1 2014-02-08 04:35:14 <Luke-Jr> wumpus: hey, shouldn't we get deterministic Mac builds merged for 0.9? :/
2 2014-02-08 04:35:43 <jrmithdobbs> please
3 2014-02-08 04:36:01 <Luke-Jr> wumpus: cfields finished that like a month ago
4 2014-02-08 04:36:59 <cfields> i think there are only a few one-liners needed in core, i can PR them if desired for .9
5 2014-02-08 04:37:15 <cfields> the rest is gitian stuff that's out-of-tree
6 2014-02-08 04:38:42 <Luke-Jr> cfields: IMO it's definitely desired for 0.9.
7 2014-02-08 04:39:02 <Luke-Jr> cfields: copumpkin was just asking about it in #bitcoin-otc btw, he's the guy who put 25 BTC toward it.
8 2014-02-08 04:39:19 <cfields> ok, heading over
9 2014-02-08 04:39:32 <copumpkin> \o/
10 2014-02-08 04:40:03 <cfields> copumpkin: ah, you're here too. probably better.
11 2014-02-08 04:40:11 <copumpkin> now I just need you to register a non-profit for mac builds so I can deduct however many thousands from my taxes
12 2014-02-08 04:40:13 <copumpkin> >_>
13 2014-02-08 04:40:24 <cfields> yea, it's all done in my repo.
14 2014-02-08 04:40:25 <cfields> heh
15 2014-02-08 04:40:47 <cfields> not sure if it's reasonable to take on the deps build process for the official .9 binaries
16 2014-02-08 04:40:54 <cfields> but it all works
17 2014-02-08 04:41:26 <Luke-Jr> copumpkin: technically, you could just 1099 him as a business expense :P
18 2014-02-08 04:41:32 <cfields> copumpkin: https://github.com/theuni/osx-cross-depends
19 2014-02-08 04:42:08 <cfields> pretty sure the w9 deadline has passed :p
20 2014-02-08 04:42:12 <copumpkin> I'd probably need some sort of s-corp to claim business expenses, but probably not worth the effort yet :P
21 2014-02-08 04:42:18 <copumpkin> when we hit 100k/coin I'll go for it ;)
22 2014-02-08 04:42:33 <copumpkin> cfields: cool
23 2014-02-08 04:43:22 <cfields> hmm, actually, i might've snuck the bitcoin changes in already
24 2014-02-08 04:44:43 <cfields> ah right, it's the dmg creation that needs a few patches
25 2014-02-08 04:45:11 <cfields> that's the part i didn't bother with until some discussion about how to actually do the release
26 2014-02-08 04:46:16 <cfields> ah nope, did those too: https://github.com/theuni/bitcoin/commits/deterministic-dmg
27 2014-02-08 04:47:08 <cfields> having a shitty memory and discovering that you've already done something is kinda like finding $20 in your pocket when you put on your pants :)
28 2014-02-08 04:47:18 <Luke-Jr> :D
29 2014-02-08 04:47:58 <cfields> so Luke-Jr: the top ~4 commits in that branch are needed for core. want me to PR em?
30 2014-02-08 04:49:24 <Luke-Jr> sure
31 2014-02-08 04:49:49 <cfields> ok
32 2014-02-08 07:41:04 <Cryo> Luke-Jr, did 64bit mac build get worked out for 0.9?
33 2014-02-08 07:41:57 <Cryo> yay for checking timestamps before asking questions
34 2014-02-08 10:05:02 <Alina-malina> hello all are there anre bitcoin psd ready files and stuff i am trying to make my website, and it would be nice to have some ready bitcoin logotypes, backgrounds, patterns etc
35 2014-02-08 10:05:10 <Alina-malina> *any
36 2014-02-08 10:17:47 <volante> is vanitygen as good as it gets for generating secure offline addresses?
37 2014-02-08 11:49:21 <money> hi is anyone familiar with a certain fix in a 0.08 version release?
38 2014-02-08 11:49:58 <money> about padding. and some interface changes? Does that make a new version of bitcoins or something.
39 2014-02-08 11:50:29 <money> how can the system interact if 10 users are using old version and 10 users are using new version of that.
40 2014-02-08 12:14:36 <abrkn> what?
41 2014-02-08 12:31:57 <mswiggs> burrito: thanks mustn't have done it right.
