <udovdh> ok, maybe later we can do some mining
295 2011-05-28 09:43:14 <BlueMatt> does bitcoin fall under Applications/Internet or Applications/Office ?
296 2011-05-28 09:45:44 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, internet
297 2011-05-28 09:46:32 <BlueMatt> sorry, should have been Applications/Internet/Communication or Applications/Office
298 2011-05-28 09:46:39 <BlueMatt> it cant be just internet (though its shown there)
299 2011-05-28 09:46:52 <phantomcircuit> for what?
300 2011-05-28 09:47:14 <BlueMatt> debian packages
301 2011-05-28 09:47:18 <BlueMatt> http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/menu-policy/ch2.html
302 2011-05-28 09:47:42 <phantomcircuit> well gnucash is under office
303 2011-05-28 09:47:47 <phantomcircuit> so i guess office then
304 2011-05-28 09:48:05 <BlueMatt> thats what I was thinking...but all other p2p stuff is internet
305 2011-05-28 09:51:08 <kokjo> i have an idea: password based transactions! i would be easy to implement: 1. just take a hash of the password, and put it in a transaction script. 2. provide the password in another transaction.
306 2011-05-28 09:52:08 <BlueMatt> and when the node directly upstream takes the password that you just posted and sends the tx to themselves instead?
307 2011-05-28 09:53:22 <kokjo> @bluematt, i have already thouth about that flaw, but there must be some way around it...
308 2011-05-28 09:53:37 <phantomcircuit> kokjo, yeah but you need a new script op
309 2011-05-28 09:53:42 <phantomcircuit> and that's not gonna happen
310 2011-05-28 09:53:44 <phantomcircuit> so
311 2011-05-28 09:53:47 <phantomcircuit> yeah
312 2011-05-28 09:53:55 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: no you dont
313 2011-05-28 09:54:09 <kokjo> i am only suggesting this because people a wieing about encrypted wallets
314 2011-05-28 09:54:10 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, you need to be able to hash the outputs
315 2011-05-28 09:54:13 <BlueMatt> his idea works with current scripts, its just that you have no protection from upstream
316 2011-05-28 09:54:19 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: no you dont
317 2011-05-28 09:54:27 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, no HIS idea does
318 2011-05-28 09:54:39 <phantomcircuit> im saying that to use simple passwords you need a new script op
319 2011-05-28 09:54:45 <kokjo> phantomcircuit: it already a script OP
320 2011-05-28 09:54:58 <phantomcircuit> lol forget it
321 2011-05-28 09:55:19 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: no, hes right.  There are ops to hash, and you can equalverify
322 2011-05-28 09:55:32 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, yes but that's not secure
323 2011-05-28 09:55:37 <BlueMatt> that was my point
324 2011-05-28 09:55:56 <kokjo> but is there a way to do it secure?
325 2011-05-28 09:55:57 <phantomcircuit> however if you could get a hash of the transaction outputs from the script you could use a password with that hash
326 2011-05-28 09:56:06 <phantomcircuit> but there isn't a way to get that using the current set of script ops
327 2011-05-28 09:56:17 <BlueMatt> that is one way to do it
328 2011-05-28 09:56:26 <phantomcircuit> is there another wya?
329 2011-05-28 09:56:55 <BlueMatt> not sure...probably
330 2011-05-28 09:57:01 <phantomcircuit> i dont think so
331 2011-05-28 09:57:11 <BlueMatt> anyway, I would bet not with current scripts
332 2011-05-28 09:57:17 <phantomcircuit> pretty sure you need to have a way to access the transaction outputs from scripts
333 2011-05-28 09:58:01 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: probably...I dont feel like thinking about it right now anyway, Im trying to get good ubuntu/debian packages ready so that we can get included in 0.4.0
334 2011-05-28 09:58:14 <phantomcircuit> yeah
335 2011-05-28 09:58:30 <phantomcircuit> well i've been told that there is no chance at all of new script ops being added
336 2011-05-28 09:58:37 <BlueMatt> pretty much
337 2011-05-28 09:58:37 <phantomcircuit> so basically passwords are never going to happen
338 2011-05-28 09:58:55 <BlueMatt> unless there is a *huge* demonstrateable need for one
339 2011-05-28 09:59:09 <BlueMatt> or if it can be done in a very backward compatible way
340 2011-05-28 09:59:33 <phantomcircuit> it's trivially backwards compatible
341 2011-05-28 09:59:48 <phantomcircuit> except that it would cause a fork
342 2011-05-28 10:00:12 <BlueMatt> which is a problem
343 2011-05-28 10:00:47 <phantomcircuit> yeah you'd have to include it in the script parsing but not in the script building
344 2011-05-28 10:01:40 <phantomcircuit> then when >99% of the network supposed it you could enable it
345 2011-05-28 10:29:10 <sturles> I wonder..  My home computer is listed as one of many seed nodes in the client.  This is unfortunate, because I only have 250 kbps out, shared with my phone line.  Sometimes a lot of clients are downloading blocks at the same time, and saturates my line.  While I agree to have as any seed nodes as possible, is it possible to drop low bandwidth nodes from the list?  It would make initial blockchain downloading faster for all as well.
346 2011-05-28 10:29:49 <BlueMatt> submit a pull req removing your node from the list, it will be pulled
347 2011-05-28 10:30:42 <sturles> My suggestion was to test the bandwidth of al the nodes to improve the quality.
348 2011-05-28 10:31:03 <sturles> Make initial blockchain downloading faster.
349 2011-05-28 10:31:41 <sturles> It can take hours now if you are unlucky.
350 2011-05-28 10:32:23 <BlueMatt> seed nodes are not there to provide block uploads, they are there to get you connected to other nodes
351 2011-05-28 10:32:59 <soap> but many ISPs fudge short burst bandwidth (aka Time Warner's Power Boost)
352 2011-05-28 10:33:49 <soap> so any test can get false numbers.
353 2011-05-28 10:34:22 <sturles> Better than nothing.
