1 2011-11-04 00:02:52 <invisiblemonk> derp
  2 2011-11-04 02:06:49 <roconnor> oh. TestNet has a script with an OP_2 instruction
  3 2011-11-04 02:08:12 <roconnor> http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/tx/e232e0055dbdca88bbaa79458683195a0b7c17c5b6c524a8d146721d4d4d652f#o1
  4 2011-11-04 02:20:29 <gmaxwell> I thought gavin had said he tried out op_eval on testnet?
  5 2011-11-04 02:22:12 <roconnor> well, that is the first block that I encountered with a nonstandard script (that is executed)
  6 2011-11-04 02:23:59 <luke-jr> &
  7 2011-11-04 02:24:05 <luke-jr> plenty on mainnet
  8 2011-11-04 02:24:51 <roconnor> oh
  9 2011-11-04 02:24:57 <roconnor> I guess I haven't looked
 10 2011-11-04 02:33:31 <Diablo-D3> current top ten: deepbit, btcguild, slush, ars, eligius, bitcoins.lc, abcpool, bitclockers, btcmine, emc
 11 2011-11-04 02:33:51 <cocktopus> how could slush be top 10
 12 2011-11-04 02:33:58 <cocktopus> he has been down for days
 13 2011-11-04 02:36:29 <Diablo-D3> Im using last known rate
 14 2011-11-04 02:36:49 <Diablo-D3> if he doesnt come back up, I think Im going to take him out of the top 10
 15 2011-11-04 02:37:05 <Diablo-D3> slush: wheres your pool?
 16 2011-11-04 02:37:21 <slush> I'll be back in hour or so
 17 2011-11-04 02:37:25 <slush> hardware failure :*
 18 2011-11-04 02:37:27 <slush> eh :(
 19 2011-11-04 02:37:32 <Diablo-D3> ouch
 20 2011-11-04 02:38:23 <roconnor> Do all stack operations crash if there isn't sufficent input on the stack?
 21 2011-11-04 04:00:53 <slush> huh, done
 22 2011-11-04 04:01:20 <slush> nine hours of installing
 23 2011-11-04 05:54:53 <invisiblemonk> /portal 2
 24 2011-11-04 07:37:53 <CIA-34> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p: Stefan Thomas master * r96e84d7 / (3 files in 3 dirs): Various fixes for "database-agnosticism". (+6 more commits...) - http://git.io/YNZcIg
 25 2011-11-04 09:19:54 <invisiblemonk> herp torbutton derp
 26 2011-11-04 09:34:28 <dikidera> So guys i want to know..lets say i have a cdkey of some product which is KR44-Z793-CRJK-NHFD-KTCL(a random one i made up). Lets say i only know this part of the key KR44-Z793-CRJK-NHFD-KTCL how many possible combinations are there left possible to complete the key?
 27 2011-11-04 09:35:07 <dikidera> sorry, brain fart, lets say i know only THIS part of the key "KR44-Z793-CRJK"
 28 2011-11-04 09:39:01 <edcba> ...
 29 2011-11-04 09:39:05 <edcba> simple math
 30 2011-11-04 09:39:19 <edcba> you miss 8 letters
 31 2011-11-04 09:39:33 <edcba> now you have to know how many different letters you can have
 32 2011-11-04 09:39:45 <edcba> let say 32
 33 2011-11-04 09:39:58 <edcba> you have 8**32 possibilities
 34 2011-11-04 09:40:08 <edcba> that is 2**96
 35 2011-11-04 09:40:40 <edcba> now that could be reduced i guess
 36 2011-11-04 09:40:50 <edcba> hmm
 37 2011-11-04 09:41:00 <edcba> 32**8 !
 38 2011-11-04 09:41:23 <edcba> 2**40
 39 2011-11-04 09:41:54 <marf_away_away> !calc 32**8
 40 2011-11-04 09:41:55 <gribble> 1099511627776
 41 2011-11-04 09:46:58 <dikidera> edcba:letters AND number
 42 2011-11-04 12:00:14 <nathan7> apple pie?
 43 2011-11-04 13:18:55 <BlueMatt> wumpus: ping
 44 2011-11-04 13:19:04 <wumpus> hey BlueMatt
 45 2011-11-04 13:19:22 <sipa> hey both :)
 46 2011-11-04 13:19:34 <BlueMatt> hey, its a party
 47 2011-11-04 13:19:40 <BlueMatt> wheres gavinandresen?
 48 2011-11-04 13:19:48 <gavinandresen> who?
 49 2011-11-04 13:20:44 <wumpus> hi sipa
 50 2011-11-04 13:20:50 <wumpus> glad the power is back gavinandresen :)
 51 2011-11-04 13:21:08 <gavinandresen> me too!
 52 2011-11-04 13:21:22 <gavinandresen> kids are STILL home from school, though (had the entire week off)
 53 2011-11-04 13:21:45 <BlueMatt> lucky...I want a week off school
 54 2011-11-04 13:22:00 <BlueMatt> anyway, gavinandresen are you good for rc2 now?
 55 2011-11-04 13:22:29 <gavinandresen> yes, I'm just about to commit updates to release-process.txt and then will tag the tree rc2.  Mac builds are still broken, though....
 56 2011-11-04 13:22:30 <BlueMatt> oh, wait can someone check if we need to update the about dialog w/ gpl messages from bitcoin-qt image use
 57 2011-11-04 13:22:39 <BlueMatt> wumpus: ^
 58 2011-11-04 13:23:51 <wumpus> yeah, I  guess we need to put all the things requiring attribution in the about page
 59 2011-11-04 13:23:57 <[Tycho]> Hello, gavinandresen.
 60 2011-11-04 13:24:05 <BlueMatt> yep
 61 2011-11-04 13:24:27 <wumpus> better to change the dialog and make it a scrollable text area :-)
 62 2011-11-04 13:24:40 <BlueMatt> yea, judging by the amount of attributions...
 63 2011-11-04 13:24:54 <BlueMatt> (and the like 10 licenses we need...)
 64 2011-11-04 13:25:00 <CIA-34> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen v0.5.0rc2 * rf6aacbf / (6 files in 6 dirs): Mac releases use macdeployqtplus - http://git.io/o7gLeQ
 65 2011-11-04 13:25:00 <wumpus> I wonder how other open source projects solve this, I mean, most icons are pretty common ...
 66 2011-11-04 13:25:42 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: when you say mac builds are still broken, do you mean they are now fixed?
 67 2011-11-04 13:26:15 <gavinandresen> No, I mean I can't create a .dmg file that contains a Bitcoin-Qt.app that actually works because Qt's macdeploy script is broken
 68 2011-11-04 13:27:15 <sipa> wumpus: are you going to the bitcoin conference, btw?
 69 2011-11-04 13:27:34 <gavinandresen> Hey [Tycho]
 70 2011-11-04 13:28:07 <wumpus> sipa: nope, don't have the money and the time at the moment
 71 2011-11-04 13:28:32 <sipa> ah, too bad
 72 2011-11-04 13:28:33 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: and the commit you just pushed fixed it, or no?
 73 2011-11-04 13:28:38 <gavinandresen> no
 74 2011-11-04 13:28:46 <sipa> i'm still doubting whether i'd go
 75 2011-11-04 13:28:51 <wumpus> sipa: are you going?
