1 2012-05-29 00:14:32 <BlueMatt> D34TH: you can always find the latest git version of bitcoind+bitcoin-qt for windows and linux at http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/ws/
2 2012-05-29 00:15:08 <D34TH> have my children now.
3 2012-05-29 00:15:36 <D34TH> last build apr 26
4 2012-05-29 00:15:37 <D34TH> :/
5 2012-05-29 00:15:52 <BlueMatt> wtf...goddamit
6 2012-05-29 00:15:58 <BlueMatt> lemme go fix it (again)
7 2012-05-29 00:17:39 <luke-jr> XD
8 2012-05-29 00:21:14 <BlueMatt> building
9 2012-05-29 00:21:25 <D34TH> :D
10 2012-05-29 00:23:32 <D34TH> bitcoin in progress
11 2012-05-29 00:23:33 <D34TH> :D
12 2012-05-29 00:23:51 <Joric> rather in regress
13 2012-05-29 00:24:20 <D34TH> bluematt
14 2012-05-29 00:24:30 <D34TH> of you can make -j4 on the linux
15 2012-05-29 00:24:36 <D34TH> why not make -j4 on the windows
16 2012-05-29 00:24:39 <BlueMatt> what?
17 2012-05-29 00:24:40 <Joric> there just was a 18k sell price went down to 5.02
18 2012-05-29 00:26:32 <D34TH> http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/316/console
19 2012-05-29 00:26:53 <D34TH> make -j4
20 2012-05-29 00:27:01 <D34TH> make -j2 -f makefile.linux-mingw DEPSDIR=/mnt/mingw bitcoind.exe
21 2012-05-29 00:27:54 <D34TH> lukes new push: disable warnings
22 2012-05-29 00:28:11 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: there werent any warnings for quite a while
23 2012-05-29 00:28:26 <BlueMatt> D34TH: because its on a vm with only 2 cores and other things run on that vm?
24 2012-05-29 00:28:28 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: because they were disabled/hidden
25 2012-05-29 00:28:43 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: no, even when we had all warnings on
26 2012-05-29 00:28:45 <D34TH> then why j4
27 2012-05-29 00:28:57 <splatster> luke-jr: FYI, it just fails when sendmany sees an addy with 0
28 2012-05-29 00:29:05 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: code doesn't grow warnings :p
29 2012-05-29 00:29:21 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: when people add code that gets warnings it does
30 2012-05-29 00:29:50 <BlueMatt> we had sign comparison warnings on for the past month, and we didnt have any errors for most of that time
31 2012-05-29 00:41:52 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #316: FAILURE in 20 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/316/
32 2012-05-29 00:41:53 <BlueMattBot> * pieter.wuille: gettransaction RPC for non-wallet transactions
33 2012-05-29 00:41:54 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: change button tooltip on sign message page for copy to clipboard as it was missleading
34 2012-05-29 00:41:55 <BlueMattBot> * gavinandresen: Windows build: compile against openssl 1.0.1b
35 2012-05-29 00:41:56 <BlueMattBot> * gavinandresen: Update openssl version
36 2012-05-29 00:41:57 <BlueMattBot> * gavinandresen: Check earlier for blocks with duplicate transactions. Fixes #1167
37 2012-05-29 00:41:58 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: remove references to bitcoin-wx from comment in init.cpp
38 2012-05-29 00:41:59 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: fix compiler warning "suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth
39 2012-05-29 00:42:00 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: fix DEPENDPATH in the project file, as json has no include sub-dir and src was in twice
40 2012-05-29 00:42:12 <BlueMattBot> * laanwj: simplified qrcode icon that scales gracefully to 16x16
41 2012-05-29 00:42:13 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: change text on message.ui from "Copy to Clipboard" to "Copy Signature" and
42 2012-05-29 00:42:14 <BlueMattBot> * greg: Bugfix: %-12I64d is not valid and causes the parameter to be skipped, use %12"PRI64d" instead
43 2012-05-29 00:42:15 <BlueMattBot> * pieter.wuille: Fix addrman crashes
44 2012-05-29 00:42:16 <BlueMattBot> * laanwj: Hide UI immediately after leaving the main loop.
45 2012-05-29 00:42:17 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: passphrasedialog: change dialog title to "Passphrase Dialog" / remove style-sheet for bold font and use Qt Designer option / remove an unused label default-text and remove an obsolete clear()'
46 2012-05-29 00:42:18 <BlueMattBot> * laanwj: Move back setPlaceholderText to code, from xml, as this broke building with Qt 4.6
47 2012-05-29 00:42:19 <BlueMattBot> * laanwj: Make user action more straightforward in address book
48 2012-05-29 00:42:20 <BlueMattBot> * greg: Increase client version to 0.6.99
49 2012-05-29 00:42:23 <D34TH> type /sp
50 2012-05-29 00:42:25 <D34TH> :D
51 2012-05-29 00:42:28 <BlueMatt> yay megaspam...
52 2012-05-29 00:42:32 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: add 2 comments to transactionview.cpp to ensure no one moves setPlaceholderText to the XML file (after this all parts in the code that use setPlaceholderText have this comment
53 2012-05-29 00:42:33 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: optionsdialog.cpp: rename "Start Bitcoin on window system startup" to "Start Bitcoin on system login" and move it to Main / hide "Window" Options on Mac as there are currently none available / remove an unused variable / add Alt-Shortcuts where they were missing / allow translation of "default"
54 2012-05-29 00:42:34 <BlueMattBot> * jgarzik: CTxMemPool::accept(): do not log FetchInputs failure redundantly
55 2012-05-29 00:42:35 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: guiutil.cpp/.h: fix a -Wreorder compiler warning and make constructor for ToolTipToRichTextFilter explicit
56 2012-05-29 00:42:36 <BlueMattBot> * phil.kaufmann: if there is no current block number available display N/A on totalBlocks label, instead of 0, which can not ever be true
57 2012-05-29 00:42:37 <BlueMattBot> * pieter.wuille: IPv6 node support
58 2012-05-29 00:42:38 <BlueMattBot> * pieter.wuille: Limited relaying/storing of foreign addresses
59 2012-05-29 00:42:38 <D34TH> D:
60 2012-05-29 00:42:39 <BlueMattBot> * pieter.wuille: Use NET_ identifiers in CNetAddr::GetGroup()
61 2012-05-29 00:42:40 <BlueMattBot> * pieter.wuille: Keep port information for local addresses
62 2012-05-29 00:43:07 <D34TH> IRC notifier plugin: Sending notification to suspect: ubpd34th
63 2012-05-29 00:43:11 <D34TH> wat
64 2012-05-29 00:43:26 <BlueMatt> it pms everyone it thinks may have caused it
65 2012-05-29 00:43:39 <BlueMatt> when it doesnt lock up and stop polling properly it works well...
66 2012-05-29 00:43:39 <D34TH> but thats not my ircname
67 2012-05-29 00:43:50 <BlueMatt> wait, it pmd you that?
68 2012-05-29 00:43:55 <D34TH> no
69 2012-05-29 00:44:12 <BlueMatt> ok
70 2012-05-29 00:44:47 <D34TH> you got a sha256 error
71 2012-05-29 00:44:50 <BlueMatt> hmm...part of that may be the build system itself, Ill shut off jenkins and look at it in the morning
72 2012-05-29 00:46:03 <D34TH> D:
73 2012-05-29 00:46:35 <D34TH> you can always find the latest git version of bitcoind+bitcoin-qt for windows and linux
74 2012-05-29 00:46:36 <D34TH> lies
75 2012-05-29 02:07:24 <rsingh> How complex can my bitcoin wallet encryption key be?
76 2012-05-29 03:17:27 <osmosis> rsingh, i tried to look it up but didnt see any answers. Maybe ill put it on stackexchange
77 2012-05-29 03:25:48 <rsingh> Thank you osmosis
78 2012-05-29 03:26:10 <osmosis> rsingh, http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3864/how-complex-can-my-bitcoin-wallet-encryption-key-be
79 2012-05-29 03:26:16 <osmosis> no answers yet
80 2012-05-29 03:26:41 <Diablo-D3> the correct answer is
81 2012-05-29 03:26:46 <Diablo-D3> "as complex as it needs to be"
82 2012-05-29 03:27:28 <rsingh> Diablo-D3: Is the program not limited in its allowance of length or complexity?
83 2012-05-29 03:28:08 <rsingh> If I wanted to use a password of some 2048 characters, with characters and numerals from foreign alphabets the world over, would it reject such a password?
84 2012-05-29 03:28:28 <Diablo-D3> Im pretty sure its unicode safe
85 2012-05-29 03:28:36 <Diablo-D3> ask gmaxwell or sipa
86 2012-05-29 03:29:35 <rsingh> Hopefully they'll just respond on stackexchange
87 2012-05-29 03:30:07 <Diablo-D3> why would they?
88 2012-05-29 03:31:18 <rsingh> Perhaps to support the free exchange of information in a public forum, such that if another person has the same question, they may find the answer without asking anyone else.
89 2012-05-29 03:34:43 <Diablo-D3> rsingh: yes, but that'd require the people who know the answer to waste time answering the question
90 2012-05-29 03:34:58 <Diablo-D3> the act of answering is not free and predisposes the condition of knowing the question exists
91 2012-05-29 03:38:44 <rsingh> Your mention of their names in proximity to the question negates that probability by a certain margin. In any case, thank you for your suggestion.
92 2012-05-29 03:39:19 <Diablo-D3> rsingh: btw, the easiest way to find out if this works is to test it
93 2012-05-29 03:40:44 <osmosis> or look at the code
94 2012-05-29 03:43:34 <osmosis> search for Passphrase in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/wallet.cpp
95 2012-05-29 03:49:52 <rsingh> Thanks osmosis. Looks like it uses gpg standards, which means it's fairly limitless
96 2012-05-29 03:56:16 <osmosis> when i create a new receiving address in bitcoin-qt 0.6.2-beta, it creates it in the list without even highlighting it, so I have to scroll through and find it before I can copy it to my clipboard.
