1 2012-12-21 00:00:04 <gmaxwell> I'm really concerned about all the blockchain corruption I'm seeing reported. I think BDB is failing on people at an increased rate but I don't know why. The ones I've investigated clearly have incorrect block indexes.
2 2012-12-21 00:01:34 <gavinandresen> agreed. Would be good to know if it is just sucky hard drives combined with a few gigabytes of data that must be exactly right (as opposed to a few gigabytes of a movie where an MPEG decoding error gets ignored)
3 2012-12-21 00:01:49 <gavinandresen> ... or real bugs
4 2012-12-21 00:01:56 <gmaxwell> issues with keys just not being in the index are hard to detect as broken computers??? hashes not valdating off disk would be easy however.
5 2012-12-21 00:02:30 <gmaxwell> I note that leveldb's checks make it fail cleanly right now, but nothing gets obviously emitted that a checksum failed.
6 2012-12-21 00:04:55 <gmaxwell> at some point we may need to replace our malloc to deal with the fragementation problems, (tcmalloc and jemalloc both pretty much solve our fragmentation behavior).. if we do we could put in one that tests all newly acquired memory.
7 2012-12-21 00:05:45 <gavinandresen> testing memory would be good. Testing memory and disk would be great (although we'd have to be careful not to wear out SSD's....)
8 2012-12-21 00:06:57 <sipa> "Installig Bitcoin..." "Rebooting into 48-hour memtest86" ...
9 2012-12-21 00:07:00 <gmaxwell> make the leveldb crc stuff actually produce useful errors may be almost as good as actually testing the disk... probably that with background spot checking of the data.. perhaps.
10 2012-12-21 00:08:40 <gmaxwell> heh. well just taking every new page that gets sbrked and writing a pattern and checking it should probably have basically no performance impact at least under allocators that make a concerted effort to reuse memory.
11 2012-12-21 00:09:17 <sipa> utxo merkle root in coinbase stuff (or even not in coinbase) could be a very good way to improve reliability
12 2012-12-21 00:09:36 <sipa> as it alliws for near-certain validation of your local db
13 2012-12-21 00:10:06 <gmaxwell> sipa: if we just save it locally, rolling back the last N blocks and checking the root would be pretty good.
14 2012-12-21 00:10:30 <gmaxwell> The one insance I had of utxo corruption was easily detectable against the past few blocks.
15 2012-12-21 00:11:21 <gmaxwell> The IBD process gives the host a pretty useful workout too.
16 2012-12-21 00:20:44 <sipa> we should urge people to use windings for representing bitcoin addresses
17 2012-12-21 00:20:57 <sipa> it would instantly kill all vanity purposes :p
18 2012-12-21 00:38:36 <sipa> 265 non-canonical transactions in the last 50000 i've seen on the network
19 2012-12-21 00:38:57 <sipa> wizkid057: what was the result of your benchmarking the hal/par code, actually?
20 2012-12-21 00:41:09 <wizkid057> sipa: took roughly 2.5 hours with your patches from 0 to current, via -connect
21 2012-12-21 00:41:57 <gmaxwell> slower than I expected.
22 2012-12-21 00:42:01 <sipa> have any debug.log output left (especially of the part after 210k) ?