354 2011-05-28 10:34:47 <BlueMatt> I would recommend you patch your bitcoin to not upload or highly limit your upload
355 2011-05-28 10:35:06 <sturles> That would hurt users even more.
356 2011-05-28 10:35:12 <BlueMatt> no it wouldnt
357 2011-05-28 10:35:12 <sturles> I want Bitcoin to succeed.
358 2011-05-28 10:35:36 <soap> Not really.  Basing a decision on known-untrustworthy data is most often worse than basing a decision on the idea you won't know.
359 2011-05-28 10:35:39 <BlueMatt> again, seed nodes are not meant to upload the block chain, but to get you bootstrapped
360 2011-05-28 10:36:34 <sturles> It would.  Slow initial block download s the main complaint I hear from new users.  Their coins can't bee seen or used until the next day when it has finished downloading blocks.
361 2011-05-28 10:36:38 <sharkroman> hey guys
362 2011-05-28 10:36:47 <sharkroman> i'm having a crash on my bitcoin client
363 2011-05-28 10:36:53 <sharkroman> it says exception:st9bad_alloc
364 2011-05-28 10:36:57 <BlueMatt> sturles: its not the download thats slow, its the verification
365 2011-05-28 10:36:59 <sharkroman> it happened right after someone transferred 2btc into my acc
366 2011-05-28 10:37:16 <samfisher> where bitcoins go if i send them to a namecoin address?
367 2011-05-28 10:37:26 <sturles> BlueMatt: For people donwloading from me, download is certainly slow. :-)
368 2011-05-28 10:37:27 <samfisher> or to a not-used-yet one?
369 2011-05-28 10:37:47 <sturles> Sometimes I have several minutes lag on omy line.
370 2011-05-28 10:38:23 <sturles> Connections drop because of 100 clients downloading blocks at the same time.
371 2011-05-28 10:38:26 <BlueMatt> sturles: that is why its a p2p net, instead of a direct download net
372 2011-05-28 10:38:32 <samfisher> what's the definition of bootstrapped?
373 2011-05-28 10:38:39 <sharkroman> ahhh
374 2011-05-28 10:38:46 <sharkroman> anyone can help me?
375 2011-05-28 10:39:04 <BlueMatt> sharkroman: that is no where near enough info
376 2011-05-28 10:39:23 <sharkroman> BlueMatt, any hint?
377 2011-05-28 10:39:29 <sharkroman> i tried reinstall
378 2011-05-28 10:39:33 <sharkroman> but didn't work
379 2011-05-28 10:39:38 <BlueMatt> environment?
380 2011-05-28 10:39:48 <BlueMatt> bitcoin version?
381 2011-05-28 10:40:22 <sharkroman> 0.3.22 rc5
382 2011-05-28 10:40:37 <sharkroman> tried 0.3.21 as well
383 2011-05-28 10:40:45 <pwrcycle> xenland around?
384 2011-05-28 10:40:58 <sturles> BlueMatt: Yep, so why not impove it?  It will not help any user if I throttle my bitcoin client, as I am one of the peers.  I just set up at client at a computer with 10 Gbps to the internet.  People should use that one instead.
385 2011-05-28 10:41:21 <BlueMatt> sturles: then submit a pull to change your node's ip
386 2011-05-28 10:41:27 <sturles> It is much better suited to get people connected and started quickly.
387 2011-05-28 10:41:39 <sturles> Isn't the list automatically generated?
388 2011-05-28 10:41:45 <BlueMatt> no
389 2011-05-28 10:41:56 <BlueMatt> if it had been in the past, it is no longer
390 2011-05-28 10:43:17 <Sami345> lol fresh install 160 000 KHash/s -> 180 000 KHash/S
391 2011-05-28 10:43:30 <sturles> I have never announced my node as a public seed node.
392 2011-05-28 10:44:16 <BlueMatt> sturles: but its in pnSeeds?
393 2011-05-28 10:45:24 <sturles> Yes.
394 2011-05-28 10:46:10 <BlueMatt> then its because, in the past, satoshi or whoever just pulled a list of nodes and put them in pnSeed, now it hasnt been touched in a long time
395 2011-05-28 10:47:54 <sturles> It was put there in 0.3.20.
396 2011-05-28 10:49:14 <sturles> https://github.com/nanotube/bitcoin/commit/d50f3a0b1107c2ba40ff4bbd9ba040eb3f9416f1
397 2011-05-28 10:49:16 <BlueMatt> MagicalTux ran a program which checked uptime of known nodes
398 2011-05-28 10:49:24 <BlueMatt> and they just added what had the highest uptime
399 2011-05-28 10:49:45 <BlueMatt> again, upload speed of the seed nodes does not matter, they are not there to upload
400 2011-05-28 10:49:56 <sturles> Automatically, as I assumed.
401 2011-05-28 10:49:57 <BlueMatt> if you patch bitcoin to never upload blocks, it would make no real difference
402 2011-05-28 10:50:27 <sturles> OK.  I guess I could do that.
403 2011-05-28 10:51:19 <sturles> It will not help other people or users very much, of course.
404 2011-05-28 10:51:43 <BlueMatt> but seed nodes arent there to upload, just to bootstrap
405 2011-05-28 10:53:09 <sturles> Can't NATed clients risk to connect to 8 different seed nodes?  What if none of them upload blocks?
406 2011-05-28 10:53:37 <BlueMatt> if one seed node patches to not upload blocks, its not a problem
407 2011-05-28 10:53:49 <sturles> Or if every one of them are as slow as mine?
408 2011-05-28 10:53:58 <BlueMatt> plus, again, its not bw that limits speed, its verification, which is disk-limited
409 2011-05-28 10:54:32 <sturles> It doesn't take minutes to verify a block.
410 2011-05-28 10:54:49 <sturles> My connection lags by minutes at it's worst.
411 2011-05-28 10:54:50 <BlueMatt> nor does it ever take minutes to upload
412 2011-05-28 10:55:22 <BlueMatt> blocks are almost never larger than 50k
413 2011-05-28 10:56:04 <sturles> I have clocked five minutes from I type a letter to itt arrives back on the screen over a ssh connection.  It lags as heck.