97 2012-05-29 06:17:06 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: rebroad reopened pull request 1395 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1395> || rebroad opened pull request 1395 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1395>
98 2012-05-29 08:55:42 <SomeoneWeird> https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-server/issues/73
99 2012-05-29 08:55:44 <SomeoneWeird> Anyone know about this?
100 2012-05-29 10:53:52 <egecko> re
101 2012-05-29 10:57:37 <sipa> wb
102 2012-05-29 11:40:44 <TimothyA1> *** glibc detected *** /usr/lib/bitcoin/bitcoind: malloc(): smallbin double linked list corrupted: 0x00000000036c7c10 ***
103 2012-05-29 11:42:27 <sipa> which version?
104 2012-05-29 11:42:59 <TimothyA1> does the bitcoin version from the ubuntu repository show the version correctly?
105 2012-05-29 11:43:06 <TimothyA1> gimme about 4 hours while it starts up so I can check
106 2012-05-29 11:43:28 <sipa> no, but if it doesn't, it is 0.6.2
107 2012-05-29 11:43:40 <sipa> 4 hours :S
108 2012-05-29 11:43:44 <TimothyA1> yeah
109 2012-05-29 11:43:51 <sipa> are you running this on a 386?
110 2012-05-29 11:43:54 <gmaxwell> Hopefully you're not being serious?
111 2012-05-29 11:43:57 <TimothyA1> for just loading the blockchain on an machine with 8GB DDR3 and i7 processor
112 2012-05-29 11:44:10 <sipa> what disk?
113 2012-05-29 11:44:12 <TimothyA1> well, 4 hours is perhaps exagerating, but it's painfully excruciatingly long
114 2012-05-29 11:44:24 <TimothyA1> sipa: high-speed NAS, so they say
115 2012-05-29 11:44:46 <TimothyA1> I just know that litecoin exhibits the same long-load times
116 2012-05-29 11:45:08 <sipa> right, putting it on a network filesystem is a bad idea
117 2012-05-29 11:45:21 <TimothyA1> Bitcoin version vCLIENT_VERSION_MAJOR.CLIENT_VERSION_MINOR.CLIENT_VERSION_REVISION.CLIENT_VERSION_BUILD-g8ff1873-beta
118 2012-05-29 11:45:22 <gmaxwell> TimothyA1: did you happen to purchase that nas from an oxy-moron who works for military intelligence?
119 2012-05-29 11:45:25 <gmaxwell> :)
120 2012-05-29 11:45:42 <TimothyA1> gmaxwell: vps, not much choice in what gets used for the disks
121 2012-05-29 11:46:06 <gmaxwell> Six seconds on my i7 systems. But yes, thats an area that needs improvement.
122 2012-05-29 11:46:25 <sipa> 5 minutes on my vps
123 2012-05-29 11:46:30 <gmaxwell> crazy.
124 2012-05-29 11:46:45 <sipa> slow IOPS i guess
125 2012-05-29 11:47:16 <sipa> thankfully, i only restart the bitcoind there every few months
126 2012-05-29 11:48:06 <sipa> anyway, that double free is worrysome
127 2012-05-29 11:48:20 <sipa> which kind of RPC commands do you send there?
128 2012-05-29 11:48:33 <TimothyA1> me?
129 2012-05-29 11:48:37 <TimothyA1> getinfo()
130 2012-05-29 11:48:39 <sipa> yes
131 2012-05-29 11:48:44 <TimothyA1> but it's painfully slow at replying, too
132 2012-05-29 11:49:10 <sipa> getinfo tries to create a block
133 2012-05-29 11:49:25 <gmaxwell> it's not a double free, it's malloc arena corruption I think.
134 2012-05-29 11:49:37 <TimothyA1> oh hey, it loaded faster this time
135 2012-05-29 11:49:44 <TimothyA1> block index 451337ms
136 2012-05-29 11:49:48 <gmaxwell> TimothyA1: we mean normally, e.g. what was going on at the time of the crash?
137 2012-05-29 11:49:59 <TimothyA1> gmaxwell: well, I wouldn't know :P
138 2012-05-29 11:50:18 <gmaxwell> TimothyA1: Can you guess?
139 2012-05-29 11:50:23 <gmaxwell> Does this node mine?
140 2012-05-29 11:50:27 <TimothyA1> no, it does not
141 2012-05-29 11:50:32 <gmaxwell> does it send funds?
142 2012-05-29 11:50:35 <TimothyA1> yes
143 2012-05-29 11:50:38 <TimothyA1> and receive
144 2012-05-29 11:50:46 <TimothyA1> send/receive funds, getinfo()
145 2012-05-29 11:50:49 <TimothyA1> that's about all it does
146 2012-05-29 11:50:55 <gmaxwell> so you call getinfo / listtransactions ?
147 2012-05-29 11:51:07 <gmaxwell> and sendtoaddress ?
148 2012-05-29 11:51:18 <sipa> do you use accounts?
149 2012-05-29 11:51:20 <TimothyA1> gmaxwell: yes
150 2012-05-29 11:51:21 <TimothyA1> sipa: no
151 2012-05-29 11:52:07 <sipa> hmm
152 2012-05-29 11:52:09 <sipa> not good
153 2012-05-29 11:52:26 <gmaxwell> we've had an issue opened and unresolved on some heap corruption producing the same error: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/944
154 2012-05-29 12:22:15 <BlueMatt> I give up, Im not rebasing cblockstore again, its too much of a mess with some of the latest merges...Im gonna recode it from the ground up (for, what, the 4th time now?)
155 2012-05-29 12:23:34 <sipa> BlueMatt: maybe you can try to avoid code moving in the pull request, only change class/method names
156 2012-05-29 12:24:18 <sipa> that should make rebasing easier (though i hope no more rebases will be necessary)
157 2012-05-29 12:24:19 <BlueMatt> yea Ill probably do that this time
158 2012-05-29 12:24:47 <BlueMatt> though thats rarely the major issue, its just decisions I made based on where the code /was/ that no longer make sense
159 2012-05-29 12:25:15 <gmaxwell> Sign that the decision wasn't excellent perhaps.
160 2012-05-29 12:26:13 <BlueMatt> its more of minor optimizations/cleaning up apis when there is no performance impact, that now effect performance because some feature of the old api is now used that wasnt used before
161 2012-05-29 12:47:53 <user_> Hi, is far way of have address with expire time
162 2012-05-29 12:47:56 <user_> ?
163 2012-05-29 12:48:29 <user_> address that i can't send coins after a specific date
164 2012-05-29 12:49:57 <gmaxwell> No. That isn't possible.
165 2012-05-29 12:50:28 <gmaxwell> Generally you should just use addresses only once, and provide it right before usage, this removes many of the reasons you might want to expire one.
166 2012-05-29 12:51:50 <user_> what if a merchant want the customer not send coins after a specific date?
167 2012-05-29 12:52:31 <luke-jr> user_: you can automate sending it back
168 2012-05-29 12:52:40 <gmaxwell> gah.
169 2012-05-29 12:52:42 <gmaxwell> No you can't.
170 2012-05-29 12:52:53 <user_> hum
171 2012-05-29 12:52:57 <luke-jr> <gmaxwell> Dispute the non-determinism of the 'smart time' I like these criteria a lot. <-- huh?
172 2012-05-29 12:53:38 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: apparently half awake, revised to say 'in spite of' ... It's non-determinstic in that if you resync with a restored wallet you'll get a totally different ordering.
173 2012-05-29 12:54:37 <gmaxwell> (I'm too sleep deprived to do any code review or testing atm. so it didn't get an ack, only moral support)
174 2012-05-29 12:54:54 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: no, because the wallet stores the smart time <.<
175 2012-05-29 12:55:05 <gmaxwell> Notice the word 'restored'.
176 2012-05-29 12:55:19 <gmaxwell> (and yes, storing it is a grand idea.
177 2012-05-29 12:55:20 <gmaxwell> )
178 2012-05-29 12:55:40 <gmaxwell> If I saw a better way to do it I would have suggested it. I didn't and I like the described behavior.
179 2012-05-29 12:57:13 <user_> gmaxwell: i see it on your wiki page: Ability to mark keys as compromised and enable autosweeping of inputs that are sent to them
180 2012-05-29 12:57:42 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: oh, I see what you mean. yeah, that's pretty unavoidable (and already the case)
181 2012-05-29 12:57:58 <user_> but if my key is compromissed is because i don't have the private key
182 2012-05-29 12:58:39 <user_> so how to autosweepink keys that i don't have the private key
183 2012-05-29 12:58:45 <gmaxwell> user_: thats not the same thing though thats something the holder of a key can do. There is no way for someone who isn't the holder of a key to do that.
184 2012-05-29 12:59:17 <user_> doesn't make sense so
185 2012-05-29 12:59:31 <gmaxwell> someone who just knows your address can't tell if you have the private key or not. This is why things should be using something like https://gist.github.com/1237788
186 2012-05-29 13:01:38 <user_> ok
187 2012-05-29 13:03:42 <user_> gmaxwell: will be possible have in the client something like: don't send coins after day 5. The user can send but the link say you shouldn't
188 2012-05-29 13:04:42 <user_> the link user clicked have an expire time suggesting to not send after a specific time
189 2012-05-29 13:05:50 <gmaxwell> The URI scheme doesn't currently have a way to specify a time limit, but I suppose that could be added.
190 2012-05-29 13:07:01 <user_> example: if the user try to construct a transaction by clicking on a uri scheme with expire time. i think the client should refuse to send the coins after a specific date
191 2012-05-29 13:07:02 <graingert> mmmm uri bloat
192 2012-05-29 13:09:14 <gmaxwell> It doesn't sound completely crazy to me.
193 2012-05-29 13:10:13 <user_> ok
194 2012-05-29 13:15:55 <user_> hi, crazy question: with tablet or notebook... with gps, is it possible with uri scheme i specify the location where i did the payment, and after see this informations on the client?