23 2012-12-21 00:42:31 <wizkid057> hm
24 2012-12-21 00:42:33 <wizkid057> maybe
25 2012-12-21 00:42:36 <wizkid057> its been running a while now
26 2012-12-21 00:42:37 <wizkid057> lol
27 2012-12-21 00:44:19 <wizkid057> sipa: heres a snippet http://pastebin.com/y9cA17jH
28 2012-12-21 01:02:51 <MC1984> does it say processblock accepted before or after processing a block
29 2012-12-21 01:03:31 <sipa> after
30 2012-12-21 01:06:53 <MC1984> thought so
31 2012-12-21 01:07:28 <MC1984> sometimes i wish the logs of seperate functions were demarcated more clearly in the file
32 2012-12-21 01:07:41 <MC1984> line break or dashes or whatever
33 2012-12-21 01:10:36 <Luke-Jr> ACTION pokes gmaxwell
34 2012-12-21 03:43:10 <etotheipi_> am I hallucinating, or did github stop supporting downloads? I can't get to the page except via direct URL and I can't add an yfiles
35 2012-12-21 03:50:11 <etotheipi_> SOB: https://github.com/blog/1302-goodbye-uploads
36 2012-12-21 03:53:56 <MC1984> shit
37 2012-12-21 03:54:14 <MC1984> WELP BACK TO SOURCEFORGE
38 2012-12-21 05:49:32 <stealth222> If I've already forked the bitcoin integration/staging tree and started working on something on the master branch but want to rename my local branch to something else while keeping the master branch in sync with the integration/staging tree, how do I do it?
39 2012-12-21 06:03:39 <forrestv> stealth222, first, make sure everything is committed, then: git branch my_own_branch && git reset --hard HEAD^ && git checkout my_own_branch
40 2012-12-21 06:03:56 <forrestv> if you have more than one of your own commits, add as many "^"s as you have commits
41 2012-12-21 06:05:22 <jgarzik> stealth222: well, renaming a branch from A to B is simply
42 2012-12-21 06:05:27 <jgarzik> git branch -m old_name new_name
43 2012-12-21 06:05:47 <stealth222> I want to be able to move between my branches and the original commit I forked from easily
44 2012-12-21 06:06:01 <jgarzik> if you committed to master branch, then perhaps
45 2012-12-21 06:06:37 <jgarzik> git branch -m master side_branch ; git branch 6940626d08e313c5e1cd99c63aeca9da45d5b7a4 master
46 2012-12-21 06:06:56 <jgarzik> (where 6940626d08e313c5e1cd99c63aeca9da45d5b7a4 is a base commit in the commit tree)
47 2012-12-21 06:07:18 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: won't that move the tracking of the branch too?
48 2012-12-21 06:07:33 <jgarzik> there is also a command that reset master -> remote/master, which I forgot
49 2012-12-21 06:07:42 <Luke-Jr> I'd personally do it forrestv's way :P
50 2012-12-21 06:08:27 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: any thoughts on brainwallets and firstbits?
51 2012-12-21 06:10:10 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: pick a good password
52 2012-12-21 06:10:24 <stealth222> then if I want to completely overwrite a repo I have with my new local copy?
53 2012-12-21 06:10:28 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: (I sent you an invite btw)
54 2012-12-21 06:10:28 <stealth222> including all branches?
55 2012-12-21 06:10:42 <stealth222> a remote repo
56 2012-12-21 06:19:04 <stealth222> just add push lines in the config file?
57 2012-12-21 06:19:12 <stealth222> and use the -f option?
58 2012-12-21 06:42:04 <stealth222> I had an open pull request - I updated my branches and forced a push and now my pull request seems to be gone
59 2012-12-21 06:42:17 <stealth222> on github
60 2012-12-21 06:42:28 <stealth222> do I need to create a new one?
61 2012-12-21 06:43:09 <stealth222> and are all the comments in the old one deleted?
62 2012-12-21 06:43:51 <stealth222> oh, wait - it was just closed
63 2012-12-21 06:44:20 <stealth222> derp - I want to reopen it but using the new branch I created
64 2012-12-21 07:53:01 <thermoman> happy apokalypse!
65 2012-12-21 10:13:51 <pere> hi. I'm trying to build bitcoin-qt without UPNP support, but when I run qmake I do not get the expected output. Why is UPNP reported twice, once without and once with? <URL: http://paste.debian.net/217970/ > show the confusing output. When I try to build it, I end up with -DUPSE_UPNP=0, which is not what I expected.
66 2012-12-21 10:14:29 <sipa> USE_UPNP=0 means upnp support is compiled in, but disabled by default
67 2012-12-21 10:14:48 <sipa> use -DUSE_UPNP=- if you want to build without
68 2012-12-21 10:14:56 <pere> sipa: did you look at the URL?