 76 2011-11-04 13:29:01 <wumpus> I guess it'll be interesting
 77 2011-11-04 13:29:06 <gavinandresen> ... that'll either be a fix to macdeploy (which is a qt thing, not part of our tree) or will be a final release change.
 78 2011-11-04 13:29:36 <BlueMatt> mmm, yuck
 79 2011-11-04 13:29:46 <wumpus> so all mac qt application deployments fail now?
 80 2011-11-04 13:30:35 <BlueMatt> how do other apps do deployment on mac?
 81 2011-11-04 13:30:37 <wumpus> I mean, if it's an upstream problem, someone else is bound to have stumbled on it and maybe fixed/worked around it somehow
 82 2011-11-04 13:30:39 <wumpus> exactly
 83 2011-11-04 13:30:48 <gavinandresen> Bug 1 :  https://bugreports.qt.nokia.com/browse/QTBUG-21913
 84 2011-11-04 13:30:57 <BlueMatt> or do they just use appstore now and not worry about it?
 85 2011-11-04 13:31:13 <gavinandresen> Dunno.
 86 2011-11-04 13:32:15 <phantomcircuit> gavinandresen, heh lost power?
 87 2011-11-04 13:32:26 <gavinandresen> Bug 2 I haven't filed-- looks like macdeployqt doesn't like libraries that are read-only in /opt/local/lib/...
 88 2011-11-04 13:32:32 <gavinandresen> phantomcircuit: yes, lost power for 5 days
 89 2011-11-04 13:32:33 <BlueMatt> has anyone actually tried to submit bitcoin-qt to the mac app store?
 90 2011-11-04 13:32:38 <phantomcircuit> heh
 91 2011-11-04 13:32:46 <phantomcircuit> im in like the only part of ct to not lose power
 92 2011-11-04 13:32:50 <phantomcircuit> pure dumb luck
 93 2011-11-04 13:32:52 <wumpus> I guess submitting things to the mac app store costs money
 94 2011-11-04 13:32:53 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: that would be a good thing to do when we have a 1.0 release
 95 2011-11-04 13:33:16 <gavinandresen> IMHO Bitcoin-Qt is still far from being really user-friendly.
 96 2011-11-04 13:33:22 <BlueMatt> wumpus: yea, but someone here has to have an app store subscription...
 97 2011-11-04 13:33:35 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: I agree, but that doesnt mean we shouldnt submit to mac app store just to see what they say?
 98 2011-11-04 13:33:36 <cjdelisle> heh I'm in Heath and we got 22 inches but we didn't lose power
 99 2011-11-04 13:33:50 <sipa> BlueMatt: that also means we'd depend on that person for pushing timely updates to the store as well
100 2011-11-04 13:34:00 <BlueMatt> well thats the other issue...
101 2011-11-04 13:34:03 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: bad idea, I think that'd just bias them against bitcoin
102 2011-11-04 13:34:40 <BlueMatt> they dont reject apps because they are non-user-friendly unless they are downright terrible
103 2011-11-04 13:34:40 <[eval]> is there still a plan for a foundation? it'd be good if the app store subscription was in the name of the foundation instead of one person on whom you have to rely
104 2011-11-04 13:34:51 <sipa> [eval]: indeed
105 2011-11-04 13:36:17 <BlueMatt> also, now that we have gitian win32 deterministic, anyone want to sign up to do a gitian-downloader wrapper and automatic updater for the win32 version of bitcoin?
106 2011-11-04 13:36:25 <wumpus> gavinandresen: what's missing from being really user friendly?
107 2011-11-04 13:37:16 <gavinandresen> wumpus: Faster startup.  Not downloading the entire fricking blockchain.
108 2011-11-04 13:37:24 <gavinandresen> wumpus: better wallet backup.
109 2011-11-04 13:37:44 <gavinandresen> wumpus: easy way to protect the wallet from viruses/trojans.
110 2011-11-04 13:37:46 <BlueMatt> less monolithic code design
111 2011-11-04 13:37:54 <gavinandresen> ... I think that's all on my list (I'm probably forgetting something)
112 2011-11-04 13:37:56 <gmaxwell> That isn't a user friendlyness issue itself.
113 2011-11-04 13:38:09 <wumpus> huh, how is code design a UI issue
114 2011-11-04 13:38:14 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: true, but its still on the list of things that should be done...
115 2011-11-04 13:38:14 <sipa> not at all
116 2011-11-04 13:38:37 <BlueMatt> more of a programmer friendliness issue
117 2011-11-04 13:39:05 <gmaxwell> Although being able to seperate the wallet and the backend may be useful for usability.  E.g. being able to leave your bitcoin backend running 'in the cloud' but just having a light weight wallet front end.
118 2011-11-04 13:39:10 <gavinandresen> I learned that a nice, clean API doesn't matter at all when I took a look at the APIs for the Playstation and Nintendo boxes....  shudder....
119 2011-11-04 13:39:10 <wumpus> though I agree it would be nice to do some refactoring of the core code
120 2011-11-04 13:39:27 <gavinandresen> (actually, win32 api proves that, too...)
121 2011-11-04 13:39:47 <wumpus> well I think it matters, up to a point
122 2011-11-04 13:39:56 <wumpus> like everything, if you overdo it it only gets in the way again
123 2011-11-04 13:40:08 <wumpus> if it's really bad it also gets in the way
124 2011-11-04 13:40:22 <wumpus> then again, I agree with your points gavinandresen
125 2011-11-04 13:40:42 <gmaxwell> Considering what bitcoin does doing more with RPC than API is probably the way to go... simply because we really don't want $random code executing in the same process as bitcoin.
126 2011-11-04 13:40:53 <gavinandresen> I've never seen "nice and clean and easy for developers" be the deciding factor in a major API winning.  But I'm probably forgetting something
127 2011-11-04 13:40:58 <gmaxwell> And the data that needs to be exchanged is _very_ low bandwidth.
128 2011-11-04 13:41:14 <gavinandresen> NeWS versus Xwindows....  NeWS was a much nicer API/model, but X won....
129 2011-11-04 13:41:40 <wumpus> yes, but having code that is  a tangled mess is a danger in itself
130 2011-11-04 13:42:15 <BlueMatt> (though noone cared, so I gave up)
131 2011-11-04 13:42:16 <gmaxwell> I still boggle at people calling the bitcoin code tangled.
132 2011-11-04 13:42:17 <gavinandresen> I agree we should write good code, and create clean APIs.  I just don't think it is a high priority.
133 2011-11-04 13:42:19 <sipa> we should do that in steps
134 2011-11-04 13:42:23 <wumpus> accidental complexity and security doesn't really combine very well
135 2011-11-04 13:42:38 <sipa> first thing: a layer between ui+rpc and wallet that hides the internal data structures
136 2011-11-04 13:42:54 <sipa> imho
137 2011-11-04 13:43:11 <wumpus> BlueMatt: yeah it's pretty thankless work
138 2011-11-04 13:43:17 <gavinandresen> Using boost's signals and slots for internal communication inside bitcoin would make a lot of things MUCH cleaner
139 2011-11-04 13:43:21 <wumpus> gavinandresen: YES
140 2011-11-04 13:43:30 <sipa> BlueMatt: imho, you rushed a bit into it
141 2011-11-04 13:43:40 <sipa> wumpus, gavinandresen: definitely
142 2011-11-04 13:44:11 <BlueMatt> sipa: true, but no one else was doing anything, so I just said screw it Im gonna split this up
143 2011-11-04 13:44:12 <BlueMatt> and when I asked for comments all I got was "meh"
144 2011-11-04 13:44:20 <wumpus> signals and async notifications would be great,  and more use of C++ idiom in general, like RAII
145 2011-11-04 13:44:31 <wumpus> BlueMatt: welcome to bitcoin dev :P
146 2011-11-04 13:44:39 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: the splitting isn't exciting until it's 120% done.