414 2011-05-28 10:56:20 <BlueMatt> then remove yourself from pnSeed
415 2011-05-28 10:56:20 <sturles> 50k isn't going any faster than one character.
416 2011-05-28 10:57:18 <sturles> I think my suggestion is better.  As long as the list is automatically updated from time to time, I risk getting back.
417 2011-05-28 10:58:12 <sturles> Also my IP address changes if I stay down for more thn 24 hours, and I risk getting added again with the new IP.
418 2011-05-28 11:13:48 <soap> 5 minute ping?
419 2011-05-28 11:14:02 <soap> there is something else going on besides "slow connection"
420 2011-05-28 11:14:48 <soap> ye know what, sturles, the BTC network will not only survive w/o your computer, from the sounds of it, it might actually run better.
421 2011-05-28 11:28:13 <Sami345> ,,bc,calc
422 2011-05-28 11:28:15 <gribble> (bc,calc <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "echo The average time to generate a block at $1 Khps, given current difficulty of [bc,diff], is [time elapsed [math calc 1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256)]]".
423 2011-05-28 11:28:31 <gribble> (bc,calc <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "echo The average time to generate a block at $1 Khps, given current difficulty of [bc,diff], is [time elapsed [math calc 1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256)]]".
424 2011-05-28 11:28:31 <Sami345> ,,bc,calc 240000
425 2011-05-28 11:28:56 <Sami345> ,bc,calc 240000
426 2011-05-28 11:29:00 <Sami345> bc,calc 240000
427 2011-05-28 11:29:00 <sturles> When there are 100+ competing sendqueues, transmission is going to be slow over a 200 kbps line, things get ugly.  2 kbps isn't much nowadays.  Even my old modem could do 2.4 kbps.
428 2011-05-28 11:29:09 <Sami345> ,,bc,calc 240000
429 2011-05-28 11:29:10 <gribble> (bc,calc <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "echo The average time to generate a block at $1 Khps, given current difficulty of [bc,diff], is [time elapsed [math calc 1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256)]]".
430 2011-05-28 11:29:13 <Sami345> :(
431 2011-05-28 11:29:16 <Sami345> how to use it'
432 2011-05-28 11:29:27 <sipa> ;;bc,calc 240000
433 2011-05-28 11:29:28 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 240000 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 12 weeks, 6 days, 1 hour, 48 minutes, and 49 seconds
434 2011-05-28 11:29:35 <sturles> From the eighties.
435 2011-05-28 11:40:19 <Sami345> ;;bc,calc 180000
436 2011-05-28 11:40:20 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 180000 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 17 weeks, 1 day, 2 hours, 25 minutes, and 5 seconds
437 2011-05-28 11:42:02 <luke-jr> ;;bc,stats
438 2011-05-28 11:42:04 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127328 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1695 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 10 hours, and 0 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 545060.99088041
439 2011-05-28 11:44:12 <luke-jr> ;;bc,gen 298000
440 2011-05-28 11:44:13 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 298000 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 0.689236068538 BTC per day and 0.0287181695224 BTC per hour.
441 2011-05-28 11:45:19 <Xenland> Looks like I have a working complete front-end for pool mining.... now only if those put out a bounty would show up
442 2011-05-28 11:49:12 <[Tycho]> How big is the bounty ?
443 2011-05-28 11:50:01 <BlueMatt> and there never has been a bounty on wallet encryption...
444 2011-05-28 11:50:09 <BlueMatt> I picked the wrong thing to dev
445 2011-05-28 11:50:29 <[Tycho]> Wallet encryption is cool.
446 2011-05-28 11:52:34 <sipa> is there some automated tool for checking whether classes/methods/variables are never used from outside of their compilation unit?
447 2011-05-28 11:52:47 <BlueMatt> grep?
448 2011-05-28 11:52:50 <sipa> :D
449 2011-05-28 11:53:12 <pwrcycle> hi Xenland
450 2011-05-28 11:53:26 <Xenland> hey pwrcycle
451 2011-05-28 11:53:46 <pwrcycle> how's the build going
452 2011-05-28 11:54:49 <Xenland> I think it needs a public test. I'm reviewing to make sure I didn't overlook anything. No installation files yet
453 2011-05-28 11:56:00 <EskimoBob> Hi, is this the channel where I can get some help with linux install (not U(ku)buntu) ?
454 2011-05-28 11:56:12 <pwrcycle> how much ram are you starting with
455 2011-05-28 11:56:19 <Xenland> This isn't exactly the place but nobody is really online so its cool with us
456 2011-05-28 11:56:20 <BlueMatt> EskimoBob: #bitcoin
457 2011-05-28 11:56:40 <BlueMatt> EskimoBob: if they cant answer, come back here
458 2011-05-28 11:57:54 <EskimoBob> thank you. cheers
459 2011-05-28 11:59:38 <pwrcycle> Xenland: pm
460 2011-05-28 12:24:06 <diki> Sipa, i've been trying the method you told me to calculate pool speed, but something isn't quite right here. Say i have 200,000 shares per hour. I divide by 3600 seconds and get 55,5555...and when i multiply by 4294.967296 i get 238606,90812928
461 2011-05-28 12:24:31 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r65df66b7fbc1 gentoo/net-p2p/spesmilo/ (Manifest spesmilo-0.0.1_beta1.ebuild spesmilo-9999.ebuild): net-p2p/spesmilo: add RDEPEND on net-p2p/bitcoind with USE=local http://tinyurl.com/433qp6j
462 2011-05-28 12:25:08 <diki> assuming 238606,90812928 is the speed in mhash, how do i convert it to more reasonable number?
463 2011-05-28 12:25:22 <sipa> define reasonable?
464 2011-05-28 12:25:34 <sipa> it's in Mhash/s, indeed
465 2011-05-28 12:25:35 <diki> XXX.XX ghash/s
466 2011-05-28 12:25:52 <sipa> you don't know how to convert a number from Mhash/s to Ghash/s?