195 2012-05-29 13:15:59 <helo> so a web app could send an email with a URI, and only have to listen on the corresponding address for a finite period of time...
196 2012-05-29 13:16:09 <helo> sounds like a good idea to me
197 2012-05-29 13:17:53 <user_> So i could see on a map the places i did payments
198 2012-05-29 13:18:33 <user_> something like foursquare of my payments
199 2012-05-29 13:20:27 <helo> anything is possible, but you have to weight the usefulness against the cost to implementors. i suspect the 'expire time' is worth it, but i don't see how the GPS location would be useful outside of a few novelty applications
200 2012-05-29 13:22:32 <user_> gps location is just to the user see for example: in a year what was the places i did bitcoin payments
201 2012-05-29 13:22:46 <user_> kind of a hobby
202 2012-05-29 13:23:05 <user_> map hobby
203 2012-05-29 13:23:38 <user_> not something very important
204 2012-05-29 13:23:59 <user_> just ideas for bitcoin clients devs
205 2012-05-29 13:24:02 <helo> that kind of thing could be added to mobile phone bitcoin apps without being added to the URI spec (so without burdening all client developers)
206 2012-05-29 13:24:24 <helo> so every time you make a payment, it logs the current GPS location of the phone in the app
207 2012-05-29 13:26:23 <user_> i think can be uri spec. so i could see the info on any client, not only mobiles
208 2012-05-29 13:26:43 <user_> but ok
209 2012-05-29 13:26:53 <user_> i'm just a newbie
210 2012-05-29 13:27:05 <helo> not a bad idea :)
211 2012-05-29 13:27:23 <helo> but /probably/ not likely to gain consensus to the extent to get it added to the URI spec
212 2012-05-29 13:28:23 <helo> considering the 'cost to implementors' is a high priority to the devs
213 2012-05-29 13:42:06 <graingert> user_: just use RDF
214 2012-05-29 13:42:27 <graingert> tbh RDF should be used for the temporal parts
215 2012-05-29 13:46:07 <graingert> there shouldn't really be a need for anything more than an address
216 2012-05-29 13:46:16 <graingert> everything else is bloat
217 2012-05-29 14:09:41 <Eliel> this pull doesn't apply cleanly on 6.2.0, does anyone know if it depends on any code changes done after 6.2.0 release? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1386/files
218 2012-05-29 14:11:46 <luke-jr> Eliel: you mean 0.6.2? :P
219 2012-05-29 14:12:40 <Eliel> umm, yes
220 2012-05-29 14:15:07 <helo> using RDF for everything is equivalent to allowing arbitrary variable/value pairs in the URI, but not requiring support for any of them, and not having any consensus on what a particular variable is used for?
221 2012-05-29 14:15:25 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: rebroad opened pull request 1396 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1396>
222 2012-05-29 14:15:41 <helo> so a human will read and interpret the values, and construct the transaction accordingly
223 2012-05-29 14:28:07 <D34TH> yeay after sleeping on it i got another error
224 2012-05-29 14:28:08 <D34TH> incomplete type
225 2012-05-29 14:28:09 <D34TH> this hates me
226 2012-05-29 14:34:56 <gmaxwell> damn you jeff for starting that braindead thread.
227 2012-05-29 14:35:07 <gmaxwell> rebroad: There is _no_ single txn block issue.
228 2012-05-29 14:35:25 <luke-jr> (nor is free-txn relay limits pro-miner)
229 2012-05-29 14:38:40 <gmaxwell> 1.73% single txn blocks implies 10.47 seconds of processing latency to get txn added after a block was found, which sounds basically reasonable with the current software.
230 2012-05-29 14:39:56 <Eliel> it's that slow to process txn?
231 2012-05-29 14:41:29 <gmaxwell> Eliel: it certantly can be if you're taking a disk rotation for every input.
232 2012-05-29 14:41:30 <BlueMatt> no, if I read that right, it takes, on average, 10.47 seconds for miners to get new txes to add to new blocks after a block comes out
233 2012-05-29 14:41:37 <D34TH> alright time to make a windows vm with qt in it specifically for bitcoin so i dont have any dep issues with mingw
234 2012-05-29 14:41:46 <BlueMatt> D34TH: jenkins built
235 2012-05-29 14:41:53 <BlueMatt> I just hadnt updated openssl
236 2012-05-29 14:41:59 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: not just get.. but to get them added to the blocks they produce, build the hash tree, etc.
237 2012-05-29 14:42:05 <BlueMatt> yea
238 2012-05-29 14:42:20 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I suspect fetchinputs is the slowest part actually
239 2012-05-29 14:43:02 <gmaxwell> well on a non-ssd fetching a single input will take several times the disk rotational latency.
240 2012-05-29 14:43:11 <gmaxwell> unless it happens to still be in cache.
241 2012-05-29 14:43:23 <luke-jr> right now, I think we're fetching all the inputs twice actually
242 2012-05-29 14:43:29 <luke-jr> or maybe just in my txn_prio branch <.<
243 2012-05-29 14:43:32 <Eliel> ah, right, it still checks every transaction in the new block, even the ones that were already checked?
244 2012-05-29 14:43:45 <BlueMatt> I wrote this, but only tested it on tmpfs, if anyone wants to benchmark it on spinning disk, it would be interesting: https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoin/commit/b2c66029244cfc4081739800aa013a37dc045b19
245 2012-05-29 14:43:59 <BlueMatt> (addresses the slow fetchinputs part of block checking)
246 2012-05-29 14:44:35 <BlueMatt> that said, its based on old-cblockstore
247 2012-05-29 14:45:35 <D34TH> what was the issue
248 2012-05-29 14:45:37 <D34TH> how does one download from it
249 2012-05-29 14:46:37 <D34TH> bluematt how does one download from jenkins
250 2012-05-29 14:46:40 <BlueMatt> D34TH: grab bitcoin-qt.exe or bitcoind.exe from http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/ws/
251 2012-05-29 14:47:37 <D34TH> ahh i see it
252 2012-05-29 14:48:30 <luke-jr> 17% of listening nodes secure against CVE-2012-2459
253 2012-05-29 14:51:37 <D34TH> why is it saying out of sync
254 2012-05-29 14:55:06 <bonks> is there a way to throttle bandwidth on bitcoind-qt?
255 2012-05-29 14:55:28 <gmaxwell> bonks: just don't listen and you shouldn't have any particular need to throttle.
256 2012-05-29 14:55:43 <D34TH> why does the wallet keep falling out of sync
257 2012-05-29 14:55:44 <D34TH> oh, because it cant connect to irc
258 2012-05-29 14:55:51 <BlueMatt> bonks: do it on your network stack, or on your router
259 2012-05-29 14:56:04 <gmaxwell> D34TH: old testnet is basically completely broken.
260 2012-05-29 14:56:16 <gmaxwell> thats why we've reset it in 0.7.0
261 2012-05-29 14:56:18 <bonks> gmaxwell: actually i want to maximize my vps node bandwidth, which I connect to from my desktop, but only getting about 50kB/s
262 2012-05-29 14:56:37 <D34TH> yea, i got the latest git on windows
263 2012-05-29 14:57:12 <D34TH> it seems to fail on connecting to irc
264 2012-05-29 14:57:13 <D34TH> "oh you want to irc on ipv6? no."
265 2012-05-29 14:57:21 <gmaxwell> sipa: ^
266 2012-05-29 14:57:34 <BlueMatt> I was under the impression irc had finally been disabled by default...
267 2012-05-29 14:57:38 <BlueMatt> if its not, can we finally do that?
268 2012-05-29 14:57:41 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: testnet.
269 2012-05-29 14:57:55 <BlueMatt> ok, can we do it for mainnet now then?
270 2012-05-29 14:58:02 <gmaxwell> It is disabled for mainnet.
271 2012-05-29 14:58:07 <BlueMatt> ohhh
272 2012-05-29 14:58:08 <gmaxwell> Has been for quite some time.
273 2012-05-29 14:58:14 <BlueMatt> its only enabled for testnet, makes sense
274 2012-05-29 14:58:24 <gmaxwell> right, keeps the code working and it's more useful for testnet.
275 2012-05-29 14:58:40 <bonks> also when using "connect=IP" in bitcoin.conf, this is the only node my client connects to, is there a way to append nodes to the automatically detected ones?
276 2012-05-29 14:58:41 <BlueMatt> yep, makes sense
277 2012-05-29 14:58:48 <BlueMatt> plus we dont have testnet dnsseeds
278 2012-05-29 14:58:53 <gmaxwell> bonks: addnode
279 2012-05-29 14:59:37 <bonks> are there security issues with connecting to only one node though?
280 2012-05-29 14:59:55 <BlueMatt> yes
281 2012-05-29 14:59:57 <gmaxwell> bonks: is it your node?
282 2012-05-29 15:00:04 <gmaxwell> If so, then no.
283 2012-05-29 15:00:19 <gmaxwell> Unless you expect to DOS or isolate yourself.
284 2012-05-29 15:00:36 <bonks> gmaxwell: it is my node
285 2012-05-29 15:00:41 <BlueMatt> well yea, but if you dont 100% trust the node you are -connect ing to, then no
286 2012-05-29 15:00:59 <bonks> ok, i'm using it like a proxy
287 2012-05-29 15:01:16 <gmaxwell> Thats fine, even prudent.
288 2012-05-29 15:01:21 <D34TH> i had to noirc and then addnode
289 2012-05-29 15:01:22 <D34TH> but we are already 55k blocks in
290 2012-05-29 15:01:35 <gmaxwell> D34TH: on testnet? hm?
291 2012-05-29 15:01:58 <D34TH> 52779 blocks remaining
292 2012-05-29 15:01:59 <D34TH> :D
293 2012-05-29 15:02:18 <gmaxwell> nah, you're getting bogus data from old nodes or your not on new testnet.