147 2011-11-04 13:44:54 <BlueMatt> wumpus: no, normally you more of a "cool, but Im not gonna help"
148 2011-11-04 13:45:34 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: e.g. people will be very excited if they can have a UI+Wallet with no blockchain communicate with one or two somewhat trusted bitcoind... and not worry about the trouble of running a full node.
149 2011-11-04 13:45:41 <wumpus> well, at least if someone rushes into it it gets done
150 2011-11-04 13:46:08 <gmaxwell> But that doesn't just require the split, it requires a lot of additional work, and without it (or things like it) the split alone isn't interesting.
151 2011-11-04 13:46:19 <wumpus> but it would be easier with a split
152 2011-11-04 13:46:24 <wumpus> that's the reason for infratstructure work
153 2011-11-04 13:46:32 <gavinandresen> meh
154 2011-11-04 13:46:32 <sipa> BlueMatt: i still think that split is where we should aim for, but going all at once is a lot of work, and people won't see intermediate results
155 2011-11-04 13:46:35 <wumpus> making changes that you intend to do eventually easier
156 2011-11-04 13:46:48 <wumpus> and more robust and clear etc..
157 2011-11-04 13:47:06 <BlueMatt> true, but the split is the first step
158 2011-11-04 13:47:19 <BlueMatt> sipa: there isnt much of a way to do a split like that piecemeal
159 2011-11-04 13:47:25 <BlueMatt> you kind of have to just go for it...
160 2011-11-04 13:47:42 <wumpus> yep
161 2011-11-04 13:47:55 <sipa> sure, the actual split will always be a radical change
162 2011-11-04 13:48:27 <gavinandresen> ... so you plan to spend a month working on a nice split, it actually takes six, and five months in somebody else releases a really nice open-source implementation that does everything you want in plain C.  Or python.  Or C++ with a mysql back-end (wait, genjix is already doing that one...)
163 2011-11-04 13:48:35 <wumpus> I still thing a -next branch for radical work is a good idea
164 2011-11-04 13:48:42 <gavinandresen> wumpus: go for it
165 2011-11-04 13:48:47 <[eval]> and bitcoinjs is already doing some of it in javascript too :P
166 2011-11-04 13:48:48 <sipa> wumpus: agree
167 2011-11-04 13:49:02 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: it probably would have taken ~1 month if I had started in the summer when I had time to dedicate to it...
168 2011-11-04 13:49:14 <BlueMatt> anyway, Ive gotta go to class, Ill get on when I get there (comp sci, not like ive got anything better to do but irc in there...)
169 2011-11-04 13:49:21 <wumpus> because I really wouldn't want to break the current version / stability, but it's good to focus on the longer run as well
170 2011-11-04 13:49:23 <wumpus> gavinandresen: ok
171 2011-11-04 13:50:02 <sipa> BlueMatt: get yourself a bouncer or an irc client running remotely :)
172 2011-11-04 13:50:13 <wumpus> but yes I think we can safely say the priority now is speeding up startup time
173 2011-11-04 13:50:31 <sipa> reworking the ip address handling is part of that
174 2011-11-04 13:50:44 <sipa> but obviosuly the largest part is loading of the block chain
175 2011-11-04 13:51:05 <wumpus> it spends a lot of time in ip address handling?!
176 2011-11-04 13:51:09 <[eval]> but if you can run the p2p/blockchain part of it as a service/daemon and run the wallet in the UI, startup times are virtually 0
177 2011-11-04 13:51:20 <wumpus> or do you mean the hangs when DNS-seeding?
178 2011-11-04 13:51:32 <[eval]> (again, split)
179 2011-11-04 13:51:38 <sipa> wumpus: loading address can take some time (as in: seconds), where it shouldn't
180 2011-11-04 13:51:45 <sipa> but that isn't the largest problem
181 2011-11-04 13:51:46 <wumpus> [eval]: how's that? it'll still need to load everything and connect before you can do anything useful
182 2011-11-04 13:52:01 <wumpus> [eval]: sure, it can show the UI before the loading is finished, but that doesn't help :)
183 2011-11-04 13:52:22 <sipa> wumpus: i suppose he means that if you start the UI while the daemon was already running, things should go fast
184 2011-11-04 13:52:29 <wumpus> sipa: yeah I really think we need to profile to make sure we focus on the right areas
185 2011-11-04 13:52:30 <[eval]> wumpus: assuming the UI is started after the daemon/service has updated its copy of the chain
186 2011-11-04 13:52:42 <gmaxwell> sipa: tens of seconds. On a fast machine with an SSD.
187 2011-11-04 13:52:51 <[eval]> yes, sipa
188 2011-11-04 13:53:04 <wumpus> sipa: ah, right, you want the daemon to be always running.. yeah... that'd be possible
189 2011-11-04 13:53:30 <gavinandresen> I hate things that always run on my machine....
190 2011-11-04 13:53:30 <wumpus> a bit like utorrent etc
191 2011-11-04 13:53:40 <wumpus> me too, but it'd be better for the network :P
192 2011-11-04 13:53:46 <[eval]> i run tor as a relay all the time, and bitcoind too
193 2011-11-04 13:53:49 <gavinandresen> Not unless you're mining
194 2011-11-04 13:53:52 <[eval]> to help both networks
195 2011-11-04 13:54:05 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: you shouldn't need to know that it's always running.
196 2011-11-04 13:54:10 <wumpus> when I ran a tor node all kinds of sites started to ban me :-(
197 2011-11-04 13:54:21 <gavinandresen> I hate things that always run on my machine without telling me even more....
198 2011-11-04 13:54:27 <wumpus> gmaxwell: of course you need to know!
199 2011-11-04 13:54:37 <wumpus> please don't do things on my machine without me knowing :/
200 2011-11-04 13:54:46 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: I'm not suggesting being sneaky! I mean if its not obnoxious then you shouldn't even notice.
201 2011-11-04 13:54:48 <[eval]> wumpus: i don't run an exit node, just a relay into tor... thinking about setting up a tor2web.org proxy too
202 2011-11-04 13:54:57 <wumpus> [eval]: I didn't run an exit node either!
203 2011-11-04 13:55:07 <[eval]> oh man.. i haven't been banned from anything yet lol
204 2011-11-04 13:55:28 <gmaxwell> wumpus: there are some broken sites, but I can think of only two incidents in many years of running tor where that has hit me.
205 2011-11-04 13:55:31 <wumpus> it happens this way: tor publishes list of relays, some stupid sites take it over and directly put it into their backlist
206 2011-11-04 13:56:03 <gmaxwell> wumpus: provided nice exit filtered feeds to address that. Including an fairly nice DNS query option.
207 2011-11-04 13:56:29 <[eval]> sorry, didn't mean to derail convo.