467 2011-05-28 12:26:13 <diki> if i divide by 100000000 i get some low number
468 2011-05-28 12:26:22 <sipa> you know what M and G mean?
469 2011-05-28 12:26:29 <diki> yes?
470 2011-05-28 12:26:29 <mtrlt> diki: learn SI prefixes
471 2011-05-28 12:26:33 <sipa> tell me
472 2011-05-28 12:27:16 <diki> How do i divide to get the speed in gigahashes?
473 2011-05-28 12:27:30 <mtrlt> diki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_prefix
474 2011-05-28 12:27:39 <mtrlt> there's your kilos, megas, gigas and teras
475 2011-05-28 12:27:42 <mtrlt> :P
476 2011-05-28 12:28:19 <sipa> diki: if you know what a M and G are, it shouldn't be an issue to convert from one to the other
477 2011-05-28 12:30:42 <gabriel_d> (1G = 1000M)
478 2011-05-28 12:34:30 <diki> 238606.90812928 / 100000 i get 2,386... if i divide by 10000000 i get 0,238 which is again, not what i need nor expect, it should be like 238,XX
479 2011-05-28 12:35:01 <diki> in case someone did not understand i divide 238606.90812928 only
480 2011-05-28 12:35:08 <sipa> diki: if you have 238606 megabytes, how many gigabytes do you have?
481 2011-05-28 12:35:51 <diki> look, that is some hard question, if 1Ghash is 1000Mhash, in hdd space it's 1GB = 1024 megabytes
482 2011-05-28 12:36:04 <diki> so the example is not really great
483 2011-05-28 12:36:17 <diki> Either way, i just can't calculate it
484 2011-05-28 12:36:29 <sipa> 1 Ghash is 1000 Mhash
485 2011-05-28 12:36:37 <diki> 1GB = 1024MB
486 2011-05-28 12:36:38 <sipa> so 1000 Mhash is 1 Ghash
487 2011-05-28 12:36:50 <sipa> so 238606 Mhash is 238.606 Ghash
488 2011-05-28 12:37:02 <sipa> just divide by 1000
489 2011-05-28 12:37:30 <sipa> if you don't get that, go back to school, sorry
490 2011-05-28 12:37:50 <diki> in school they dont teach you about computer space or any other thing like that
491 2011-05-28 12:37:58 <gabriel_d> this is division
492 2011-05-28 12:38:04 <GarrettB> diki: they teach you to divide
493 2011-05-28 12:38:12 <GarrettB> I distinctly remember that from 3rd grade
494 2011-05-28 12:38:14 <diki> Well i never did do great in math
495 2011-05-28 12:38:17 <mtrlt> diki: school is bullshit, you have to learn everything yourself
496 2011-05-28 12:38:19 <diki> i mostly skipped and still skip
497 2011-05-28 12:38:31 <sipa> i don't care how you learn it, at school or otherwise
498 2011-05-28 12:38:40 <sipa> but this is not the place to ask how to convert mega into giga
499 2011-05-28 12:42:30 <sipa> jgarzik, BlueMatt: i made a big mistake in the fee-split patch: no free transactions are accepted anymore at all
500 2011-05-28 12:43:13 <phantomcircuit> lol
501 2011-05-28 12:43:29 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Pieter Wuille master * r12a1256 / src/main.cpp : bugfix: accept free transactions - http://bit.ly/lfW99c
502 2011-05-28 12:43:34 <phantomcircuit> sipa, there really should be automated tests
503 2011-05-28 12:43:36 <phantomcircuit> but of course
504 2011-05-28 12:43:39 <phantomcircuit> THATS INSANITY!
505 2011-05-28 12:43:41 <sipa> yes there should be
506 2011-05-28 12:43:48 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: care to write them?
507 2011-05-28 12:43:58 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, for the current client? fucks no
508 2011-05-28 12:45:30 <gabriel_d> what's a good cross-platform application testing framework for c++ stuff? i'm from the web world
509 2011-05-28 12:46:34 <phantomcircuit> gabriel_d, boost::test
510 2011-05-28 12:53:49 <sanity> any cashcow devs on here?
511 2011-05-28 12:54:14 <sipa> what is cashcow?
512 2011-05-28 12:54:32 <sanity> sipa: http://cashcow.no-ip.org/
513 2011-05-28 12:55:10 <jrmithdobbs> 09:38 < diki> i mostly skipped and still skip
514 2011-05-28 12:55:19 <jrmithdobbs> errr
515 2011-05-28 12:55:33 <jrmithdobbs> 09:38 < diki> Well i never did do great in math
516 2011-05-28 12:55:48 <jrmithdobbs> that's the guy i want running a financial system (pool) alright!
517 2011-05-28 12:56:17 <gabriel_d> we taught him how to divide. he should be good to go now!
518 2011-05-28 12:56:38 <jrmithdobbs> gabriel_d: except he just cut and paste your division algorithm and didn't actually take the time to understand it
519 2011-05-28 12:56:42 <jrmithdobbs> <3
520 2011-05-28 12:57:14 <mtrlt> copypaste coding ftw
521 2011-05-28 12:58:19 <[Tycho]> How "bc,prob" command is used ?
522 2011-05-28 12:59:05 <sipa> ;;bc,prob 1497000 1h 7m 5s
523 2011-05-28 12:59:06 <gribble> 0.0032207376934
524 2011-05-28 13:02:54 <[Tycho]> Thanks.
525 2011-05-28 13:03:27 <[Tycho]> 1497000 is hashes or kilohashes ?