294 2012-05-29 15:02:35 <gmaxwell> "blocks" : 6853,
295 2012-05-29 15:05:01 <D34TH> 7 active connections in client but only 4 in its irc channel
296 2012-05-29 15:05:02 <D34TH> i should write a script to start bitcoin testnet after grabbing all the ip addrs in the testnet3 channel
297 2012-05-29 15:05:05 <D34TH> thoughts?
298 2012-05-29 15:05:30 <gmaxwell> D34TH: I don't see what you think there is an issue?
299 2012-05-29 15:05:57 <helo> can difficulty increase or decrease by a certain amount each regarget?
300 2012-05-29 15:06:08 <gmaxwell> helo: 4x.
301 2012-05-29 15:06:14 <helo> either way?
302 2012-05-29 15:06:18 <gmaxwell> Correct.
303 2012-05-29 15:06:22 <helo> thanks
304 2012-05-29 15:06:32 <gmaxwell> (asymmetry creates neat issues, as seen by some of the altcoins)
305 2012-05-29 15:06:37 <gmaxwell> D34TH: I mean, getting a bogus block count is just cosmetic.
306 2012-05-29 15:08:01 <D34TH> why me
307 2012-05-29 15:08:02 <D34TH> ill just grab the blockchain from my linux node
308 2012-05-29 15:08:03 <D34TH> can never be easy
309 2012-05-29 15:10:49 <gmaxwell> D34TH: I think you're spazzing for no reason.
310 2012-05-29 15:10:51 <gmaxwell> Whats the issue?
311 2012-05-29 15:11:06 <D34TH> meh this will be a quicker blockchain download
312 2012-05-29 15:11:08 <D34TH> oh it crashed
313 2012-05-29 15:11:11 <D34TH> 11dbexception
314 2012-05-29 15:11:46 <D34TH> sec let me check the log
315 2012-05-29 15:12:54 <D34TH> __db_meta_setup: C:UsersD34THAppDataRoamingBitcoin\testnet3lkindex.dat: unexpected file type or format
316 2012-05-29 15:15:21 <gmaxwell> you can't copy the databases from running nodes.
317 2012-05-29 15:16:06 <D34TH> ponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
318 2012-05-29 15:16:09 <D34TH> fixed it
319 2012-05-29 15:16:10 <D34TH> had to copy the database
320 2012-05-29 15:16:25 <gmaxwell> yes, because you copied an unclean node. You're quite likely still corrupted.
321 2012-05-29 15:16:33 <gmaxwell> don't ever copy blkindex anymore.
322 2012-05-29 15:16:42 <gmaxwell> use --loadblock=blk000.dat
323 2012-05-29 15:17:19 <gmaxwell> of course, if you'd just left it alone you probably would have already been done considering that the whole testnet chain is like 5mbytes.
324 2012-05-29 15:19:06 <D34TH> i didnt
325 2012-05-29 15:20:28 <rebroad> why is an orphan tx considered an ERROR?
326 2012-05-29 15:21:30 <D34TH> gmaxwell should i delete the chain on that node?
327 2012-05-29 15:21:40 <gmaxwell> D34TH: stop.
328 2012-05-29 15:21:47 <D34TH> ok:(
329 2012-05-29 15:21:47 <gmaxwell> D34TH: Take a breath.
330 2012-05-29 15:22:20 <gmaxwell> D34TH: the block count is incorrect. If you have 6853 blocks you are in sync.
331 2012-05-29 15:22:35 <D34TH> its just cosmetic
332 2012-05-29 15:22:39 <gmaxwell> Right.
333 2012-05-29 15:23:02 <gmaxwell> However, in all that dancing you might have corrupted your database. I recommend deleting it just in case.
334 2012-05-29 15:23:36 <D34TH> deleted
335 2012-05-29 15:24:28 <sipa> D34TH: no ipv6 peer disovery via irc
336 2012-05-29 15:24:42 <sipa> but you can use irc to find your own ipv6 address
337 2012-05-29 15:24:43 <D34TH> it tried to connect to irc bia ipv6
338 2012-05-29 15:25:12 <D34TH> windows loled at me D:
339 2012-05-29 15:26:11 <D34TH> ok it finished with the blockchain
340 2012-05-29 15:27:08 <sipa> you cannot copy the blockchain files *at all* unless you use -detachdb
341 2012-05-29 15:36:36 <D34TH> thats weird my linux node only has 550 blocks
342 2012-05-29 15:36:41 <D34TH> but nine connections
343 2012-05-29 15:39:52 <rebroad> would anyone know if it's possible to rebase without make recompiing all the files again?
344 2012-05-29 15:40:25 <sipa> al make only recompiles changed files
345 2012-05-29 15:40:35 <sipa> or files with changed dependencies
346 2012-05-29 15:40:36 <rebroad> a.
347 2012-05-29 15:40:37 <rebroad> ,
348 2012-05-29 15:40:39 <rebroad> al?
349 2012-05-29 15:40:45 <sipa> -al
350 2012-05-29 15:41:00 <rebroad> sipa, what do I type instead of "make"?
351 2012-05-29 15:41:09 <sipa> make
352 2012-05-29 15:41:19 <rebroad> it's recompiling everything after a rebase..
353 2012-05-29 15:41:34 <rebroad> even though only 1 or 2 files should have changed...
354 2012-05-29 15:41:50 <sipa> if the rebase changes an essential header file, almost everything will need to be rebuilt
355 2012-05-29 15:42:22 <rebroad> yeah, net.h was probably one of the files... it's a pain that so much needs recompiling from that change... makes me want to move stuff out of net.h and into main.cpp!
356 2012-05-29 15:42:37 <sipa> better move it to net.cpp
357 2012-05-29 15:42:58 <sipa> net.h actually is only of the worst offenders left
358 2012-05-29 15:43:01 <rebroad> well, it's things in main.cpp that call it..
359 2012-05-29 15:43:06 <rebroad> e.g. AskFor
360 2012-05-29 15:43:09 <sipa> so?
361 2012-05-29 15:43:31 <rebroad> so.. that's where the code is more easily moved to
362 2012-05-29 15:43:37 <sipa> you can call functions from other .cpp files
363 2012-05-29 15:43:45 <sipa> if they are in headers
364 2012-05-29 15:44:27 <sipa> only of -> one of
365 2012-05-29 15:56:15 <zzop> Hey if I keep a backup of my wallet.dat and I create new receiving addresses in the meantime, is it necessary for me to re-backup that wallet.dat in order to have a secure storage of incoming cash?
366 2012-05-29 15:56:45 <zzop> Sorry if that's an awkward way to ask the question: Do new receiving addresses change the wallet.dat file?
367 2012-05-29 16:00:34 <sipa> zzop: the file contains 100 "future keys"
368 2012-05-29 16:00:54 <sipa> so you need a backup every 100 transactions/getnewaddress'es
369 2012-05-29 16:10:29 <jamesstanley> Does anyone know how to change currency on the Mt. Gox websocket API?
370 2012-05-29 16:10:51 <copumpkin> I think you just query a different URL don't you?
371 2012-05-29 16:10:57 <BlueMatt> ask #mtgox ?
372 2012-05-29 16:10:57 <copumpkin> I don't think you can switch inline
373 2012-05-29 16:11:17 <jamesstanley> copumpkin: for the HTTP API, yes; I don't know what to do for websockets though
374 2012-05-29 16:11:19 <jamesstanley> BlueMatt: thanks, I'll try that
375 2012-05-29 16:20:07 <luke-jr> http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/security.html
376 2012-05-29 16:20:17 <luke-jr> ^ handy
377 2012-05-29 16:20:50 <rebroad> if I have MAX_OUTBOUND_NODES set to 8, but all of them are stuck, and I want to allow a max of 8 PLUS nStuck where nStuck is the number of stuck nodes, where might be the best place in the code to place this?
378 2012-05-29 16:21:32 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: gitian-updater on win32 would fix a ton of that, imho
379 2012-05-29 16:21:50 <sipa> rebroad: define "stuck" ?
380 2012-05-29 16:22:22 <rebroad> sipa, as in blocks were being downloaded from them, but now they've all paused.
381 2012-05-29 16:22:35 <sipa> that has nothing to do with the node
382 2012-05-29 16:22:47 <sipa> it's just the result of not asking them
383 2012-05-29 16:22:58 <rebroad> sipa, no, they've been asked, and they were transferring blocks
384 2012-05-29 16:23:01 <rebroad> but they didn't complete
385 2012-05-29 16:23:05 <luke-jr> rebroad: that doesn't happen
386 2012-05-29 16:23:10 <rebroad> i.e. they stuck mid-block
387 2012-05-29 16:23:17 <rebroad> luke-jr, it's happening now
388 2012-05-29 16:23:17 <sipa> so the connection broke?
389 2012-05-29 16:23:25 <rebroad> sipa, no, the connection is still there
390 2012-05-29 16:23:28 <luke-jr> rebroad: only because you don't have a real internet connection
391 2012-05-29 16:23:38 <rebroad> luke-jr, I'm using a proper connection today
392 2012-05-29 16:23:57 <sipa> do they.still send anything?
393 2012-05-29 16:24:08 <rebroad> sipa, no
394 2012-05-29 16:24:14 <gmaxwell> rebroad: pehaps we should invent a new protocol for people on networks that suck (I'm only half kidding)
395 2012-05-29 16:24:32 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: like Electrum's?
396 2012-05-29 16:24:34 <rebroad> today I'm using a wifi connection in a bar, which seems reliable
397 2012-05-29 16:24:48 <luke-jr> seems not very reliable to me
398 2012-05-29 16:24:59 <rebroad> it's only bitcoin that's not working..
399 2012-05-29 16:25:00 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: well, like using airhook or whatever the heck mosh uses as the underlying transport.
400 2012-05-29 16:25:00 <sipa> well, reliable protocols are useful certainly
401 2012-05-29 16:25:04 <rebroad> which is why I'm trying to code to fix it
402 2012-05-29 16:25:17 <gmaxwell> TCP is basically ... not terribly useful on sufficiently lossy connections.