208 2011-11-04 13:56:33 <wumpus> hehe
209 2011-11-04 13:57:12 <gmaxwell> In any case, if you don't want bitcoin always running, you almost certantly don't want a full node... otherwise the time it takes to sync back up when you do start it is bad for usability.
210 2011-11-04 13:57:16 <wumpus> anyway, myself I only start bitcoin when I'm using it, I wouldn't be opposed to it running in the background but I wouldn't want to push that to users by default
211 2011-11-04 13:58:17 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: re: "so you plan to spend a month working on a nice split, it actually takes six, and five months in somebody else releases a really nice open-source implementation..." so in other words lets not bother updating the satoshi client and just let other clients come out that are better that can take over...
212 2011-11-04 13:58:21 <[eval]> you could also run the "full node" on something like a freedombox/sheevaplug/dvr/something that's on all the time and have all the clients in your house (or in your business) connecting to it as separate wallets
213 2011-11-04 13:58:23 <BlueMatt> so why are we doing any work?
214 2011-11-04 13:58:36 <[eval]> there's no reason you should have multiple copies of the blockchain to service multiple wallets
215 2011-11-04 13:58:38 <gmaxwell> ..and we get a nice trickel of people in IRC (which automatically means they some of the more technically competent ones) who are concerned that 10 seconds after starting a node which has been off for a week they still don't see a payment made to them 10 minutes ago.
216 2011-11-04 13:58:54 <wumpus> [eval]: agreed, that'd be nice
217 2011-11-04 13:59:05 <gmaxwell> ... and another slow flow of people who get screwed up because they close bitcoin RIGHT after issuing a transaction and then it doesn't actually make it out onto the network.
218 2011-11-04 13:59:10 <wumpus> you could also have a passive client to just watch addresses
219 2011-11-04 13:59:19 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: the alternative is to plan the Grand Redesign taking a year or two or three, and implement it in incremental changes.
220 2011-11-04 13:59:19 <wumpus> without "wallet"
221 2011-11-04 13:59:21 <helo> just run a full node on bitcoin.org and let everybody use it! ;)
222 2011-11-04 13:59:22 <[eval]> wumpus: yes
223 2011-11-04 13:59:41 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: which is what "the split" is...
224 2011-11-04 13:59:45 <BlueMatt> anyway, its irrelevant now...
225 2011-11-04 13:59:51 <[eval]> helo: bccapi does something like that but i don't want to trust a third party's full node :P
226 2011-11-04 14:00:06 <wumpus> let's just try to make the design somewhat better with every change that we make :P
227 2011-11-04 14:00:09 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: ... so you work on things that actually matter instead of "stuff that will make it easier to do stuff that I want to do.... eventually...."
228 2011-11-04 14:00:17 <gavinandresen> wumpus: amen
229 2011-11-04 14:00:19 <wumpus> and not accept patches that make the design worse
230 2011-11-04 14:00:24 <wumpus> (like adding another ToHex function :p)
231 2011-11-04 14:00:26 <gmaxwell> It's pretty obnoxious that I have to run four full nodes at home just to keep four wallets online.
232 2011-11-04 14:00:58 <wumpus> gmaxwell: yes, that's pretty crazy.. but running one full node in your home would make asingle point of failure
233 2011-11-04 14:01:39 <[eval]> if it's at home, you can usually wait a few minutes to restart the node/redownload the blockchain... if it's a business, you can run redundant full nodes that can all still service multiple wallets
234 2011-11-04 14:01:43 <sipa> helo: what about blockexplorer.com
235 2011-11-04 14:01:47 <wumpus> true...
236 2011-11-04 14:01:55 <gmaxwell> wumpus: So? I can start another one trivially if one fails.
237 2011-11-04 14:01:58 <helo> it is probably inevitable that people will start using "public" nodes for usability... it's not much easier for the average user to run one full node and handle networking their other devices (other PCs, cell phone) to it, VS running full nodes on each device
238 2011-11-04 14:02:15 <wumpus> gmaxwell: yes, but what about trust? what if it is subverted and told to lie?
239 2011-11-04 14:02:37 <gmaxwell> wumpus: if someone can subvert the one node I'm running then they can surely subvert all of them.
240 2011-11-04 14:02:45 <wumpus> the whole idea of it being P2P and asking multiple nodes is to prevent such attacks
241 2011-11-04 14:02:58 <wumpus> gmaxwell: why would that be? the attack doesn't have to have been through bitcoin itself
242 2011-11-04 14:03:00 <[eval]> wumpus: but your wallet only asks its own node now
243 2011-11-04 14:03:01 <gmaxwell> It's not like they have software diversity (nor would I want the maintance burden of diverse software even if I could get diverse software)
244 2011-11-04 14:03:15 <[eval]> so if your node is subverted and told to lie, your wallet still lies to you
245 2011-11-04 14:03:41 <gmaxwell> wumpus: it's a point, but a weak one and a seperated wallet could query multiple daemons.
246 2011-11-04 14:04:06 <wumpus> hey it's not that I'm against a split
247 2011-11-04 14:04:34 <wumpus> I'm a bit scared of less knowledgable users setting some wallet server, which gets owned a la mybitcoin
248 2011-11-04 14:04:56 <gmaxwell> wumpus: I'd be a lot more inclined to have bitcoind software diversity if I could just have two and they serviced four wallets. Perhaps I'd also use one run by someone else.
249 2011-11-04 14:05:10 <gmaxwell> wumpus: but they'll already do that with the web at least they could keep their private keys locally.
250 2011-11-04 14:05:43 <wumpus> that's true... but it means the wallet<->blockchain protocol needs to be secure
251 2011-11-04 14:05:54 <gmaxwell> wumpus: yup. And authenticated.
252 2011-11-04 14:05:56 <wumpus> if it's just localhost it's easier
253 2011-11-04 14:05:59 <wumpus> right...
254 2011-11-04 14:06:25 <wumpus> it would have to be anyway I guess
255 2011-11-04 14:06:57 <sipa> it's quite possible to have a wallet<->node protocol just for internal use, where there is one node running, and several wallets connect to it
256 2011-11-04 14:07:02 <sipa> all within one trusted network
257 2011-11-04 14:07:31 <sipa> clearly having the ability to secure it makes it more useful
258 2011-11-04 14:08:07 <wumpus> not that authentication+encryption is that much of a deal, we already link against openssl anyway :)
259 2011-11-04 14:09:44 <wumpus> https+jsonrpc would be most straightforward, though maybe a bidirectional protocol would be better, as back-calls with jsonrpc means that the client has to listen for connections as well (and have a port open)
260 2011-11-04 14:10:32 <BlueMatt> meh, protocol for splitting the code into multiple programs comes after we can split the code to being with...
261 2011-11-04 14:10:51 <wumpus> it doesn't hurt to think about it
262 2011-11-04 14:11:04 <BlueMatt> also, its been thought about: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Wallet_protocol
263 2011-11-04 14:11:06 <AlexWaters1> BlueMatt: do you think it would be possible for me to create qt builds of test branches today?
264 2011-11-04 14:11:09 <BlueMatt> (well mostly by luke...)
265 2011-11-04 14:11:25 <BlueMatt> AlexWaters1: yea, let me go update those build scipts...
266 2011-11-04 14:11:26 <AlexWaters1> *for windows x64
267 2011-11-04 14:11:30 <BlueMatt> no
268 2011-11-04 14:11:41 <BlueMatt> since when do we do win64 builds?