526 2011-05-28 13:03:50 <BlueMatt> k
527 2011-05-28 13:04:24 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,prob 100000000 30m
528 2011-05-28 13:04:25 <gribble> 0.0918717777183
529 2011-05-28 13:05:39 <gribble> 9.63650529739e-05
530 2011-05-28 13:05:39 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,prob 100000 30m
531 2011-05-28 13:05:58 <[Tycho]> !calc 9.63650529739e-05 * 434882.7217497
532 2011-05-28 13:06:09 <[Tycho]> ;;calc 9.63650529739e-05 * 434882.7217497
533 2011-05-28 13:06:10 <gribble> 9.63650529739e-05 * 434,882.7217497 = 41.9074965
534 2011-05-28 13:07:43 <[Tycho]> How do i calc this for difficulty 1 ?
535 2011-05-28 13:08:56 <BlueMatt> ;;bc,probd
536 2011-05-28 13:08:56 <gribble> Error: "bc,probd" is not a valid command.
537 2011-05-28 13:09:02 <BlueMatt> nope, dont think you can the
538 2011-05-28 13:09:57 <Anderxander> Hello
539 2011-05-28 13:09:57 <sipa> nanotube: can we have a bc,probd command? :)
540 2011-05-28 13:10:17 <[Tycho]> ;;calc 1-exp(-100000*1000 * [1800] / (2**32* 1))".
541 2011-05-28 13:10:18 <gribble> Error: "1800" is not a valid command.
542 2011-05-28 13:10:19 <gribble> Error: "1800" is not a valid command.
543 2011-05-28 13:10:19 <[Tycho]> ;;calc 1-exp(-100000*1000 * [1800] / (2**32* 1))"
544 2011-05-28 13:10:25 <Anderxander> I'm interested in helping develop for bitcoin. Can da
545 2011-05-28 13:10:26 <gribble> ...
546 2011-05-28 13:10:26 <[Tycho]> ;;calc 1-exp(-100000*1000 * 1800 / (2**32* 1))"
547 2011-05-28 13:10:34 <gribble> 1 - exp(((-100,000) * 1,000 * 1,800) / ((2 ** 32) * 1)) = 1
548 2011-05-28 13:10:34 <[Tycho]> ;;calc 1-exp(-100000*1000 * 1800 / (2**32* 1))
549 2011-05-28 13:10:45 <BlueMatt> [Tycho]: you care to do that in private?
550 2011-05-28 13:10:50 <[Tycho]> Ok.
551 2011-05-28 13:11:14 <BlueMatt> Anderxander: github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
552 2011-05-28 13:11:57 <BlueMatt> why do we link gthread? we dont use it afaict?
553 2011-05-28 13:12:06 <BlueMatt> pthread we use, gthread...no
554 2011-05-28 13:15:48 <diki> jrmith, you suck pal...i am saying that in all my honesty....
555 2011-05-28 13:27:14 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
556 2011-05-28 13:27:15 <gribble> 127337
557 2011-05-28 13:30:50 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
558 2011-05-28 13:30:51 <gribble> 127337
559 2011-05-28 13:38:11 <sipa> grr, i need a block!
560 2011-05-28 13:41:06 <diki> blocks per sec sure have dropped
561 2011-05-28 13:41:12 <diki> ;;bc,stats
562 2011-05-28 13:41:15 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127337 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1686 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 11 hours, 36 minutes, and 36 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 539006.11149022
563 2011-05-28 13:42:07 <diki> the next diff could potentially slow the miners down for 14 days thus we might see a drop in diff
564 2011-05-28 13:47:29 <jgarzik> sipa: that's why we have -rc :)
565 2011-05-28 13:48:31 <sipa> well, it seems after 5 rc's, not many people test the binaries anymore :)
566 2011-05-28 13:51:26 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, no nightlies yet?
567 2011-05-28 13:51:30 <devrandom> hi BlueMatt
568 2011-05-28 13:52:05 <sipa> c'mon peeps, OC those radeons a bit further!
569 2011-05-28 13:52:37 <phantomcircuit> lol
570 2011-05-28 13:53:17 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
571 2011-05-28 13:53:19 <gribble> 127337
572 2011-05-28 13:55:02 <BlueMatt> hi devrandom
573 2011-05-28 13:56:06 <gribble> Error: "bc,nethash*1000000" is not a valid command.
574 2011-05-28 13:56:06 <sipa> ;;bc,prob [bc,nethash*1000000] 52m
575 2011-05-28 13:56:18 <sipa> ;;bc,prob [calc [bc,nethash]*1000000] 52m
576 2011-05-28 13:56:22 <gribble> Error: invalid syntax (<string>, line 1)
577 2011-05-28 13:56:25 <devrandom> BlueMatt: gitian is having issues... 64 bit wxWidgets triggers non-determinism in gcc... at least for me
578 2011-05-28 13:57:03 <sipa> devrandom: can you derive where in the binary (which object/symbol/...) the non-determinism is in?
579 2011-05-28 13:57:16 <devrandom> yes
580 2011-05-28 13:57:18 <sipa> ;;calc [bc,nethash]*1000000
581 2011-05-28 13:57:19 <gribble> 4,072.4145982020627 * 1,000,000 = 4.0724146 * 10^(9)
582 2011-05-28 13:57:31 <devrandom> hang on, I'm pasting an example
583 2011-05-28 13:57:39 <devrandom> sipa https://gist.github.com/806265#comments
584 2011-05-28 13:57:40 <sipa> ;;bc,prob 4072414600 52m
585 2011-05-28 13:57:41 <gribble> 0.99888911048
586 2011-05-28 13:58:34 <BlueMatt> devrandom: hm, shame...also needs looking on win32, I have a feeling it is far from deterministic atm
587 2011-05-28 13:58:43 <BlueMatt> (I have only tested that it builds)
588 2011-05-28 13:58:47 <sipa> that's very trannge
589 2011-05-28 13:58:49 <sipa> *strange
590 2011-05-28 13:59:01 <devrandom> only happens with 64 bit wxwindows
591 2011-05-28 13:59:05 <devrandom> wxwidgets
592 2011-05-28 13:59:34 <devrandom> seems to be that one of the optimizers is non-deterministic
593 2011-05-28 13:59:50 <devrandom> maybe a hash table that's traversed in memory order or something like that
594 2011-05-28 13:59:54 <BlueMatt> very odd indeed
595 2011-05-28 14:00:14 <devrandom> here's another one:
596 2011-05-28 14:00:17 <sipa> which symbol does that code belong to?