403 2012-05-29 16:25:22 <rebroad> ok, one node just 104ed...
404 2012-05-29 16:25:36 <rebroad> Nodes=8: AskedFor=5, WaitingFor=5, Receiving=4, BlockShy=1, BlockStuck=4
405 2012-05-29 16:26:08 <sipa> rebroad: i plan to modify the connection logic to try a new connection every N minutes, and replace one outgoing connection slot when that succeeds
406 2012-05-29 16:26:18 <sipa> maybe that would help as well
407 2012-05-29 16:26:24 <rebroad> this means vNode.size is 8, 5 have been had a getblocks 0 sent to them, 5 are waiting for blocks following a getdata block, 4 have started sending blocks, one ignored the getdata block, and all four downloading have become stuck.
408 2012-05-29 16:27:16 <zzop> sipa: Thanks (delayed). That's so awesome.
409 2012-05-29 16:28:44 <gmaxwell> rebroad: perhaps you should start proxying your bitcoin over http://airhook.ofb.net/ (if you want to use it you may want this patch: https://people.xiph.org/~greg/airproxy.patch.gz which I think fixes a crash bug in airhook bit its been so long that I don't recall)
410 2012-05-29 16:28:45 <rebroad> I'm using the build in my ParallelBlockDownload branch
411 2012-05-29 16:43:56 <rebroad> gmaxwell, hmmm, looks interesting, thanks. I've been using tor so far instead of that, but today, using the wifi in this cafe, I didn't think I would need it here... it's obviously not just my home connection.
412 2012-05-29 16:46:55 <RedEmerald> gmaxwell: Warning: Airhook is a defunct project, no longer maintained, never really implemented properly in the first place. The idea doesn't even really make sense any more -- modern wireless networks are much faster and include link level retransmission and congestion control. This page is kept here for historical reference purposes only.
413 2012-05-29 16:47:32 <RedEmerald> not so sure that it would help
414 2012-05-29 16:48:03 <gmaxwell> Yea, the author got upgraded wireless, but he's incorrect.
415 2012-05-29 16:48:19 <gmaxwell> There are still lots of networks that suck, as rebroad apparently knows.
416 2012-05-29 16:48:32 <gmaxwell> The continued need for such things is what motivated mosh. (which is awesome btw)
417 2012-05-29 16:48:35 <rebroad> luke-jr, what was that graph you posted a bit earlier? 82.25% insecure?
418 2012-05-29 16:48:50 <luke-jr> rebroad: yes
419 2012-05-29 16:48:58 <gmaxwell> RedEmerald: and software doesn't stop working just because its author lost interest in it. (esp software in portable C :) )
420 2012-05-29 16:49:01 <rebroad> what is insecure?
421 2012-05-29 16:49:14 <sipa> rebroad: running a vulnerable version
422 2012-05-29 16:49:22 <RedEmerald> the "never really implemented properly in the first place" is more what i was referring to
423 2012-05-29 16:49:40 <rebroad> vulnerable to what?
424 2012-05-29 16:50:33 <sipa> any known vulnerability
425 2012-05-29 16:51:19 <sipa> the latest being 0.6.0
426 2012-05-29 16:51:37 <rebroad> if 0.6.0 an insecure one?
427 2012-05-29 16:51:57 <rebroad> "is
428 2012-05-29 16:52:13 <sipa> yes
429 2012-05-29 16:52:16 <sipa> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81749.0
430 2012-05-29 16:52:23 <rebroad> I read something about needing 0.6.2 to fix a vulnerability, but I'm using the latest upstream master and it's showing as 0.6.1
431 2012-05-29 16:52:33 <RedEmerald> gmaxwell: mosh does look nifty
432 2012-05-29 16:54:11 <sipa> rebroad: yes, master and 0.6.2 both branched off 0.6.1
433 2012-05-29 16:54:57 <sipa> but don't worry, master has no known vulnerabilities (though it is obviously way too less tested to make any statement about its security)
434 2012-05-29 16:55:01 <rebroad> sipa, ah... so should I be working off master or 0.6.2?
435 2012-05-29 16:55:26 <sipa> if you're developing, use master of course
436 2012-05-29 16:55:46 <sipa> if you're running a production system, use 0.6.2
437 2012-05-29 16:56:17 <rebroad> ah ok.. and if I do pull requests, they need to be rebased from master not 0.6.2 I guess otherwise it makes it hard to merge, right?
438 2012-05-29 16:57:02 <rebroad> no need to answer that, I'm fairly sure that was too obvious to need to answer...
439 2012-05-29 16:57:49 <sipa> indeed
440 2012-05-29 16:58:13 <rebroad> hmmm. my stuck nodes seem to 104 disconnect after ~1200 seconds from becoming stuck
441 2012-05-29 17:00:14 <rebroad> does anyone know if there's a way to add a merge in between the commits I have from the rebase of master?
442 2012-05-29 17:00:40 <rebroad> i.e. not at the end, but maybe at the beginning, or a couple of commits along
443 2012-05-29 17:00:53 <rebroad> or is that something I specify when I do the interactive rebase?
444 2012-05-29 17:01:14 <rebroad> it's just that I had to edit it when I merged it, and then do the same thing again when I rebased it... seemed a bit silly to have to do it twice..
445 2012-05-29 17:11:07 <rebroad> ho hum.... another git question... anyone know how I can delete a remote branch?
446 2012-05-29 17:11:24 <sipa> git push <remote> :<branch>
447 2012-05-29 17:38:19 <BlueMatt> sipa: why does dns not appear to want to resolve to ipv6 even with -onlynet=ipv6?
448 2012-05-29 17:39:04 <BlueMatt> or is dns still off by default even for obvious names?
449 2012-05-29 17:39:13 <sipa> BlueMatt: what is an obvious name?
450 2012-05-29 17:39:34 <sipa> name resolving is always off by default, except for dns seeding and -seednode
451 2012-05-29 17:39:40 <rebroad> sipa, thanks
452 2012-05-29 17:39:41 <sipa> (and the latter is a bug)
453 2012-05-29 17:39:59 <BlueMatt> sipa: I was just -connect=dnsseed.bluematt.me
454 2012-05-29 17:40:07 <sipa> nah, you need -dns for that
455 2012-05-29 17:40:10 <BlueMatt> ah
456 2012-05-29 17:40:19 <BlueMatt> Id call that a bug, but...oh well
457 2012-05-29 17:40:56 <sipa> meh, maybe we can make -dns default to on
458 2012-05-29 17:42:24 <sipa> BlueMatt: -dns is only for -addnode and -connect anyway
459 2012-05-29 17:42:38 <sipa> so i think every use of it is "obvious"
460 2012-05-29 17:42:47 <BlueMatt> Id say so then, yea
461 2012-05-29 17:46:58 <sipa> o/ 7 ipv6 nodes in my seeds.txt
462 2012-05-29 17:47:11 <sipa> (only one onion node, still, though)
463 2012-05-29 17:47:19 <rebroad> ok, I obviously have to stop rebasing if I don't want to spend all day compiling...
464 2012-05-29 17:51:20 <gmaxwell> I'll keep reliable mainnet and testnet onion nodes up... once this gets merged. I keep breaking it when I pull other stuff as is.
465 2012-05-29 17:52:36 <sipa> but gavin didn't like the magic defaults, it seems
466 2012-05-29 17:54:12 <gmaxwell> What was his objection?
467 2012-05-29 17:54:22 <gmaxwell> the (unless ...) parts of it?
468 2012-05-29 17:54:29 <sipa> i suppose
469 2012-05-29 17:54:50 <sipa> i think he didn't like -listen to be sometimes off and sometimes on by default
470 2012-05-29 17:55:23 <gmaxwell> well they're required if we want to not make traps for existing users to deanonymize themselves... unless we want to rename proxy/connect and make the old ones refuse to start or something.
471 2012-05-29 17:56:12 <sipa> i don't think the changes are that intrusive that everyone needs to re-evaluate which options they want
472 2012-05-29 17:57:33 <gmaxwell> As is I think your behavior is fine. I mean if we do things like drop the implicit listen changing based on proxy.
473 2012-05-29 17:58:13 <luke-jr> there, http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/security.html fixed up with a nicer lib
474 2012-05-29 17:59:23 <gmaxwell> hey, the situation gets much better if you hover over stable node.. quick everyone load the page and hover!
475 2012-05-29 17:59:35 <luke-jr> O.o
476 2012-05-29 18:17:42 <luke-jr> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CVEs <-- we're not doing too fast on fixes going live
477 2012-05-29 18:18:32 <BlueMatt> again, gitian-updater-based auto-update nagging for windows users
478 2012-05-29 18:23:12 <BlueMatt> heh, rim is finally admitting they are dead if they dont do something major
479 2012-05-29 18:23:48 <rebroad> Why does debug.log show so many of the zeros of the block hash rather than the more significant bits?
480 2012-05-29 18:25:16 <sipa> rebroad: wondered about that myself
481 2012-05-29 18:26:47 <luke-jr> rebroad: I'll test & ACK a commit to show the other end of the hash :p
482 2012-05-29 18:26:55 <luke-jr> was considering writing one, but couldn't be bothered
483 2012-05-29 18:27:08 <luke-jr> also, the zeros *are* the most significant bits&
484 2012-05-29 18:27:46 <BlueMatt> noooo, you'll break my benchmark scripts
485 2012-05-29 18:29:06 <sipa> we can just start by dropping 8 zeroes
486 2012-05-29 18:29:15 <sipa> as thoae are required
487 2012-05-29 18:29:56 <BlueMatt> I would say no need to get complicated, just drop the always-0s and leave the rest
488 2012-05-29 18:29:56 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I've been patching to print whole hashes.
489 2012-05-29 18:30:10 <BlueMatt> its debug.log, it doesnt have to be /that/ pretty
490 2012-05-29 18:30:12 <gmaxwell> because you need whole hashes to use getblock / gettransaction / etc.