69 2012-12-21 10:16:25 <sipa> doesn't load (mobile connection on train)
70 2012-12-21 10:16:44 <pere> sipa: I did pass USE_UPNP=- to qmake, but it didn't stick. :)
71 2012-12-21 10:17:02 <sipa> hmm?
72 2012-12-21 10:17:25 <pere> and qmake report that the feature is both disabled and enabled...
73 2012-12-21 10:17:29 <sipa> oh, that message
74 2012-12-21 10:17:37 <sipa> yes that's a bug
75 2012-12-21 10:17:44 <sipa> don't worry about it
76 2012-12-21 10:18:03 <pere> I'm not worrying about the message, I am worrying about the fact that the setting do not work.
77 2012-12-21 10:18:40 <sipa> iit works fine here, even with that message
78 2012-12-21 10:18:49 <pere> the only way I could get the build to work properly is by commenting out the entire else block.
79 2012-12-21 10:19:18 <pere> sipa: do you have the -lminiupnpc library installed? I do not, and the linker fail because it is missing.
80 2012-12-21 10:22:25 <sipa> on some systems i don't have it
81 2012-12-21 14:05:14 <topace> anyone know of a neat bitcoin/blockchain visualizer? i want something running in the office lobby
82 2012-12-21 14:05:26 <topace> that'll make people stop and gaze
83 2012-12-21 14:05:35 <topace> preferably 3D
84 2012-12-21 14:05:49 <topace> and that doesnt need interaction
85 2012-12-21 14:10:31 <helo> not 3d, but http://bitcoinmonitor.com/
86 2012-12-21 14:11:11 <helo> i don't think blockchain activity is well suited for 3d visualization
87 2012-12-21 14:12:06 <helo> i would be interested to see the oldest coin that is moved each day
88 2012-12-21 14:12:26 <helo> week, month, year
89 2012-12-21 14:22:56 <topace> yea bitcoinmonitor isnt very sexxy
90 2012-12-21 14:23:05 <topace> especially with the ads on the page
91 2012-12-21 14:23:29 <SomeoneWeird> check iseecoins
92 2012-12-21 14:23:39 <SomeoneWeird> http://iseecoins.org/
93 2012-12-21 14:23:45 <topace> right now the lobby machine is running gl_tail to tail the common apache access log file for the 600+ websites we bost
94 2012-12-21 14:23:47 <topace> host
95 2012-12-21 14:25:55 <helo> topace: you can use the browser (ctrl +) to zoom in on the interesting part
96 2012-12-21 14:46:55 <sipa> gavinandresen: hmm, a binary linked with dbghelp worked fine on my win7 system with no dev environment whatsoever
97 2012-12-21 14:47:08 <sipa> gavinandresen: strange that you could avoid it, but i hardly understand everything
98 2012-12-21 14:47:33 <gmaxwell> Hm. I have a hang on shutdown with the remaining thread stuck in the destructor for the signature cache waiting on the cs_sigcache mutex.
99 2012-12-21 14:47:51 <sipa> gavinandresen: what code/branch?
100 2012-12-21 14:47:58 <sipa> eh, gmaxwell
101 2012-12-21 14:48:18 <sipa> gavinandresen: no more problems with Logv?
102 2012-12-21 14:48:26 <gavinandresen> sipa: mmmm... I just worry about depending on something named 'debug help', maybe it is part of windows(or maybe that pragma is linking statically?)
103 2012-12-21 14:48:37 <gavinandresen> in any case, I think avoiding mingw64 is a good idea
104 2012-12-21 14:48:55 <sipa> sure, if it works with mingw32, perfectly
105 2012-12-21 14:49:18 <gavinandresen> hopefully I'll be able to test that very soon
106 2012-12-21 14:49:26 <sipa> we'll need mingw64 anyway for gitian i think, as the mingw32 on ubuntu is outdated
107 2012-12-21 14:51:31 <gavinandresen> do you remember why we need a newer mingw32?