269 2011-11-04 14:11:45 <wumpus> the w32 build works fine on w64 right?
270 2011-11-04 14:11:46 <BlueMatt> all our builds have always been win32
271 2011-11-04 14:11:49 <BlueMatt> yea
272 2011-11-04 14:11:52 <AlexWaters1> wumpus: it should
273 2011-11-04 14:12:07 <wumpus> heck I run the 32 bit windows bitcoin.exe on wine on a 64 bit linux machine
274 2011-11-04 14:12:59 <imsaguy2> w32 will run fine on w64
275 2011-11-04 14:13:05 <imsaguy2> that is by design
276 2011-11-04 14:13:18 <wumpus> BlueMatt: that page is very incomplete
277 2011-11-04 14:13:30 <AlexWaters1> BlueMatt: x86 is fine, so long as it works on x65windows7
278 2011-11-04 14:13:36 <AlexWaters1> x64*
279 2011-11-04 14:13:55 <BlueMatt> wumpus: I never said I supported it, I just said that discussion of that topic has happened several times...
280 2011-11-04 14:14:04 <BlueMatt> (as with all things in bitcoin it seems)
281 2011-11-04 14:14:17 <luke-jr> that's because w64 is 32-bit too :p
282 2011-11-04 14:14:23 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt AlexWaters1 : I'm gitian-building 0.5.0rc2 now   (aside to BlueMatt:  my 'had to sudo bin/gbuild' problem was "you installed qemu but then didn't logout and log back in again to become part of the libvirtd group")
283 2011-11-04 14:14:30 <wumpus> BlueMatt: I don't really like discussion that much, I much rather just see that someone implements it :-)
284 2011-11-04 14:14:40 <luke-jr> wumpus: 32-bit WINE doesn't run on non-32-bit Linux ;)
285 2011-11-04 14:14:53 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: m, yea but it still shouldnt be touching /dev/kmem, maybe its touching something else?
286 2011-11-04 14:14:57 <wumpus> luke-jr: huh then why does it work for me
287 2011-11-04 14:14:58 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: anyway, doesnt matter
288 2011-11-04 14:15:02 <luke-jr> wumpus: your OS is 32-bit
289 2011-11-04 14:15:11 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: I'd misremembered, it was /dev/kvm
290 2011-11-04 14:15:18 <AlexWaters1> gavinandresen: I am jealous - haha. I'm curious as to how I could do the same
291 2011-11-04 14:15:18 <luke-jr> lol
292 2011-11-04 14:15:19 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: mmm, makes much more sense
293 2011-11-04 14:15:23 <wumpus> luke-jr: no, it's not
294 2011-11-04 14:15:30 <wumpus> luke-jr: $ ldd /bin/bash
295 2011-11-04 14:15:31 <wumpus> 
296 2011-11-04 14:15:38 <luke-jr> wumpus: it's probably hybrid: both 32-bit and 64-bit
297 2011-11-04 14:15:41 <gavinandresen> AlexWaters1: do you have a 64-bit machine with Vt-x-capable hardware?
298 2011-11-04 14:15:46 <luke-jr> wumpus: sure, maybe your BASH is 64-bit ;)
299 2011-11-04 14:15:54 <AlexWaters1> gavinandresen: yes
300 2011-11-04 14:15:58 <luke-jr> AlexWaters1: it requires Ruby
301 2011-11-04 14:16:00 <BlueMatt> wumpus: oh, I agree, I was just saying discussions like this happen all the time, and they always end with "ok, so who wants to implement this?" followed by silence...
302 2011-11-04 14:16:01 <wumpus> you can't run 64 bit executables on a 32 bit os can you?
303 2011-11-04 14:16:09 <luke-jr> wumpus: you can, if the OS is also 64-bit
304 2011-11-04 14:16:17 <luke-jr> wumpus: I suspect yours is BOTH 32-bit and 64-bit
305 2011-11-04 14:16:41 <gavinandresen> AlexWaters1: I wrote up what I did to get it working in contrib/gitian-descriptors/README
306 2011-11-04 14:16:43 <wumpus> BlueMatt: well the problem is that we can never agree on anything
307 2011-11-04 14:17:17 <luke-jr> Bluebeard vs Alexander the Great vs Lancelot: who wins?
308 2011-11-04 14:17:27 <wumpus> BlueMatt: so discussions always either end up nowhere, or in some compromise that no one wants to implement :)
309 2011-11-04 14:17:31 <AlexWaters1> gavinandresen: ok thank you. will it work just as well with amd-v?
310 2011-11-04 14:17:36 <BlueMatt> wumpus: no one ever agrees when discussing, but when someone actually implements it, people always agree because its better than nothing, and no one is going to reimplement what they discussed because its too much effort
311 2011-11-04 14:17:38 <AlexWaters1> i would think so...
312 2011-11-04 14:17:52 <wumpus> BlueMatt: yes that's true :)
313 2011-11-04 14:17:53 <BlueMatt> AlexWaters1: yes
314 2011-11-04 14:19:27 <wumpus> AlexWaters1: yes it does, I'm using it with AMD
315 2011-11-04 14:19:30 <gavinandresen> AlexWaters1: theoretically....   it'll even work if you don't have virtualization hardware, it will just take FOREVER to compile what you need.
316 2011-11-04 14:19:49 <wumpus> luke-jr: yes, 32 bit libraries/support is also installed, that comes by default in Ubuntu afaik
317 2011-11-04 14:20:07 <gavinandresen> AlexWaters1: Also see the doc/release-process.txt document for getting windows gitian builds going, you have to fetch/build more stuff....
318 2011-11-04 14:20:24 <AlexWaters1> gavinandresen: I will test it with my turing machine then
319 2011-11-04 14:20:41 <gavinandresen> AlexWaters1: good idea.
320 2011-11-04 14:20:46 <luke-jr> where is 0.5.0rc2?
321 2011-11-04 14:21:09 <BlueMatt> AlexWaters1: can you upload a current branch from master to the testing branch?
322 2011-11-04 14:21:10 <AlexWaters1> gavinandresen: ok - from how it looks, this looks simple enough for even me. thank you for the tidy write-up
323 2011-11-04 14:21:13 <gavinandresen> software releases are such an abstract notion, "where" is a good question...
324 2011-11-04 14:21:23 <AlexWaters1> BlueMatt: sure
325 2011-11-04 14:21:24 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: I just tagged 0.5.0rc2
326 2011-11-04 14:21:33 <wumpus> a very good question, we should geo-tag our releases :p
327 2011-11-04 14:21:58 <luke-jr> I just pulled and didn't get it :x
328 2011-11-04 14:22:03 <luke-jr> did you push?
329 2011-11-04 14:22:23 <gavinandresen> AlexWaters1: I will add another Sanity Check:  groups  # should say you are in the libvirtd  group
330 2011-11-04 14:22:33 <luke-jr> pulled again, no tag
331 2011-11-04 14:22:37 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: push the tag!
332 2011-11-04 14:22:57 <wumpus> hey I'm not in the libvirtd group
333 2011-11-04 14:23:36 <BlueMatt> neither am I and it works fine...