491 2012-05-29 18:30:33 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: true
492 2012-05-29 18:30:48 <luke-jr> always annoys me that blockchain.info requires the whole hash
493 2012-05-29 18:31:11 <gigavps> bitcoin devs, what would be the reasons to change the mining protocol? Specifically, from sha256 to something else.
494 2012-05-29 18:31:45 <BlueMatt> break mining-specific hardware so that more control goes towards end-users
495 2012-05-29 18:32:08 <luke-jr> gigavps: 51% attack we can't otherwise compete with
496 2012-05-29 18:32:24 <luke-jr> gigavps: ie, someone makes an ASIC that can 51% attack and won't sell them to competitors
497 2012-05-29 18:32:57 <gigavps> so the dev team would be willing to change the protocol if an ASIC hasher doesn't play nice?
498 2012-05-29 18:33:18 <luke-jr> gigavps: legitimate ASIC resellers are advised to include some abnormality option in their ASICs so we can support the "alternate mode" in case a change is needed
499 2012-05-29 18:33:30 <BlueMatt> not unless they get somewhere near 51% and become essentially untouchable in their hash power
500 2012-05-29 18:33:33 <gmaxwell> gigavps: stop for a second.
501 2012-05-29 18:33:46 <gmaxwell> gigavps: the reference client dev team is not in charge of bitcoin
502 2012-05-29 18:34:02 <gigavps> understood
503 2012-05-29 18:34:02 <gmaxwell> gigavps: the question you should ask is would the bitcoin community be willing to change the protocol if an ASIC hasher doesn't play nice?
504 2012-05-29 18:34:20 <gmaxwell> And I think the answer is obvious yet, if its harming them they'd be willing collectively to stop the harm.
505 2012-05-29 18:34:27 <gmaxwell> s/yet/yes/
506 2012-05-29 18:34:57 <gmaxwell> Esp if someone (dev team or otherwise) can come up with a solution which is not contrary to the interests of the normal cooperating users.
507 2012-05-29 18:35:41 <TimothyA> gmaxwell: well, technically... the ASIC hasher would still dominate the network, I presume
508 2012-05-29 18:35:45 <gmaxwell> e.g. a trivial modification to the algorithim that breaks already asics but leaves gpus and fpgas final would probably be community-viable today, in two years perhaps not.
509 2012-05-29 18:36:17 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: it's trivial to moot an asic, their advantage hyperspecialization is their downfall.
510 2012-05-29 18:36:48 <TimothyA> gmaxwell: yes, but since they contribute the most hashrate with their own protocol, they would continue to hash on the blockchain, right?
511 2012-05-29 18:37:07 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: No. Its irrelevant if your blocks aren't valid.
512 2012-05-29 18:37:14 <gigavps> so lets talk specifics for a minute
513 2012-05-29 18:37:24 <TimothyA> my blocks are valid to me :P
514 2012-05-29 18:37:26 <gigavps> BFL has announced an ASIC chip
515 2012-05-29 18:37:42 <TimothyA> gigavps: the BFL machines were supposed to be ASIC
516 2012-05-29 18:37:48 <gmaxwell> gigavps: BFL has claimed 'ASIC' since day one. Is this claim more correct than others?
517 2012-05-29 18:38:16 <gigavps> this claim is full custom ASIC
518 2012-05-29 18:38:16 <gmaxwell> In any case the exact situation which makes this defense unavailable (lots of the community of good users has asics) also moots the attack risk for the most part.
519 2012-05-29 18:38:23 <gigavps> not just an asic controller
520 2012-05-29 18:38:52 <TimothyA> gmaxwell: it still keeps open a large window before the good users get their hands on it
521 2012-05-29 18:39:01 <TimothyA> at least, a large enough portion
522 2012-05-29 18:39:19 <BlueMatt> in order to get people fired up enough to switch the hash algo (I would think) you would need one miner to buy enough asics to dominate the network, and I dont see that happening, it gets really, really expensive to do that, and you wouldnt be able to make back your investment
523 2012-05-29 18:39:41 <luke-jr> gigavps: I am not concerned about BFL's ASICs. They are selling them, not attacking with them.
524 2012-05-29 18:39:43 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: dominating just doesn't make economic sense in fact.
525 2012-05-29 18:39:51 <BlueMatt> exactly
526 2012-05-29 18:40:04 <luke-jr> gigavps: there may or may not be details I cannot mention that reduces my concern.
527 2012-05-29 18:40:17 <gmaxwell> why keep them when you can sell AS FAST AS POSSIBLE and make your risk zero before someone else shows up and deflates the market ahead of you (and drives the difficulty up making your chips worth less)
528 2012-05-29 18:40:28 <TimothyA> gmaxwell: dominating the blockchain in regards of hashingrate would make an economic sense in the sense that the blockchain is secure - albeit controlled by a single entity
529 2012-05-29 18:40:38 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: it would make bitcoin pointless.
530 2012-05-29 18:40:46 <TimothyA> well, yeah
531 2012-05-29 18:40:51 <gmaxwell> I can use the dollar if I want a currency 'controlled by a single entity'.
532 2012-05-29 18:41:01 <gmaxwell> and pointless bitcoins don't have much resale value. :)
533 2012-05-29 18:41:05 <BlueMatt> and then the community would screw you and you would end up with a bunch of worthless asics
534 2012-05-29 18:41:13 <BlueMatt> a very expensive bunch of worthless asics
535 2012-05-29 18:41:22 <gmaxwell> yea, then we flip a switch and your asics are now only good as resistive heaters.
536 2012-05-29 18:41:23 <TimothyA> gmaxwell: difference is that the dollar is controlled by a multilude of people, and you can't just point at a single bank if the dollar goes belly up
537 2012-05-29 18:41:27 <gigavps> so BFL selling ASIC is not seen as a thread to the bitcoin network?
538 2012-05-29 18:41:35 <TimothyA> with bitcoin, if a single person would control it, that one person bears the whole responsbility
539 2012-05-29 18:41:43 <luke-jr> gigavps: no
540 2012-05-29 18:41:54 <luke-jr> gigavps: at least, *I* don't see it as a threat
541 2012-05-29 18:42:17 <BTC_Bear> Once the 'stamp' is out in the wild, the cost of ASIC's will dramatically be reduced and the 'single' entity would devolve to a decentralized entity again.
542 2012-05-29 18:42:17 <gigavps> that is a little reassuring
543 2012-05-29 18:42:25 <TimothyA> I saw we should move back to CPU hashing in the first place; make anyone able to participate and mine blocks
544 2012-05-29 18:42:53 <luke-jr> TimothyA: no good proposal for that
545 2012-05-29 18:43:02 <OneFixt> abacus
546 2012-05-29 18:43:03 <luke-jr> TimothyA: also, it gives botnets more of an advantage
547 2012-05-29 18:43:05 <sipa> whatever algorithm you choose, eventually a market will always arise for specialized hardware
548 2012-05-29 18:43:11 <luke-jr> ^
549 2012-05-29 18:43:18 <TimothyA> luke-jr: nothing to prevent botnets?
550 2012-05-29 18:43:32 <luke-jr> TimothyA: nope
551 2012-05-29 18:43:37 <luke-jr> not even anti-pool measures can stop botnets
552 2012-05-29 18:43:43 <gigavps> botnets are good as long as they play the game with everyone else TimothyA
553 2012-05-29 18:43:54 <luke-jr> botnets are bad period
554 2012-05-29 18:44:00 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: cpu hashing doesn't achieve that goal... nor is there any real way to achieve it.
555 2012-05-29 18:44:05 <sipa> sure, require a certificate for keys that block payout to, controlled by a central authority :p
556 2012-05-29 18:44:17 <TimothyA> heh
557 2012-05-29 18:44:25 <TimothyA> P2P Certificates
558 2012-05-29 18:44:27 <TimothyA> get to it!
559 2012-05-29 18:44:29 <gmaxwell> Botnets result in weird crap like there being no way for a non-theif to profitably mine, which isn't good for long term stability.
560 2012-05-29 18:44:34 <gmaxwell> but ::shrugs::
561 2012-05-29 18:44:39 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened issue 1397 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1397>
562 2012-05-29 18:44:40 <sipa> wait, that's called solidcoin, right?
563 2012-05-29 18:44:47 <TimothyA> gmaxwell: there are gpu botnets as well
564 2012-05-29 18:44:51 <luke-jr> sipa: not anymore, supposedly
565 2012-05-29 18:44:53 <TimothyA> not as commonplace, though
566 2012-05-29 18:45:07 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: sure sure. But not enough to totally distort the econonmics of it all.
567 2012-05-29 18:45:12 <luke-jr> TimothyA: they can only infect GPU-equipped machines
568 2012-05-29 18:45:18 <luke-jr> and people are more likely to notice GPU leeches
569 2012-05-29 18:45:24 <TimothyA> luke-jr: you would think
570 2012-05-29 18:45:42 <gigavps> ok thanks for the chat guys
571 2012-05-29 18:45:44 <TimothyA> they will notice it in their electricity bill. but if it's set up properly, they most likely won't even notice it
572 2012-05-29 18:45:48 <gmaxwell> mining is still quite profitable for people on GPUs with reasonable electricity cost (though with a new hardware payoff horizon far enough out that it would be risky to start these days)
573 2012-05-29 18:45:54 <TimothyA> e.g. slowing down/stopping when the user starts doing gpu-demanding tasks
574 2012-05-29 18:45:59 <sipa> i don't care about 10% network power being controlled by botnets
575 2012-05-29 18:46:03 <gigavps> i'm always humbled when i come to this channel
576 2012-05-29 18:46:16 <gmaxwell> No problem.
577 2012-05-29 18:46:17 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: hahaha!
578 2012-05-29 18:46:25 <BlueMatt> heh, nice
579 2012-05-29 18:46:32 <gmaxwell> Good news: Your gpu is fine...