597 2011-05-28 14:00:20 <devrandom> -    2d62:    49 39 df                 cmp     %rbx,%r15
598 2011-05-28 14:00:21 <devrandom> +    2d62:    4c 39 fb                 cmp     %r15,%rbx
599 2011-05-28 14:00:54 <luke-jr> FWIW, wxbitcoin doesn't build against boost 1.46+
600 2011-05-28 14:01:02 <luke-jr> (at all)
601 2011-05-28 14:01:07 <devrandom> I'm not sure, haven't figured out how to get elfutils to dump symbols with disassembly
602 2011-05-28 14:01:27 <devrandom> this one is kinda obvious
603 2011-05-28 14:01:50 <devrandom> so I see a few options, maybe in order of desirability:
604 2011-05-28 14:02:05 <sipa> -frandom-seed didn't help?
605 2011-05-28 14:02:13 <devrandom> * figure out which gcc optimizer flag triggers this and disable for now
606 2011-05-28 14:02:58 <devrandom> sipa - apparently that's just for some randomly generated syms, which are not related
607 2011-05-28 14:03:09 <devrandom> (i.e. we don't trigger that feature in gcc)
608 2011-05-28 14:03:44 <sipa> hmm
609 2011-05-28 14:03:50 <devrandom> * build against the distribution wx 2.8
610 2011-05-28 14:04:29 <devrandom> * separate out the wx build and manually confirm any diffs.  we only need to do that once and proceed with the golden wxwidgets for future builds
611 2011-05-28 14:04:34 <BlueMatt> well wx2.8 will soon be used (hopefully for 0.4.0)
612 2011-05-28 14:05:06 <BlueMatt> and then if its dynamically loaded...
613 2011-05-28 14:05:09 <devrandom> * don't distribute 64 bits
614 2011-05-28 14:05:17 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
615 2011-05-28 14:05:18 <gribble> 127338
616 2011-05-28 14:05:36 <BlueMatt> no, 32-bit bitcoin doesnt work well on 64-bit linux atm
617 2011-05-28 14:06:01 <devrandom> * manually diff the disassembly and have people sign a golden binary if the diffs look innocuous
618 2011-05-28 14:06:13 <devrandom> ah
619 2011-05-28 14:08:27 <devrandom> would any of the other options be a no-go in your opinion?
620 2011-05-28 14:08:35 <BlueMatt> jaromil: ping
621 2011-05-28 14:09:02 <BlueMatt> no, any of those are fine depending on the exact implementation needed
622 2011-05-28 14:09:05 <BlueMatt> imo
623 2011-05-28 14:09:30 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r22468a18d039 gentoo/net-p2p/ (15 files in 2 dirs): net-p2p/wxbitcoin and net-p2p/bitcoind: DEPEND on specific version range of dev-libs/boost http://tinyurl.com/44d7qgg
624 2011-05-28 14:10:05 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: 32-bit binaries only work on 32-bit OS
625 2011-05-28 14:10:17 <luke-jr> that's not "atm", it's "ever" (for x86)
626 2011-05-28 14:10:30 <BlueMatt> pretty much
627 2011-05-28 14:10:47 <BlueMatt> (except if you static link *everything* which we do on win32 anyway, so that works)
628 2011-05-28 14:10:51 <sipa> the kernel doesn't matter, but you do need the necessary (32-bit) libraries
629 2011-05-28 14:11:01 <luke-jr> XD
630 2011-05-28 14:11:08 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: but static linking is bad, so :p
631 2011-05-28 14:11:26 <BlueMatt> on win32, its the standard. that just means win sucks not that we are doing it wrong
632 2011-05-28 14:11:40 <luke-jr> it wasn't when I used win32
633 2011-05-28 14:11:52 <BlueMatt> well when was that?
634 2011-05-28 14:11:56 <luke-jr> 8 years ago?
635 2011-05-28 14:12:03 <BlueMatt> ...yea
636 2011-05-28 14:12:32 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, everything is static linked now
637 2011-05-28 14:12:35 <luke-jr> ew
638 2011-05-28 14:12:44 <phantomcircuit> because of the fucktarded mess that is dlls
639 2011-05-28 14:12:46 <BlueMatt> well when win32 ships bdb, boost, openssl, we can stop static linking
640 2011-05-28 14:12:59 <BlueMatt> or provides some kind of proper management for dlls
641 2011-05-28 14:12:59 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: it would at least be better to dynamic link to DLLs in the program files dir
642 2011-05-28 14:13:00 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, the vc runtime that microsoft uses isn't even available to normal people
643 2011-05-28 14:13:07 <jaromil> BlueMatt: hola
644 2011-05-28 14:13:09 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: it doesn't have to ship with them
645 2011-05-28 14:13:11 <BlueMatt> jaromil:
646 2011-05-28 14:13:11 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, you have to build it from the fuckign driver development kit
647 2011-05-28 14:13:14 <phantomcircuit> it's ridiculous
648 2011-05-28 14:13:17 <luke-jr> WTF
649 2011-05-28 14:13:32 <upb> you can download it from a ready made installed from ms ??P
650 2011-05-28 14:13:37 <upb> no _
651 2011-05-28 14:13:41 <upb> ?
652 2011-05-28 14:13:43 <phantomcircuit> yeah they tell everybody to use .NET but they actually use a custom vc++ runtime
653 2011-05-28 14:13:46 <phantomcircuit> it's such bullshit
654 2011-05-28 14:14:02 <upb> used to be vcredistxxx.exe
655 2011-05-28 14:14:05 <BlueMatt> jaromil: from the bitcoin debian maintainer: "Regarding autotools: Please add AM_MAINTAINER_MODE to configure.ac - that is a great help for distributors like me!"