334 2011-11-04 14:23:47 <gavinandresen> To git@github.com:bitcoin/bitcoin.git
335 2011-11-04 14:23:48 <gavinandresen> * [new tag]         v0.5.0rc2 -> v0.5.0rc2
336 2011-11-04 14:24:03 <BlueMatt> also, my /dev/kvm is owned by kvm not libvirtd
337 2011-11-04 14:24:30 <wumpus> mine is also owned by kvm, but I'm also not in that group
338 2011-11-04 14:24:45 <wumpus> sometimes it's a wonder that things work at all :-)
339 2011-11-04 14:24:47 <gavinandresen> Huh:  https://help.ubuntu.com/community/KVM/Installation#Add_Users_to_Groups
340 2011-11-04 14:25:03 <BlueMatt> wumpus: yep
341 2011-11-04 14:25:36 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tags   ... says it is there...
342 2011-11-04 14:25:38 <BlueMatt> I dont even have a libvirtd group on my system...
343 2011-11-04 14:25:40 <wumpus> maybe it's not using virtualization, though I haven't noticed build being slow
344 2011-11-04 14:26:02 <BlueMatt> I definitely am...
345 2011-11-04 14:26:14 <wumpus> how to check?
346 2011-11-04 14:26:20 <luke-jr> wtf, pull doesn't get tags automatically anymore?
347 2011-11-04 14:26:37 <BlueMatt> wumpus: if it runs in reasonable time you are (Ive run it non-kvm before and it takes 12+hours)
348 2011-11-04 14:26:59 <wumpus> BlueMatt: ok in that case I'm definitely using it, I've build qt zillions of times in a day
349 2011-11-04 14:29:10 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: erm, why is v0.5.0rc2 not part of master? :|
350 2011-11-04 14:29:30 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: huh what???
351 2011-11-04 14:29:41 <wumpus> since when are tags part of a branch?
352 2011-11-04 14:30:04 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: you tagged f6aacbf as v0.5.0rc2, but that commit is not in the master branch
353 2011-11-04 14:30:16 <wumpus> ahh
354 2011-11-04 14:30:57 <wumpus> in that case, 'where' was a good question
355 2011-11-04 14:31:15 <gavinandresen> ummm..........
356 2011-11-04 14:32:15 <gavinandresen> because I forgot to pull before I pushed....
357 2011-11-04 14:32:32 <luke-jr> >_<
358 2011-11-04 14:32:42 <CIA-34> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * rab15eba / contrib/gitian-descriptors/qt-win32.yml : Merge branch 'master' of github.com:bitcoin/bitcoin - http://git.io/yoF1Ww
359 2011-11-04 14:32:43 <CIA-34> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * rf6aacbf / (6 files in 6 dirs): Mac releases use macdeployqtplus - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/f6aacbfe6d3d73dd83601a396c45d130add60313
360 2011-11-04 14:33:25 <gavinandresen> ok, so I need to re-tag... anybody know cleanest way of deleting a tag at github?  Can I just push --tags?
361 2011-11-04 14:33:53 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: impossible to delete tags
362 2011-11-04 14:34:14 <luke-jr> even if you force it onto github, everyone who pulled it already will refuse it
363 2011-11-04 14:34:26 <BlueMatt> meh, just force it
364 2011-11-04 14:34:32 <BlueMatt> there are like 5 people here who pulled in that time
365 2011-11-04 14:34:35 <BlueMatt> and they are all here
366 2011-11-04 14:34:35 <wumpus> well it's just a few minutes
367 2011-11-04 14:34:39 <gavinandresen> git tag -d v0.5.0rc2 ....
368 2011-11-04 14:34:49 <wumpus> agreed BlueMatt
369 2011-11-04 14:35:04 <AlexWaters> BlueMatt: ok my testing repo should be up to date now
370 2011-11-04 14:35:16 <BlueMatt> AlexWaters: oops, I already started a build off of it...
371 2011-11-04 14:35:18 <luke-jr> better to use rc3 :p
372 2011-11-04 14:35:22 <luke-jr> there's no limit to rcs
373 2011-11-04 14:35:39 <wumpus> rc2.1 :P lol
374 2011-11-04 14:35:44 <BlueMatt> AlexWaters: oh well, you can grab a bitcoin-qt.exe after the build is done and you start another one
375 2011-11-04 14:35:49 <BlueMatt> AlexWaters:
376 2011-11-04 14:35:51 <AlexWaters> BlueMatt: i did it a few minutes ago - so maybe it will be the current
377 2011-11-04 14:35:53 <BlueMatt> http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin-Testing-Build/
378 2011-11-04 14:35:59 <AlexWaters> ok cool
379 2011-11-04 14:36:01 <BlueMatt> AlexWaters: probably not...
380 2011-11-04 14:36:12 <BlueMatt> just go to workspace and look for the exe (IIRC)
381 2011-11-04 14:36:18 <BlueMatt> otherwise Ive g2g, send me an email
382 2011-11-04 14:36:49 <gavinandresen> Who says we can never agree about anything?   To git@github.com:bitcoin/bitcoin.git
383 2011-11-04 14:37:31 <AlexWaters> haha
384 2011-11-04 14:38:16 <wumpus> hehe :D
385 2011-11-04 14:41:18 <luke-jr> anyhow, v0.4.1rc2 pushed to stable
386 2011-11-04 15:05:54 <invisiblemonk> oh god, 4chon facepalm. again.
387 2011-11-04 15:08:59 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #83: FAILURE in 31 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/83/
388 2011-11-04 15:10:10 <gavinandresen> shut up BlueMattBot, that is NOT my fault.
389 2011-11-04 15:16:17 <copumpkin> it should write EPIC FAIL
390 2011-11-04 15:16:23 <copumpkin> failure is an archaic term these days
391 2011-11-04 16:20:55 <CIA-34> libbitcoin: genjix * rf188b516c8dc / (4 files in 3 dirs): string_repr() -> pretty()
392 2011-11-04 16:23:26 <gmaxwell> From the forum:
393 2011-11-04 16:23:27 <gmaxwell> "Bitcoin wants to connect to store.esellerate.net on TCP port 443 (https)"
394 2011-11-04 16:23:31 <gmaxwell> ^ uuuuhhh
395 2011-11-04 16:24:03 <UukGoblin> https?
396 2011-11-04 16:24:48 <ciscoftw> ummm, any reason why i woulnt be able to locate/find the "bitcoin.conf" file? i can run bitcoin/bitcoind services... the "/.bitcoin" directory exists but there's no config file, i suppose i could just add one -but this seems strange?
397 2011-11-04 16:25:30 <gmaxwell> ciscoftw: there isn't one by default, you can create one.
398 2011-11-04 16:25:37 <UukGoblin> ciscoftw, it should be ~/.bitcoin, not /.bitcoin
399 2011-11-04 16:25:58 <UukGoblin> the "~" expands to your home directory
400 2011-11-04 16:26:08 <ciscoftw> i unpacked to /root/
401 2011-11-04 16:26:25 <gmaxwell> Running random daemons as root is generally pretty inadvisable.
402 2011-11-04 16:26:26 <UukGoblin> running bitcoin as root is soooo asking for trouble
403 2011-11-04 16:26:32 <ciscoftw> but regardless if one isnt there by defalut thats why i cant find it via locate
404 2011-11-04 16:26:41 <ciscoftw> no really (running as root)
405 2011-11-04 16:26:46 <ciscoftw> *not
406 2011-11-04 16:27:28 <UukGoblin> bitcoin is not mature software yet, possibilities for bugs are endless
407 2011-11-04 16:27:45 <UukGoblin> running it as root will potentially open your computer to serious attacks
408 2011-11-04 16:27:57 <gmaxwell> E.g. what happens if there is a some bug coded in the code that deletes the db logs and it manages to delete a chunk of your file system?