580 2012-05-29 18:46:53 <gmaxwell> better news: you found out you were compromised before you had many bitcoins to get stolen.
581 2012-05-29 18:46:53 <sipa> i've been out of the loop of gpu mining for too long
582 2012-05-29 18:47:11 <TimothyA> even better news: reduce your electricity bill
583 2012-05-29 18:47:22 <sipa> i wonder if it's profitable again here now (at belgium's electricity prices)
584 2012-05-29 18:47:32 <TimothyA> sipa: it's definitly not where I live
585 2012-05-29 18:47:39 <gmaxwell> i've been leaving wallet.dats with some bitcoins on bastion systems I get paged if they get spent. Great tripwire.
586 2012-05-29 18:47:41 <TimothyA> at ~0.40$USD kWh
587 2012-05-29 18:47:45 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: ouch!
588 2012-05-29 18:47:48 <TimothyA> yeah
589 2012-05-29 18:47:54 <gmaxwell> Germany? or?
590 2012-05-29 18:48:07 <TimothyA> and I still couldn't get enough bitcoins out of it
591 2012-05-29 18:48:11 <TimothyA> curacao
592 2012-05-29 18:48:50 <gmaxwell> I'd really love to get rid of these gpus, they're a pain to maintain.
593 2012-05-29 18:49:04 <TimothyA> and I can't afford to run them
594 2012-05-29 18:49:17 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I'll take em! :P
595 2012-05-29 18:49:24 <BlueMatt> no me
596 2012-05-29 18:49:28 <TimothyA> I can probably sell them here with a 500% upmark
597 2012-05-29 18:49:31 <gmaxwell> I'll gladly buy lots of spiffy asic should something come out thats on modern proess that won't be mooted a few months after it arrives.
598 2012-05-29 18:49:38 <TimothyA> if you know how to smuggle them to where I live
599 2012-05-29 18:49:43 <gmaxwell> hah
600 2012-05-29 18:49:50 <TimothyA> no, seriously
601 2012-05-29 18:50:08 <gmaxwell> Yea, I'm not in the smuggling business. alas.
602 2012-05-29 18:50:18 <TimothyA> what's the price of a 6990?
603 2012-05-29 18:50:33 <TimothyA> 800$ ?
604 2012-05-29 18:50:44 <TimothyA> costs 4000$ USD here
605 2012-05-29 18:51:05 <sipa> ok, 2.4 MH/J seems the best number for gpu mining
606 2012-05-29 18:51:07 <ThomasV> where?
607 2012-05-29 18:51:13 <TimothyA> ThomasV: where I live :P
608 2012-05-29 18:51:24 <ThomasV> TimothyA: where?
609 2012-05-29 18:51:29 <TimothyA> curacao
610 2012-05-29 18:51:50 <TimothyA> I mean, a friggin 8400GS goes for 500$ ...
611 2012-05-29 18:52:06 <sipa> so, at 1W...
612 2012-05-29 18:52:15 <sipa> ;;bc,gen 2400
613 2012-05-29 18:52:16 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 2400 Khps, given current difficulty of 1591074.9618473 , is 0.00151720577049 BTC per day and 6.32169071039e-05 BTC per hour.
614 2012-05-29 18:52:21 <gmaxwell> sipa: (17179869184*diff*kwh)/(719989013671875*exc*mhj)=1
615 2012-05-29 18:52:31 <gmaxwell> thats breakeven, substitute and solve.
616 2012-05-29 18:52:49 <sipa> exc?
617 2012-05-29 18:52:54 <sipa> ah, exchange rate
618 2012-05-29 18:52:57 <gmaxwell> exchange rate in usd/btc.
619 2012-05-29 18:53:11 <gmaxwell> kwh is $/kwh.
620 2012-05-29 18:54:09 <TimothyA> I've been thinking of getting a solar-powered rig operation going, but nobody seems to be interested
621 2012-05-29 18:54:20 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: I thought that was Diablo-D3's obsession?
622 2012-05-29 18:54:33 <luke-jr> TimothyA: DMC?
623 2012-05-29 18:54:37 <TimothyA> gmaxwell: really?
624 2012-05-29 18:54:39 <TimothyA> luke-jr: dmc?
625 2012-05-29 18:54:47 <phantomcircuit> this spoon was made in america
626 2012-05-29 18:54:51 <luke-jr> TimothyA: Diablo-D3's $1mil mining corp
627 2012-05-29 18:54:57 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: my power costs something like 5.5c/kwh in the winer (goes up in the summer) so you can see why solar isn't exciting to me.
628 2012-05-29 18:55:01 <phantomcircuit> spoons without lead make me happy
629 2012-05-29 18:55:02 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: bet you can break it with your hands
630 2012-05-29 18:55:02 <sipa> ;;calc (17179869184*[bc,diff]*0.2)/(719989013671875*4*2.41)
631 2012-05-29 18:55:04 <gribble> 0.787657814765
632 2012-05-29 18:55:12 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, it's a very good spoon
633 2012-05-29 18:55:23 <gmaxwell> I think it would be more interesting to drive the intial costs down and sell miners as resistive heaters in the north that you pay people to run.
634 2012-05-29 18:55:27 <phantomcircuit> high pressure stamped steel
635 2012-05-29 18:55:32 <TimothyA> luke-jr: right... so I really doubt he has any interest in having me run the op :P
636 2012-05-29 18:55:49 <phantomcircuit> should make forge pressed spoons
637 2012-05-29 18:55:53 <phantomcircuit> BOSS SPOON
638 2012-05-29 18:56:12 <BlueMatt> internet-connected resistive heaters
639 2012-05-29 18:56:18 <luke-jr> TimothyA: also, FWIW, I used to run my mining on solar
640 2012-05-29 18:56:24 <TimothyA> but?
641 2012-05-29 18:56:27 <luke-jr> but I moved.
642 2012-05-29 18:56:31 <gmaxwell> I've long held the view that eventually your oven or dryer would be the most powerful computer in your home.
643 2012-05-29 18:56:50 <gmaxwell> perhaps bitcoin will be the base load that makes that sort of thing viable.
644 2012-05-29 18:57:17 <TimothyA> why isn't anyone interested in starting bitcoin businesses in poor countries!
645 2012-05-29 18:57:36 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: if only the world were Christian&
646 2012-05-29 18:57:55 <luke-jr> with the secular world, you can be sure people would effectively steal any subsidies
647 2012-05-29 18:58:03 <luke-jr> and use it themselves
648 2012-05-29 18:58:07 <TimothyA> .... here we were going along just fine, and you bring up religion.
649 2012-05-29 18:58:31 <luke-jr> TimothyA: hey, it's true :p
650 2012-05-29 18:58:39 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: if you don't want that discussion just don't argue it, luke neve keeps up those discussions without a counterparty.
651 2012-05-29 18:58:54 <sipa> yes luke, yes...
652 2012-05-29 18:58:57 <luke-jr> TimothyA: people would buy them subsidized, then hijack the hardware for their own use
653 2012-05-29 18:59:24 <sipa> so, you're in favor of DRM as well?
654 2012-05-29 18:59:29 <bonks> so how easy is it to crack an encrypted wallet?
655 2012-05-29 18:59:30 <luke-jr> sipa: no :p
656 2012-05-29 18:59:35 <luke-jr> bonks: impossible?
657 2012-05-29 18:59:47 <sipa> bonks: with a weak password, trivial
658 2012-05-29 18:59:55 <luke-jr> sipa: I'm in favour of honest culture ;)
659 2012-05-29 18:59:55 <sipa> with a good password, impossible
660 2012-05-29 19:00:09 <bonks> sounds good
661 2012-05-29 19:00:30 <bonks> so i can store my wallet publicly as long as I have like a 25 character password
662 2012-05-29 19:00:38 <bonks> with random chars
663 2012-05-29 19:00:48 <sipa> alphanumeric?
664 2012-05-29 19:00:51 <gmaxwell> bonks: a 25 character that you used a machine to generate. Yes.
665 2012-05-29 19:00:59 <BlueMatt> sure, as long as you dont mind people seeing all your financial info (in btc)
666 2012-05-29 19:01:22 <bonks> sipa: yeah, and upper/lower case with special chars
667 2012-05-29 19:01:30 <gmaxwell> Do not make the passphrase up yourself, humans are generally no good at that even when they think they are.
668 2012-05-29 19:01:40 <luke-jr> bonks: if you don't mind no privacy
669 2012-05-29 19:01:47 <TimothyA> hmm...
670 2012-05-29 19:01:57 <bonks> ok cool, because people talk about offline wallets like it's really necessary
671 2012-05-29 19:02:01 <TimothyA> a long easily-memorable password tends to be better than 32-characters of alphanumeric mumbojumbo
672 2012-05-29 19:02:02 <gmaxwell> You don't need special characters if it's really random and that long ... all lowercase * 25 characters is 117.5 bits.
673 2012-05-29 19:02:17 <bonks> TimothyA: meh, I can remember my mumbo jumbo
674 2012-05-29 19:02:18 <luke-jr> bonks: an encrypted wallet that you never decrypt is offline
675 2012-05-29 19:02:30 <TimothyA> bonks: you would still remember more if it were words you can remember
676 2012-05-29 19:02:49 <TimothyA> to the computer, it's still just a sequence of numbers and characters
677 2012-05-29 19:02:56 <gmaxwell> TimothyA: with 12 easily remembered totally random words you can have 128 bits of entroy which is Enought for Anybody.
678 2012-05-29 19:03:10 <luke-jr> just don't use "My hovercraft is full of eels!" in any language
679 2012-05-29 19:03:10 <TimothyA> gmaxwell: I'm not argueing against you :P
680 2012-05-29 19:03:29 <gmaxwell> but you should not make up keys by yourself. You think you're being quite clever but millions of attempts per second and good models trump a lot of smart.s
681 2012-05-29 19:03:37 <bonks> so basically, the only way to crack an encrypted wallet is by brute force. and sharing an encrypted wallet still exposes transactions, so privacy may be a concern.