656 2011-05-28 14:14:10 <BlueMatt> just thought Id forward that to you
657 2011-05-28 14:14:25 <phantomcircuit> jaromil, hello
658 2011-05-28 14:14:31 <devrandom> BlueMatt: curious what is the issue with 32bit bitcoin on 64bit?  seems to run when I tried it just now
659 2011-05-28 14:14:38 <luke-jr> devrandom: then you have a 32-bit OS
660 2011-05-28 14:14:40 <jaromil> phantomcircuit: i'm crying for attention on #freecoin BTW
661 2011-05-28 14:14:43 <jaromil> BlueMatt: ACK
662 2011-05-28 14:14:51 <devrandom> luke-jr: I don't
663 2011-05-28 14:14:57 <luke-jr> devrandom: then it would'nt run
664 2011-05-28 14:15:02 <devrandom> but I do have lib32 compat package install
665 2011-05-28 14:15:09 <luke-jr> that means you have a 32-bit OS
666 2011-05-28 14:15:19 <devrandom> ia32-libs
667 2011-05-28 14:15:23 <BlueMatt> devrandom: well I think it has worked out somewhat, but when I last tried it it was issues with bdb trying to load some 64-bit libs which killed it
668 2011-05-28 14:15:25 <jaromil> BlueMatt: it is a typical flag that helps maintainers but BUGS developers
669 2011-05-28 14:15:37 <sipa> what does it do?
670 2011-05-28 14:15:39 <luke-jr> devrandom: it may be a hybrid 32+64 OS, but that is inclusive of 32-bit
671 2011-05-28 14:15:43 <jaromil> it forces rebuild of all sources even if nothing changed
672 2011-05-28 14:15:50 <jaromil> when you type make
673 2011-05-28 14:15:51 <jaromil> AFAIK
674 2011-05-28 14:15:52 <luke-jr> devrandom: and a waste of memory i might add
675 2011-05-28 14:15:59 <devrandom> ubuntu has 32 bit compat
676 2011-05-28 14:16:01 <BlueMatt> jaromil: but can it not be turned on/off at will?
677 2011-05-28 14:16:01 <jaromil> so i think it should be optional
678 2011-05-28 14:16:14 <jaromil> i'm not sure what's the state of the AM_ macro for that ATM
679 2011-05-28 14:16:16 <jaromil> lemme check
680 2011-05-28 14:16:16 <luke-jr> jaromil: only with --enable-maintainer-mode?
681 2011-05-28 14:16:29 <jaromil> yea they should have made it optional
682 2011-05-28 14:16:49 <jaromil> i just remember from the times it wasn't, this suggestion represented the little fart that debian developers leave in your codebase
683 2011-05-28 14:17:38 <phantomcircuit> lol
684 2011-05-28 14:17:47 <BlueMatt> lol
685 2011-05-28 14:18:52 <jaromil> confirm, is optional, off by default. yes lets include it
686 2011-05-28 14:19:19 <BlueMatt> sounds good to me
687 2011-05-28 14:24:10 <thermal> Marf suggested a prompt on the first-run of the bitcoin client informing the user that it will take a while to download all of the blocks
688 2011-05-28 14:24:19 <thermal> or on the final page of the install
689 2011-05-28 14:24:25 <BlueMatt> many have suggested that
690 2011-05-28 14:24:36 <BlueMatt> and it should be
691 2011-05-28 14:24:49 <jgarzik> should be easy:  if initialBlockDownload && !warnedInitialBlockDownload
692 2011-05-28 14:25:08 <thermal> so, can i fork it, make the changes and then push it back?
693 2011-05-28 14:25:20 <BlueMatt> sure
694 2011-05-28 14:25:34 <jgarzik> thermal: s/push/send pull request/
695 2011-05-28 14:25:45 <thermal> oops. yeah that :p
696 2011-05-28 14:25:52 <thermal> still new to git
697 2011-05-28 14:26:09 <luke-jr> IMO, someone should fix first-download too :p
698 2011-05-28 14:26:23 <luke-jr> jgarzik: why not warn every first-download?
699 2011-05-28 14:26:46 <jgarzik> warnedInitialBlockDownload is a C++ variable that is not persistent
700 2011-05-28 14:26:57 <luke-jr> i c
701 2011-05-28 14:27:15 <luke-jr> but yeah, there's no reason downloading the block chain from localhost should take a day
702 2011-05-28 14:28:28 <thermal> there will come a point when downloading the entire block chain will no longer be feasible
703 2011-05-28 14:29:20 <thermal> hmm. who, then, will maintain the integrity of the entire block chain?
704 2011-05-28 14:29:25 <thermal> the block masters?
705 2011-05-28 14:30:30 <WakiMiko> im a block master
706 2011-05-28 14:30:32 <WakiMiko> i live in a lego castle
707 2011-05-28 14:30:36 <thermal> bags not being a block master
708 2011-05-28 14:31:06 <thermal> WakiMiko: were you just playing sc2? your nick looks really familiar :p
709 2011-05-28 14:31:42 <WakiMiko> nope, i dont play sc2
710 2011-05-28 14:32:06 <Cusipzzz> thought he was GSL :)
711 2011-05-28 14:32:36 <luke-jr> thermal: the banks
712 2011-05-28 14:32:51 <WakiMiko> whats that now
713 2011-05-28 14:33:15 <jaromil> made https://github.com/jaromil/bitcoin/commit/4dbc9e529cfa952647b6fd73c8efb56059be85cc
714 2011-05-28 14:33:27 <jaromil> will rebase it inside. maintainer mode included
715 2011-05-28 14:34:00 <jaromil> squashed
716 2011-05-28 14:39:31 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r6d9389367104 gentoo/net-p2p/ (16 files in 3 dirs): net-p2p/bitcoind and net-p2p/wxbitcoin: pick best boost headers/libraries to use regardless of eselected versions (which might not be compatible) http://tinyurl.com/42nxftd
717 2011-05-28 14:39:36 <jaromil> i prefer git
718 2011-05-28 14:39:48 <luke-jr> they both have their features ;)
719 2011-05-28 14:39:54 <jaromil> actually i don't even contribute to projects that aren't in git
720 2011-05-28 14:40:01 <sipa> <vcs-flamewar-mode>
721 2011-05-28 14:40:28 <luke-jr> really, git doesn't even require more rebasing
722 2011-05-28 14:40:31 <luke-jr> just the git *users*
723 2011-05-28 14:40:43 <luke-jr> probably because git doesn't have as nice defaults
724 2011-05-28 14:41:06 <luke-jr> --first-parent is Bazaar's default for log
725 2011-05-28 14:41:14 <jaromil> well i guess bzr could be well emulated with a wrapper on top of git
726 2011-05-28 14:41:21 <luke-jr> which makes rebasing less needed
727 2011-05-28 14:41:36 <luke-jr> jaromil: only to an extent
728 2011-05-28 14:41:44 <luke-jr> git lacks some real functionality like renames too :p
729 2011-05-28 14:42:01 <luke-jr> but in any case, bzr can branch a git repo just fine
730 2011-05-28 14:43:09 <devrandom> okay, compiling with -O0 is deterministic...  ;)
731 2011-05-28 14:43:30 <devrandom> time for -O1... binary walk through gcc flags
732 2011-05-28 14:43:34 <jaromil> bzr is not written in C.