42 2014-02-08 12:32:07 <Burrito> ah, n p
43 2014-02-08 12:32:09 <Burrito> np*
44 2014-02-08 12:34:46 <mswiggs> What techniques are used to embed information in transactions? The one that comes to mind is making 'small transactions' where the amounts contain the necessary information, not sure if there are other techiques..
45 2014-02-08 12:37:05 <Burrito> What do you mean, like, information that usually is not meant to be embedded in transactions?
46 2014-02-08 12:37:49 <mswiggs> Yes,
47 2014-02-08 12:37:56 <Burrito> It's possible to substitute the hash160 (the thing the address is derived from) for arbitrary information (like what Proof of Existence uses)
48 2014-02-08 12:38:18 <Burrito> But the funds sent in that transaction are then not recoverable, feasibly.
49 2014-02-08 12:38:34 <mswiggs> Ok, so that output is gone.
50 2014-02-08 12:39:05 <Burrito> http://www.proofofexistence.com/about
51 2014-02-08 12:40:27 <mswiggs> Interesting, thanks
52 2014-02-08 12:42:08 <Burrito> That service substitutes the hash160's for fragments of SHA256 hashes. But it's technically possible to put anything in there.
53 2014-02-08 12:42:19 <Burrito> (anything, instead of hashes)
54 2014-02-08 12:47:27 <sipa> mswiggs: also, please just don't do that
55 2014-02-08 12:48:25 <mswiggs> sipa: I think I will use a different technique, anyway.
56 2014-02-08 12:49:15 <mswiggs> just confirming every transaction hash is suppose to be unique?
57 2014-02-08 12:51:00 <sipa> yes
58 2014-02-08 12:51:26 <sipa> mswiggs: but please don't put any unnecessary data in transactions at all
59 2014-02-08 12:51:57 <sipa> it increases the cost of running the bitcoin system for everyone
60 2014-02-08 12:52:07 <Burrito> I think the least harm would be done if it was done in a blockchain of its own.
61 2014-02-08 12:53:06 <Burrito> But it would be difficult to keep it protected from attacks, in comparison to the Bitcoin network, which is already secured by many miners
62 2014-02-08 12:53:11 <Burrito> lots of hashing power
63 2014-02-08 12:53:13 <sipa> indeed, like namecoin or datacoin
64 2014-02-08 12:53:23 <Burrito> namecoin's a good choise
65 2014-02-08 12:53:25 <Burrito> choice*
66 2014-02-08 12:53:28 <Burrito> already fit for purpose
67 2014-02-08 12:54:01 <Burrito> didn't know datacoin existed
68 2014-02-08 13:01:05 <petertodd> Burrito: that just dumps the problem on someone else
69 2014-02-08 13:01:30 <petertodd> Burrito: better to ask if proof-of-publication is actually needed by what you are doing
70 2014-02-08 13:02:23 <mswiggs> How do people feel about publicly sharing eckey public keys?
71 2014-02-08 13:02:36 <petertodd> mswiggs: for what purpose?
72 2014-02-08 13:02:52 <mswiggs> generating redeem scripts
73 2014-02-08 13:03:31 <petertodd> mswiggs: it's slightly less secure than sharing hashes instead, but it's not much of a difference
74 2014-02-08 13:03:46 <petertodd> mswiggs: I mean, if ECC is broken, say by quantum computing
75 2014-02-08 13:04:26 <mswiggs> petertodd: ok
76 2014-02-08 13:04:44 <Burrito> petertodd, It dumps the problem onto people who know that they are not mining or hosting the blockchain purely for the purposes of maintaining a currency and payment system.
77 2014-02-08 13:05:27 <xaptah> isn't datacoin meant to be used as a storage ?
78 2014-02-08 13:06:06 <Burrito> Yes, that's what I mean. People mining datacoin are not having problems dumped on them outside of the scope of what datacoin is meant to be used for anyway.
79 2014-02-08 13:06:17 <petertodd> Burrito: true, with datacoin specifically
80 2014-02-08 13:06:46 <petertodd> Burrito: I'm less convinced with namecoin; it was meant to be a dns system. But regardless for all these things stopping data storage on chains isn't possible.
81 2014-02-08 13:06:54 <sipa> indeed, first of all you should question whether you actually need to dump storage on pretty much everyone ever running a bitcoin/whatevercoin at all
82 2014-02-08 13:07:15 <petertodd> which gets back to the question of what exactly are you trying to do?