409 2011-11-04 16:28:18 <ciscoftw> :( i suppose i would agree with that
410 2011-11-04 16:28:27 <gmaxwell> Yes, bugs are bad but at least if it does not run as root the system will still be operable.
411 2011-11-04 16:28:47 <ciscoftw> no, i digress
412 2011-11-04 16:29:34 <ciscoftw> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Running_Bitcoin, indicates that a config file is created by default, your sure that one shouldnt be there?
413 2011-11-04 16:29:57 <gmaxwell> ciscoftw: I'm not sure, but if you're not finding it then thats a pretty strong indicator.
414 2011-11-04 16:29:58 <Eliel> ciscoftw: in my experience it's not created automatically.
415 2011-11-04 16:30:11 <gmaxwell> "The configuration file is not automatically created; you can create it using your favorite plain-text editor."
416 2011-11-04 16:30:12 <ciscoftw> via windows it is
417 2011-11-04 16:30:37 <gmaxwell> ciscoftw: it says explicitly that its not created by default (in the text I quoted), where does it say it is?
418 2011-11-04 16:30:43 <ciscoftw> many thanx gmaxwell/Eliel
419 2011-11-04 16:31:07 <gmaxwell> omg. midnight magic is in floodoff mode again!
420 2011-11-04 16:31:33 <ciscoftw> apprently i cant read all that well :) ...thanx for info guys
421 2011-11-04 16:31:37 <gmaxwell> No problem.
422 2011-11-04 16:37:25 <Eliel> would make configuring bitcoin much nicer if it did pre-generate a bitcoin.conf with commented out examples and explanations on what they do.
423 2011-11-04 16:38:57 <UukGoblin> it could even generate a password at random
424 2011-11-04 16:40:38 <gavinandresen> ... as long as it didn't 'help' me when I mis-typed -datadir=foo ...    in that case I'd much rather get a "missing foo/.bitcoin.conf"
425 2011-11-04 16:40:46 <CIA-34> libbitcoin: genjix * rad20fe151b47 / (Makefile src/transaction.cpp tests/script-test.cpp): Shared code between serialiser and hash_transaction.
426 2011-11-04 16:41:26 <UukGoblin> true
427 2011-11-04 16:41:57 <gavinandresen> Anybody willing to help sanity test:   https://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.5.0/test/
428 2011-11-04 16:42:01 <UukGoblin> but putting random stuff in ~/.appname is quite a standard practice by a lot of programs
429 2011-11-04 16:42:13 <gavinandresen> ... rc2 binaries built with gitian
430 2011-11-04 16:45:52 <midnightmagic> hrm..
431 2011-11-04 16:50:45 <CIA-34> libbitcoin: genjix * rf3987a4e2486 / (15 files in 8 dirs): s/^ :/ :/ as per std style. means that constructor initialiser list won't align with constructor parameters. improves readability.
432 2011-11-04 17:37:19 <eueueu> Hi, I tried to run bitcoin 05 rc2 on debian 64 and got this error: /home/leonardo/Desktop/bitcoin-0.5.0rc2-linux/bin/64/bitcoin-qt: error while loading shared libraries: libminiupnpc.so.8: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
433 2011-11-04 17:37:27 <eueueu> the app do not run
434 2011-11-04 17:37:51 <eueueu> Is it a known problem? hot to fix it?
435 2011-11-04 17:38:06 <eueueu> It's a bitcoin bug or any problem on my ystem?
436 2011-11-04 17:38:43 <[eval]> try `sudo apt-get install libminiupnpc8` and see if that works?
437 2011-11-04 17:39:21 <eueueu> ok, will see
438 2011-11-04 17:40:44 <[eval]> i'm using graingert's PPA and it automatically downloaded that for me
439 2011-11-04 17:40:58 <[eval]> (but i'm running ubuntu, not plain debian)
440 2011-11-04 17:40:59 <eueueu> hum the package doesn't exist
441 2011-11-04 17:41:03 <eueueu> on debian
442 2011-11-04 17:43:12 <eueueu> this package exist: libminiupnpc5
443 2011-11-04 17:43:17 <[eval]> looks like debian is on 5... yeah.
444 2011-11-04 17:43:28 <eueueu> I'll install so
445 2011-11-04 17:44:44 <[eval]> i doubt 5 will work unless you rebuild from source with 5... and i have no idea if you can even build with 5
446 2011-11-04 17:45:34 <eueueu> didn't work
447 2011-11-04 17:46:18 <eueueu> Is it a problem with debian or next bitcoin version probably will fix it?
448 2011-11-04 17:47:33 <[eval]> debian's libminiupnpc version is outdated... you can try installing the .deb for ubuntu
449 2011-11-04 17:48:42 <eueueu> will be a hack
450 2011-11-04 17:48:48 <[eval]> hrm... nm... it actually came from the PPA itself
451 2011-11-04 17:49:35 <[eval]> https://launchpad.net/~bitcoin/+archive/bitcoin <--
452 2011-11-04 17:49:44 <eueueu> will see
453 2011-11-04 17:50:48 <[eval]> a better hack would be to just compile miniupnpc 8 from source
454 2011-11-04 17:51:13 <[eval]> http://miniupnp.free.fr/files/
455 2011-11-04 17:52:09 <eueueu> I don't have experience in compiling. I'm newbie. But when final version be released, what will happen to newbie users of debian that want to use bitcoin 0.5
456 2011-11-04 17:54:38 <[eval]> hopefully a better distribution channel will be added for debian
457 2011-11-04 17:55:03 <helo> is graingert "DA"?
458 2011-11-04 17:58:46 <helo> nope
459 2011-11-04 18:35:41 <CIA-34> libbitcoin: genjix * r3e4ee498b0a6 / (4 files in 4 dirs): Safe deserializer. Throws end_of_stream if premature end of data_stream. Caught inside channel when deconstructing messages and signals the handler with error::bad_stream
460 2011-11-04 18:45:01 <eueue> Hi, I tried to run bitcoin 05 rc2 on debian 64 and got this error: /home/leonardo/Desktop/bitcoin-0.5.0rc2-linux/bin/64/bitcoin-qt: error while loading shared libraries: libminiupnpc.so.8: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
461 2011-11-04 18:45:31 <eueue> Is it possible include this file on the bitcoin installation?
462 2011-11-04 18:46:03 <eueue> debian doesn't have this version of miniupnpc
463 2011-11-04 18:47:12 <gavinandresen> Sounds like bitcoin-qt.pro needs to be taught to link against libminiupnpc.a ....
464 2011-11-04 18:48:03 <gmaxwell> Does _anything_ have that version? I thought we used a bleeding edge one. (I wouldn't know I UPNP=  my makes)
465 2011-11-04 18:51:08 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: no, sounds like whoever made the deb left out the dependency
466 2011-11-04 18:51:24 <luke-jr> linking to .a is BAD, k?
467 2011-11-04 18:51:33 <helo> i think he's using ubuntu's package on debian
468 2011-11-04 18:51:48 <eueue> no
469 2011-11-04 18:52:04 <helo> oh, mb
470 2011-11-04 18:52:04 <luke-jr> eueue: do you have miniupnp installed?