108 2012-12-21 14:52:17 <sipa> c++0x support
109 2012-12-21 14:53:03 <sipa> and also because in the older mingw32 i didn't have dbghelp, but you may have solved that now
110 2012-12-21 14:59:23 <gmaxwell> sipa: so, the mutex hang seems to be reproducable at a rate of 1:100 of my test runs.
111 2012-12-21 15:00:09 <sipa> gmaxwell: which code?
112 2012-12-21 15:00:29 <gavinandresen> sipa: I compiled without c++0x support by replacing 'nullptr' with NULL ...
113 2012-12-21 15:01:06 <sipa> gavinandresen: right, i did that as well, but then i hit the dbghelp problem
114 2012-12-21 15:01:13 <gmaxwell> master as of a couple days ago, plus hal, plus current par (which is what puts a mutex into the sig cache), plus a patch that disables the hash checks on the block.
115 2012-12-21 15:01:41 <gmaxwell> trigger must be some kind of race, since it doesn't reproduce every time on the same blockchain.
116 2012-12-21 15:01:43 <sipa> gavinandresen: though it may rely on move semantics too, which doesn't necessarily show in the code
117 2012-12-21 15:01:52 <gavinandresen> sipa: move semantics?
118 2012-12-21 15:02:12 <gmaxwell> didn't see it while running in valgrind, though I suppose thats no shocker.
119 2012-12-21 15:02:12 <sipa> gavinandresen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B11#Rvalue_references_and_move_constructors
120 2012-12-21 15:03:00 <sipa> gavinandresen: still, i think upgrading to a newer gcc is nice, unless there are clear problems obviously
121 2012-12-21 15:03:40 <gavinandresen> sipa: I'm worried about making an even bigger barrier for gitian builders-- if you have to build-vm twice, that's more work, more stuff to go wrong....
122 2012-12-21 15:04:01 <gavinandresen> sipa: I agree that upgrading to a newer gcc IS nice, though
123 2012-12-21 15:04:08 <sipa> gavinandresen: we have 3 people right now who do gitian builds; it can't get much worse, right?
124 2012-12-21 15:04:49 <gavinandresen> right-- but every time we change dependencies it is painful
125 2012-12-21 15:05:23 <sipa> you already have to do build-vm twice, btw; it now becomes 3 times :p
126 2012-12-21 15:06:12 <sipa> anyway, i don't have a problem with delaying upgrading to a newer env if there's a good reason
127 2012-12-21 15:06:37 <sipa> if building new leveldb works on lucid win32... fine
128 2012-12-21 15:11:31 <sipa> gavinandresen: maybe having a git repo with my build script + subrepositories that refer to gitian and bitcoin master would make it easier to get into gitian building
129 2012-12-21 15:12:15 <gavinandresen> sipa: good idea.
130 2012-12-21 15:13:02 <sipa> if it'd also download dependencies automatically it would be even nicer, but that's somewhat fishy already i suppose
131 2012-12-21 15:13:16 <sipa> at least unless checksum verification of those files
132 2012-12-21 15:17:01 <gavinandresen> sigh... one of my mingw32 dependencies was built with the wrong compiler, linking fails...
133 2012-12-21 15:19:28 <D34TH> gavinandresen, i've come to the conclusion that leveldb+mingw=no
134 2012-12-21 15:19:44 <gavinandresen> ACTION is an idiot.. used mingw64-deps on a mingw32 machine
135 2012-12-21 15:20:09 <gavinandresen> D34TH: I still have faith dogged persistence will pay off for me
136 2012-12-21 15:20:29 <D34TH> gavinandresen, ive come to a code error i have no idea how to fix
137 2012-12-21 15:21:10 <gavinandresen> D34TH: see https://gist.github.com/4353422 for my work so far...