733 2011-05-28 14:44:02 <luke-jr> jaromil: that's its biggest flaw :D
734 2011-05-28 14:44:27 <sipa> what is it written in?
735 2011-05-28 14:44:53 <luke-jr> sipa: Python
736 2011-05-28 14:46:09 <jaromil> sgrunt
737 2011-05-28 14:46:39 <EvanR> im setting up bitcoind for a website
738 2011-05-28 14:46:42 <EvanR> which version do i want?
739 2011-05-28 14:46:52 <EvanR> MagicalTux said one of the versions he had was unstable
740 2011-05-28 14:47:48 <sipa> will it do transactions, or is it just for monitoring the block chain?
741 2011-05-28 14:47:56 <EvanR> transactions
742 2011-05-28 14:48:55 <EvanR> 0.3.21?
743 2011-05-28 14:49:07 <sipa> i'd just default with the latest
744 2011-05-28 14:50:18 <luke-jr> EvanR: 0.3.21 is what MT said was unstable
745 2011-05-28 14:50:41 <EvanR> mmm
746 2011-05-28 14:52:01 <EvanR> 0.3.22 ?
747 2011-05-28 14:52:33 <BlueMatt> dont think any kind of such bug would have been fixed...did he say what was unstable about it?
748 2011-05-28 14:52:52 <EvanR> well, mtgox stopped working
749 2011-05-28 14:52:57 <EvanR> so im getting bitcoind crashed
750 2011-05-28 14:53:08 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
751 2011-05-28 14:53:08 <luke-jr> ;;later tell jgarzik would you consider it to be linking, to add a "database" to pushpoold that merely connected to a local socket and sent JSON share info? (ie, my other end wouldn't be GPL necessarily)
752 2011-05-28 14:53:27 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: he said it crashed, possibly related to packet loss
753 2011-05-28 14:53:29 <EvanR> ill reduce the version number
754 2011-05-28 14:54:00 <luke-jr> EvanR: older versions have the subcent change bug ;)
755 2011-05-28 14:54:35 <EvanR> what bug is that
756 2011-05-28 14:54:48 <luke-jr> where it discards subcent portions behind your back
757 2011-05-28 14:55:00 <EvanR> discards?
758 2011-05-28 14:55:20 <EvanR> gives them back to people?
759 2011-05-28 14:55:37 <luke-jr> to miners
760 2011-05-28 14:55:54 <luke-jr> basically it makes them a fee without your permission
761 2011-05-28 14:55:56 <sipa> recent versions have had quite some improvements and bug-fixes, but almost no fixes for crashing
762 2011-05-28 14:55:59 <luke-jr> even when a fee isn't needed
763 2011-05-28 14:56:20 <sipa> there was one i remember, where it crashes when exiting sometimes
764 2011-05-28 14:56:27 <BlueMatt> probably a lockup, for that, we really just need to generally clean, like sipa's walletclass
765 2011-05-28 14:56:33 <sipa> so that isn'the the problem
766 2011-05-28 14:56:36 <EvanR> not crashing is more valuable to me than < .01
767 2011-05-28 14:56:41 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: no, it was a segfault
768 2011-05-28 14:56:44 <BlueMatt> oh
769 2011-05-28 14:57:52 <BlueMatt> well for that we need to move towards -Wall
770 2011-05-28 14:58:23 <EvanR> MagicalTux: which version of bitcoin do you use now
771 2011-05-28 14:58:36 <EvanR> because thats what im going to use ;)
772 2011-05-28 15:00:16 <sipa> ok, walletclass is at least able to receive payments now
773 2011-05-28 15:00:24 <sipa> sending doesn't work yet :)
774 2011-05-28 15:00:26 <thermal> here's an idea: rather than bundling bitcoin's functionality in with the client... have it run as a separate service that the client communicates with (via tcp/ip perhaps?)
775 2011-05-28 15:00:48 <sipa> thermal: that's what spesmilo does
776 2011-05-28 15:00:59 <thermal> ah
777 2011-05-28 15:01:00 <sipa> use the json-rpc interface to communicate with bitcoind
778 2011-05-28 15:01:05 <sipa> and provide a gui based on that
779 2011-05-28 15:01:10 <thermal> that's awesome! :D
780 2011-05-28 15:01:40 <thermal> props to whoever decided on that.. especially json-rpc
781 2011-05-28 15:02:09 <devrandom> anybody know how to turn on terminal bell under ubuntu / gnome?
782 2011-05-28 15:02:17 <thermal> i was considering making an alternate client
783 2011-05-28 15:02:19 <devrandom> I have it enabled in my gnome-terminal profile
784 2011-05-28 15:02:30 <thermal> this makes it a *lot* easier :)
785 2011-05-28 15:09:21 <sipa> BlueMatt: did a succesfull send with walletclass :)