682 2012-05-29 19:03:54 <luke-jr> bonks: also exposes comments and addresses
683 2012-05-29 19:04:09 <bonks> comments?
684 2012-05-29 19:04:13 <bonks> oh the labels
685 2012-05-29 19:04:21 <sipa> transaction comments and labels
686 2012-05-29 19:04:51 <bonks> there are transaction comments? is this accessible in -qt?
687 2012-05-29 19:04:59 <sipa> not afaik
688 2012-05-29 19:05:20 <splatster> Well, the other parts don't really need to be encrypted, as the attacker couldn't spend the money.
689 2012-05-29 19:05:56 <bonks> alright, I just didn't want to be too paranoid to the point that it's inconvenient
690 2012-05-29 19:06:41 <gmaxwell> bonks: why bother with public, but 20 cheap usb drives from china for like $1... smallest available will do.. and just put your wallet on each and litter your home and office with them.
691 2012-05-29 19:07:21 <gmaxwell> sure, and attacker could get one and go after your password, but I assume there are far fewer attackers in your house than on the entire internet.
692 2012-05-29 19:07:27 <gmaxwell> (and if not, you have other problems)
693 2012-05-29 19:08:40 <splatster> lol
694 2012-05-29 19:11:32 <D34TH> :3
695 2012-05-29 19:12:28 <splatster> I've seen several posts on the forums about people worried about keyloggers stealing their passwords, but wouldn't a piece of malware which has access to your keystrokes likely have access to your memory to snag an unencrypted copy much easier?
696 2012-05-29 19:15:43 <gmaxwell> splatster: yes. but a keylogger is a non-specific attack... e.g. the attacker may see the phrase in the logs after the fact.
697 2012-05-29 19:16:24 <splatster> ah
698 2012-05-29 19:16:41 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: you and I need to get more noticable PM notification :P
699 2012-05-29 19:16:46 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: do you have XMPP?
700 2012-05-29 19:17:04 <bonks> Isn't my wallet only decrypted on sending. So I could keep an offline wallet which I stash funds in, but if I need to send coins out, I could send it offline, then go online AFTER I decrypted?
701 2012-05-29 19:17:22 <bonks> .. to sync, then take it offline.
702 2012-05-29 19:17:26 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: yea, but it's not better than IRC really.
703 2012-05-29 19:17:52 <luke-jr> >_<
704 2012-05-29 19:18:07 <gmaxwell> bonks: yes but if you're compromised the trojan can wait and pull the keys from memory.
705 2012-05-29 19:18:39 <gmaxwell> eventually we'll have better support for external wallets... but that will come after determinstic keys I expect.
706 2012-05-29 19:19:31 <bonks> ok cool
707 2012-05-29 19:21:04 <gmaxwell> (because that will remove the complexity of syncing keys between your online view-only wallet which you'd use to draft transactions, and your offline sign-only wallet which you use to confirm and sign transactions.
708 2012-05-29 19:24:02 <TheSeven> BlueMatt: any plans on pushing 0.6.2 to the PPA?
709 2012-05-29 19:25:59 <BlueMatt> its there
710 2012-05-29 19:26:32 <BlueMatt> TheSeven: its been there since 2012-05-08
711 2012-05-29 19:27:10 <TheSeven> hm... sry for chasing you up then
712 2012-05-29 19:27:30 <BlueMatt> is it not loading for you?
713 2012-05-29 19:28:20 <TheSeven> one of my boxes (which is supposed to update this automatically) is still running "version" : 60006
714 2012-05-29 19:28:42 <TheSeven> another one is running bitcoin-qt "Bitcoin Version vCLIENT_VERSION_MAJOR.CLIENT_VERSION_MINOR.CLIENT_VERSION_REVISION.CLIENT_VERSION_BUILD-g8ff1873-beta", which, IIUC, is indeed 0.6.2
715 2012-05-29 19:29:26 <BlueMatt> the second looks like 0.6.2 to me, the first...any clue why?
716 2012-05-29 19:29:44 <TheSeven> probably some trouble on my side, I'll check that out
717 2012-05-29 19:30:49 <TheSeven> hm, aptitude says "held back" for some reason
718 2012-05-29 19:31:13 <BlueMatt> is it in your /etc/apt/preferences
719 2012-05-29 19:31:36 <BlueMatt> or are there any holds in there that might effect its deps
720 2012-05-29 19:34:14 <TheSeven> gonna sort that out afterwards if it doesn't fix itself magically during the process
721 2012-05-29 20:02:38 <bonks> where do I go to suggest features for -qt?
722 2012-05-29 20:13:13 <splatster> Need help with sendmany, can I get some help in PM?
723 2012-05-29 20:15:25 <sipa> bonks: github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues
724 2012-05-29 20:17:03 <bonks> ah looks like it's already there
725 2012-05-29 20:17:28 <bonks> ... balance history that is
726 2012-05-29 20:18:39 <bonks> hmm, no way to upvote
727 2012-05-29 20:22:17 <splatster> Any way to use sendmany from "*"?
728 2012-05-29 20:22:30 <splatster> Becuase bitcoind calls that an invalid account.
729 2012-05-29 20:22:47 <splatster> I want to use sendmany, not caring about the account in use.
730 2012-05-29 20:23:25 <freewil> splatster, i guess this would be using a specific account
731 2012-05-29 20:23:33 <freewil> but what if you just used the default empty string ""
732 2012-05-29 20:23:53 <splatster> I'll try that
733 2012-05-29 20:24:46 <splatster> lolwut?
734 2012-05-29 20:24:47 <splatster> "" : -33.53414950,
735 2012-05-29 20:24:56 <splatster> An account with a negative balance?
736 2012-05-29 20:26:44 <gmaxwell> splatster: sure.
737 2012-05-29 20:27:42 <sipa> splatster: every transaction has one and only one "from account"
738 2012-05-29 20:27:55 <sipa> accounts are only virtual balances
739 2012-05-29 20:28:03 <sipa> they do not correspond to coins
740 2012-05-29 20:28:22 <sipa> it just has to be subtracted somewhere
741 2012-05-29 20:28:44 <splatster> any way to set all things back to the default account?
742 2012-05-29 20:28:53 <sipa> moveto
743 2012-05-29 20:28:56 <sipa> or move
744 2012-05-29 20:29:59 <splatster> wait, does it actually make a TX for it?
745 2012-05-29 20:30:35 <freewil> no, moves do not create or broadcast transactions
746 2012-05-29 20:30:49 <freewil> it's just an internal operation within your wallet
747 2012-05-29 20:33:40 <splatster> could the default account having a negative balance cause sendmany to fail even though the wallet has plenty of money in it?
748 2012-05-29 20:34:48 <sipa> no
749 2012-05-29 20:35:09 <sipa> not since 0.3.something
750 2012-05-29 20:39:03 <splatster> hmmm
751 2012-05-29 20:41:14 <splatster> sipa: Then what's my problem?
752 2012-05-29 20:44:13 <sipa> no, idea; what is the symptom?
753 2012-05-29 20:47:13 <splatster> sipa: Does minconf not actually change anything if you set it to 0?
754 2012-05-29 20:47:57 <splatster> this is so weird
755 2012-05-29 20:49:17 <sipa> it never uses 0-conf coins that are not change or send-to-self
756 2012-05-29 20:49:36 <sipa> even with minconf=0
757 2012-05-29 20:50:46 <splatster> ok
758 2012-05-29 20:50:57 <splatster> I'm just ditching sendmany
759 2012-05-29 20:51:03 <splatster> And got it to work without it.
760 2012-05-29 20:51:32 <sipa> :(
761 2012-05-29 20:52:19 <splatster> sipa: Right now, it's only 4 TXs and it's once a day, so I'm not too worried.
762 2012-05-29 20:52:32 <splatster> If it gets to be more, I'll figure sendmany out
763 2012-05-29 20:52:49 <splatster> Maybe make a patch without <account> for sendmany?
764 2012-05-29 20:53:56 <sipa> why?
765 2012-05-29 20:54:05 <sipa> use "" as from account
766 2012-05-29 20:54:10 <splatster> Didn't work
767 2012-05-29 20:54:13 <sipa> that is what sendtoaddress does
768 2012-05-29 20:54:27 <splatster> I'll debug it in a sec
769 2012-05-29 20:54:37 <splatster> but for now, I'm sticking with this to save my sanity
770 2012-05-29 21:08:09 <D34TH> IRC connect failed
771 2012-05-29 21:08:11 <D34TH> hmm
772 2012-05-29 21:09:18 <sipa> maybe it resolved the IRC server's address to an IPv6 one, but you have no IPv6 interface?
773 2012-05-29 21:09:24 <D34TH> i do
774 2012-05-29 21:09:40 <D34TH> 2001:470:4:9b1::2
775 2012-05-29 21:09:42 <D34TH> :D
776 2012-05-29 21:26:43 <luke-jr> sigh
777 2012-05-29 21:26:50 <luke-jr> I don't see any way to optimize txn_prio more
778 2012-05-29 21:26:57 <luke-jr> all its time is spent fetching/connecting inputs
779 2012-05-29 21:59:35 <D34TH> i hate openvz
780 2012-05-29 21:59:37 <D34TH> :/
781 2012-05-29 22:18:21 <splatster> Question: Do "change" outputs need to be confirmed before they can be spend?
782 2012-05-29 22:21:02 <gmaxwell> define 'spend'?
783 2012-05-29 22:21:46 <gmaxwell> you can write endless chains of unconfirmed txn, though the client avoids it if it can. the chidren can only be mined at the same time or later than the parents.
784 2012-05-29 22:21:49 <splatster> s/spend/spent/
785 2012-05-29 22:22:09 <splatster> Ok let me rephrase it.
786 2012-05-29 22:22:13 <luke-jr> splatster: protocolly, only generated coins have spending restrictions