138 2012-12-21 15:21:35 <gavinandresen> D34TH: ... although I'm working through more changes to eliminate the c++0x support right now
139 2012-12-21 15:21:48 <D34TH> i had to use gnu++0x
140 2012-12-21 15:21:50 <gavinandresen> D34TH: that's a patch against sipa's leveldb17 branch
141 2012-12-21 15:22:11 <sipa> gavinandresen: there's still an -ldbghelp in your patch
142 2012-12-21 15:22:27 <gavinandresen> sipa: yes, I changed that about 10 minutes ago
143 2012-12-21 15:22:40 <sipa> gavinandresen: are you now building on windows, or in linux-mingw?
144 2012-12-21 15:23:06 <gavinandresen> I'm building on windows, makefile.mingw variant that compiled -g -ggdb to get a debugging environment
145 2012-12-21 15:23:26 <sipa> ok
146 2012-12-21 15:23:39 <gavinandresen> Once that is working nicely, I plan on getting the cross-compile working and tested
147 2012-12-21 15:23:58 <sipa> thanks for that - it was driving me nuts :)
148 2012-12-21 15:24:50 <gavinandresen> I, too, can only tolerate this kind of thing for a couple of days before I go nuts.... tag-team development for the win!
149 2012-12-21 15:25:11 <sipa> you probably want to disable CROSSCOMPILE for the windows build case
150 2012-12-21 15:25:43 <sipa> though i think that just disables some automated tests
151 2012-12-21 15:26:08 <gavinandresen> yes, doesn't seem to make a difference for me
152 2012-12-21 15:26:12 <sipa> ok
153 2012-12-21 15:26:40 <gavinandresen> (running tests is a good idea, though....)
154 2012-12-21 15:36:57 <Davey> how do i get secret key for mtgox api
155 2012-12-21 15:52:27 <gavinandresen> it's ALIVE!
156 2012-12-21 15:54:08 <gavinandresen> wait... no, it is hung...
157 2012-12-21 15:55:39 <sipa> gavinandresen: sure that is the fault of the program and not the OS?
158 2012-12-21 15:55:58 <gavinandresen> sipa: I'll debug after lunch and errands
159 2012-12-21 16:27:10 <Davey> can anyone tell me how to get secret for mtgox bot authentication
160 2012-12-21 16:27:55 <Graet> #mtgox might be able to
161 2012-12-21 18:14:29 <gavinandresen> sipa: I've got a good mingw32 debugging environment, and recreated the bug. _vsnprintf is crashing when parsing the "%lld". I wrote a little code to translate to %I64d, which mingw/Windows likes much better
162 2012-12-21 18:15:22 <gavinandresen> sipa: I'll clean up my changes, and see if cross-compiling still works
163 2012-12-21 18:18:14 <sipa> nice find
164 2012-12-21 18:18:18 <sipa> !
165 2012-12-21 19:04:57 <gavinandresen> sipa: https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoin-git/commit/eb0ecd2192aecebe32923a39902b12945ff39167
166 2012-12-21 19:05:34 <gavinandresen> sipa: I haven't had a chance to test cross-compiling with that yet
167 2012-12-21 19:06:54 <gavinandresen> sipa: I'll be back later to do that-- I expect makefile.linux-mingw needs some changes
168 2012-12-21 19:09:27 <sipa> gavinandresen: just no -ldbghelp i guess
169 2012-12-21 19:09:42 <gavinandresen> mmm
170 2012-12-21 19:10:32 <sipa> unless you want linux-mingw to use mingw32 again instead of mingw-w64
171 2012-12-21 19:11:44 <sipa> it makes sense though... i had no problem running my cross-compiled leveldb17 binary on Win7, but you did on WinXP... if %ll is supported in more recent version
172 2012-12-21 19:12:22 <sipa> wizkid057: is that par/hal bitcoind still running?