471 2011-11-04 18:52:06 <eueue> I'm using the tar and extracted the files
472 2011-11-04 18:52:10 <eueue> to a folder
473 2011-11-04 18:52:18 <luke-jr> &
474 2011-11-04 18:52:21 <helo> ahhh heh
475 2011-11-04 18:52:27 <eueue> yes but the version on debian is 5
476 2011-11-04 18:52:33 <eueue> and bitcoin need 8
477 2011-11-04 18:52:38 <luke-jr> i c
478 2011-11-04 18:52:56 <luke-jr> right solution: use the debian package
479 2011-11-04 18:53:01 <luke-jr> wrong solution: gavin can link to .a
480 2011-11-04 18:53:41 <helo> if you want to use it from tar, you'll have to handle the dependencies manually
481 2011-11-04 18:53:43 <luke-jr> insane solution that will probably not work: LD_PRELOAD=/path/to/libminiupnpc.whatever ./bitcoin-qt
482 2011-11-04 18:54:01 <eueue> http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/libminiupnpc5
483 2011-11-04 18:54:07 <helo> do you use miniupnp for anything?
484 2011-11-04 18:54:14 <eueue> need to be 8 that is not even on sid
485 2011-11-04 18:54:35 <eueue> no, just installed to see if bitcoin works
486 2011-11-04 18:54:45 <eueue> I'm newbie
487 2011-11-04 18:55:22 <helo> you can uninstall it and download/install miniupnp8 from source... although i guess you may get into dependency hell if it requires newer version of other things in debian packages
488 2011-11-04 18:55:48 <eueue> hum
489 2011-11-04 18:56:14 <eueue> will just wait so, as appear not have a simple solution
490 2011-11-04 18:57:41 <helo> "use the debian package"
491 2011-11-04 19:15:45 <CIA-34> bitcoin: Chris Moore master * r2989b46 / (src/qt/bitcoin.qrc src/qt/locale/bitcoin_en.ts): Add English translation to fix plural(s). - http://git.io/PhQY6g
492 2011-11-04 19:26:36 <genjix> nanotube: here?
493 2011-11-04 19:26:45 <nanotube> genjix: o/
494 2011-11-04 19:26:50 <PK> hi genjix :)
495 2011-11-04 19:27:02 <PK> long time no see
496 2011-11-04 19:27:37 <genjix> PK: hey, did we used to work on crystalspace together?
497 2011-11-04 19:27:42 <genjix> wasup :)
498 2011-11-04 19:27:55 <PK> yea, we met in Aachen, iirc
499 2011-11-04 19:28:20 <genjix> i remember.
500 2011-11-04 19:28:27 <genjix> are you coming to the bitcoin prague conference?
501 2011-11-04 19:28:39 <genjix> the one on bitcoin.org
502 2011-11-04 19:28:40 <PK> I didn't know there is one, when?
503 2011-11-04 19:28:49 <cocktopus> *facepalm*
504 2011-11-04 19:28:49 <genjix> http://conference.bitgroups.org/
505 2011-11-04 19:30:16 <abragin> crystalspace? are you its developer?
506 2011-11-04 19:30:31 <abragin> I remember crystal space from a decade ago at the very least
507 2011-11-04 19:30:36 <PK> 25th november is too short term, sorry. I'm already booked on that date.
508 2011-11-04 19:31:11 <PK> Otherwise I would have loved to join.
509 2011-11-04 19:31:45 <PK> abragin: it's been ages since I last wrote anything for crystalspace :(
510 2011-11-04 19:31:52 <genjix> abragin: yeah we were.
511 2011-11-04 19:35:36 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: the .so deps on the linux build is just that static wasnt specified when the build defaults were changed
512 2011-11-04 19:36:14 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: so it is an easy fix?
513 2011-11-04 19:37:06 <genjix> PK: you still in switzerland btw?
514 2011-11-04 19:37:11 <PK> genjix: yes
515 2011-11-04 19:37:34 <genjix> there's quite a few people in switzerland and regular meetings for bitcoin
516 2011-11-04 19:37:47 <abragin> cool, nice to meet you then ;)
517 2011-11-04 19:38:06 <genjix> thx :)
518 2011-11-04 19:38:40 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: I removed the linux.tar.gz from the 0.5.0/test directory on SourceForge, sounds like we'll spin a rc3 as soon as the Linux and Mac deployment issues are fixed...
519 2011-11-04 19:38:48 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: yes, it should be
520 2011-11-04 19:38:49 <PK> genjix: really?
521 2011-11-04 19:39:01 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #84: STILL FAILING in 21 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/84/
522 2011-11-04 19:39:08 <BlueMatt> arg, still didnt fix that...
523 2011-11-04 19:39:15 <genjix> PK: yeah justmoon and TD are both from bern
524 2011-11-04 19:39:26 <PK> I work in Bern.
525 2011-11-04 19:39:48 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: are the deps not also there on linux bitcoind?
526 2011-11-04 19:40:09 <genjix> PK: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6725.0
527 2011-11-04 19:40:10 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: ldd -v bitcoind  looks fine
528 2011-11-04 19:40:12 <PK> we should almost organize some bitcoin party in Bern, maybe on the Bundesplatz ^^
529 2011-11-04 19:40:26 <genjix> no idea what that is :)
530 2011-11-04 19:41:29 <PK> Bundesplatz = ... think of the yard of the Whitehouse in the USA, just open to the public.
531 2011-11-04 19:42:07 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: (I just checked the 64-bit bitcoin-qt/bitcoind, though; I assume 32-bit is the same, ldd on my 64-bit box claims they are not a dynamic executable)
532 2011-11-04 19:42:23 <genjix> if you're ever in amsterdam you should hit up caedes. he has a big group of people and a house there
533 2011-11-04 19:42:24 <BlueMatt> yea, it should be
534 2011-11-04 19:42:27 <PK> http://www.g26.ch/abb_bern_bundesplatz_05.jpg
535 2011-11-04 19:43:00 <genjix> also we have a chan (little quieter than this one) if you wanna lurk #bitcoinconsultancy
536 2011-11-04 19:43:31 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: it looks like there is no dynamic/static option in bitcoin-qt.pro
537 2011-11-04 19:43:32 <PK> genjix: I'll probably meet with sueastside and a few others in nederlands in January.
538 2011-11-04 19:43:54 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: someone just needs to add the necessary link flags and some ifdef STATIC's
539 2011-11-04 19:44:03 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: mmm.... someone....
540 2011-11-04 19:44:29 <BlueMatt> got a bit or work to do...Ill write it if noone has done it in like the next hour...
541 2011-11-04 19:45:37 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: cool, no big hurry, I'm not going to rebuild until the mac issues are fixed anyway
542 2011-11-04 19:46:41 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: fair enough
543 2011-11-04 21:20:06 <snimpy> ;;bc,diffchange
544 2011-11-04 21:20:14 <gribble> Estimated percent change in difficulty this period | -1.45411831205 % based on data since last change | -2.38833862958 % based on data for last three days
545 2011-11-04 21:20:21 <snimpy> ;;bc,estimate
546 2011-11-04 21:20:22 <gribble> 1185962.16613040
547 2011-11-04 21:20:42 <snimpy> ;;bc,nethash