173 2012-12-21 19:15:19 <gmaxwell> interesting??? still can get the shutdown hang with -maxsigcachesize=0
174 2012-12-21 19:23:35 <EasyAt_> Hey gmaxwell, in your post about deterministic wallets. What is the difference between a change address and displayed address?
175 2012-12-21 19:23:39 <EasyAt_> Why would a type matter
176 2012-12-21 19:27:12 <gmaxwell> EasyAt_: so you an tell them apart when reconstructing a wallet??? e.g. you don't show your own payments to change addresses as seperate transactions.
177 2012-12-21 19:32:22 <EasyAt_> Ah, thank you!
178 2012-12-21 19:52:07 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: re that commit's comments??? do new versions of Windows support %ll finally? :O
179 2012-12-21 19:52:57 <gavinandresen> Luke-Jr: I guess. I dunno, the only version of Windows I have is XP SP3
180 2012-12-21 19:53:33 <Luke-Jr> i c
181 2012-12-21 20:47:15 <TD> BlueMatt: heya
182 2012-12-21 21:09:50 <thesnark> Hi all. I have a simple question - can more than one person get the same response for a GetWork request? Do people compete for the same blocks?
183 2012-12-21 21:23:11 <D34TH> thesnark, yes
184 2012-12-21 21:23:34 <kjj> erm.
185 2012-12-21 21:24:39 <gmaxwell> D34TH: please don't confuse people.
186 2012-12-21 21:24:52 <gmaxwell> Getworks are universally unique unless software is broken.
187 2012-12-21 21:24:55 <kjj> each node uses their own pubkey for the generate transaction, and the reference client keeps track of the number of requests and increments a counter in the coinbase called extranonce
188 2012-12-21 21:25:35 <kjj> so, you could use a proxy to provide the same work to multiple miners, which would be really, really silly. but each direct getrequest will have a unique output
189 2012-12-21 21:25:36 <D34TH> gmaxwell, i probably misunderstood sorry
190 2012-12-21 21:26:37 <kjj> and the whole world is competing to find the next valid block, but the blocks they find are unique for reasons given above
191 2012-12-21 21:27:12 <kjj> so, the problem was really ambiguity in the notion of "same blocks"
192 2012-12-21 21:27:36 <thesnark> ACTION is a noob
193 2012-12-21 21:27:58 <kjj> nothing wrong with being a noob. everyone is or was once.
194 2012-12-21 21:28:43 <kjj> did my answer make sense to you?
195 2012-12-21 21:29:17 <thesnark> So everybody competes for the same solution, but nobody is assigned the same work?
196 2012-12-21 21:29:26 <thesnark> ACTION scratches head
197 2012-12-21 21:29:55 <thesnark> no
198 2012-12-21 21:31:06 <thesnark> everyone is assigned different work, however if anybody can provide a solution they will "win" credit for it
199 2012-12-21 21:31:35 <thesnark> so if I solve my neighbor's work I still get that credit...but knowing what my neighbor's work is is very difficult?
200 2012-12-21 21:34:08 <kjj> if you solver someone else's work, their address gets the credit
201 2012-12-21 21:34:11 <kjj> er, solve
202 2012-12-21 21:34:34 <thesnark> kjj I see. So mining is basically non-competitive?
203 2012-12-21 21:34:45 <kjj> the reward goes to the key (address) specified when the work is created, and can't be changed without invaliding the block candidate
204 2012-12-21 21:34:52 <kjj> no, it is totally competitive
205 2012-12-21 21:34:54 <thesnark> I see
206 2012-12-21 21:44:14 <etotheipi_> sipa: good news: my CKD matches yours
207 2012-12-21 21:44:28 <etotheipi_> all the way up to m/0/1/3/7/15/31/63/127/255/511/1023/2047/4095/8191/16383/32767
208 2012-12-21 21:51:40 <wizkid057> sipa: yes, it should be
209 2012-12-21 21:51:58 <wizkid057> yeah, it is
210 2012-12-21 21:53:22 <gavinandresen> sipa: https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoin-git/commits/mingw32fixes rebased with a fix to makefile.linux-mingw. Cross-compile works
211 2012-12-21 21:53:52 <gavinandresen> ... and now I've got to disappear. Happy solstice everybody! And Merry Christmas... I'll be mostly away until the 26'th.
212 2012-12-21 21:55:30 <galambo> oh no the world is ending
213 2012-12-21 22:08:38 <robocoin> hi, whort question regarding bitcoind. When I 'bitcoind getbalance', I'll see currently confirmed balance. In Bitcoind-Qt I can also see the currently unconfirmed amounts. - > Can I call this value (received but unconfirmed) from bitcoind? - without writing a function. I have not found it in the documentation :(
214 2012-12-21 22:08:44 <robocoin> *short
215 2012-12-21 22:10:08 <Scrat> robocoin: getreceivedbyaccount account 0
216 2012-12-21 22:10:16 <Scrat> this is just received (NOT BALANCE)
217 2012-12-21 22:10:40 <robocoin> Scrat, but it also sums already spend amounts.
218 2012-12-21 22:11:48 <robocoin> but I could (getreceivedbyaccount * - getbalance).. But if the bitcoind already does it, I thought I could avoid using a function
219 2012-12-21 22:11:52 <Scrat> try getbalance "" 0
220 2012-12-21 22:12:45 <robocoin> Scrat, thank you!
221 2012-12-21 22:13:09 <Scrat> I misread your question ;/
222 2012-12-21 22:13:19 <robocoin> Scrat, thx
223 2012-12-21 22:15:31 <MC1984> the foundation only accepts coins right
224 2012-12-21 23:26:54 <da2ce7> dose anyone maintain Visual Studio project files for bitcoin?
225 2012-12-21 23:27:29 <da2ce7> I've hacked up my own copy of them for bitcoind, however it is going to take lots of work to get bitcoin-qt up and running.
226 2012-12-21 23:27:54 <da2ce7> just don't want to re-invent the wheel.
227 2012-12-21 23:28:05 <Luke-Jr> I would expect qmake can produce them
228 2012-12-21 23:28:15 <da2ce7> hmm.
229 2012-12-21 23:34:35 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: I'm curious as to whats motivating that? (and as luke says, hopefully qmake can do it... if not, it's a losing battle)
230 2012-12-21 23:35:40 <da2ce7> If I build for Windows RT, I need to use msvc.
231 2012-12-21 23:36:08 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: mingw-rt.
232 2012-12-21 23:41:13 <da2ce7> gmaxwell: the mingw -'rt' is the runtime.
233 2012-12-21 23:41:35 <da2ce7> not for the Windows RT (aka walled guardan Windows 8)
234 2012-12-21 23:41:50 <gmaxwell> Aww.
235 2012-12-21 23:42:00 <da2ce7> *Garden
236 2012-12-21 23:42:31 <gmaxwell> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12909139/can-windows-store-applications-be-built-with-mingw
237 2012-12-21 23:42:41 <da2ce7> ** walled garden == jail
238 2012-12-21 23:43:40 <da2ce7> maybe cbitcoin would be a good option for that...
239 2012-12-21 23:43:47 <gmaxwell> yea, doesn't sound very conceptually friendly with bitcoin... how do I know a windows-jail build of bitcoin isn't malicious?
240 2012-12-21 23:44:29 <da2ce7> you wouldn't, but you can mitigate much of the risk with muti-sig
241 2012-12-21 23:45:55 <gmaxwell> eh. careful. multisig (1) doesn't mitigate systemic risk if its widely deployed, (2) is easily fooled when the malicious software controls almost everything you see... but thats more of a general argument against running _any_ unauditable software, than specifically against that.
242 2012-12-21 23:50:33 <da2ce7> I think that _some_ people will be able to audit it... being able to download the original package from the windows store, and check it. Just not the every-day user.
243 2012-12-21 23:50:57 <da2ce7> there is still DLL's that are made and installed.