83 2014-02-08 13:07:21 <sipa> petertodd: namecoin is designed to be a generic key-value store, afaik
84 2014-02-08 13:07:42 <petertodd> sipa: and without some means of expiration it's not a very good one...
85 2014-02-08 13:07:45 <Burrito> petertodd, I guessed that since he was trying to use transaction amounts first, that he was trying to use it as a covert channel.
86 2014-02-08 13:08:06 <sipa> petertodd: never claimed that i think it's a good idea :)
87 2014-02-08 13:08:48 <petertodd> Burrito: heh, much better ways to do it than tx amounts :)
88 2014-02-08 13:09:59 <petertodd> stealth addresses are a case in point: ideally we'd have a way to have a transaction be accompanied by time-limited-data, so the ephemeral pubkey could be guaranteed to be kept available for, say, 1 year, and then discarded
89 2014-02-08 13:10:32 <petertodd> they don't need proof-of-publication for that, but they do need that data to be atomicly transferred ith the transaction to have the required reliability guarantee
90 2014-02-08 13:11:34 <petertodd> in practice, with pruning and schemes like mmr txo commitments, maybe op-return data effectively already works that way...
91 2014-02-08 15:54:17 <Xeno-Genesis> Im implementing BIP-0039 in Haskoin. Is the recommendation being followed as stated in the reference code from Trezor?
92 2014-02-08 16:33:58 <Diablo-D3> man whats with the bitcointalk mods lately?
93 2014-02-08 16:34:13 <Diablo-D3> apparently they've been actively removing threads that talk about the coingator scam
94 2014-02-08 16:40:09 <Emcy> who even mods that forum
95 2014-02-08 16:40:24 <Emcy> or more succinctly, BCT has mods?
96 2014-02-08 16:47:27 <ajoul> Hello, how do bitcoin mining pools work?
97 2014-02-08 16:50:31 <jrmithdobbs> they don't, next
98 2014-02-08 16:57:19 <Emcy> "how do bitcoin mining pools work"
99 2014-02-08 16:57:26 <Emcy> like a plantation owner
100 2014-02-08 17:17:59 <xabbix> Are there any known issues with 'sendFrom' on version 0.8.6? I'm using it to send some funds from an account to an address and I'm getting a txid, however the transaction does not appear on neither of the wallets (not even on the sending wallet) and txid does not come up on blockchain.info..
101 2014-02-08 17:18:07 <xabbix> Using the JSON RPC
102 2014-02-08 17:19:38 <sipa> it should at least appear in listtransactions
103 2014-02-08 17:19:59 <sipa> and your node will periodically rebroadcast it
104 2014-02-08 17:21:01 <xabbix> Quite worried since the sent amount was removed from my account balance and i received the txid however it's not listed in the transaction list..
105 2014-02-08 17:21:29 <sipa> that's not possible
106 2014-02-08 17:21:39 <xabbix> I know, right? I'll recheck everything now..
107 2014-02-08 17:21:47 <sipa> the only way it can be deducted from the account balance is because a transaction is claiming it
108 2014-02-08 17:21:55 <sipa> as account balances are computed on the fly
109 2014-02-08 17:22:30 <michagogo> cloud|Shavua tov, everyone
110 2014-02-08 17:22:36 <xabbix> and if it is indeed not in the listtransactions, that will qualify for a bug right? I mean there's no reason for this transaction not to be listed right away in the listtransactions
111 2014-02-08 17:23:53 <xabbix> michagogo|cloud: Shavua tov ben adam :)
112 2014-02-08 17:28:23 <xabbix> sipa: Yep, it's there... my bad :)
113 2014-02-08 17:46:57 <michagogo> cloud|helo: ping
114 2014-02-08 17:47:15 <Bisbee> pong
115 2014-02-08 18:03:16 <Michail1> Does anyone have bitcoind running on a raspberry pi? If so, I would like some help and/or link to the compiled daemon. I have tried reimaging the unit and different method for compile. Although it compiles there is many "warnings" When I run the unit I end up with many errors. Stuff like.... InvalidChainFound: Warning: Displayed transactions may not be correct! You may need to
116 2014-02-08 18:03:16 <Michail1> upgrade, or other nodes may need to upgrade.
117 2014-02-08 18:03:38 <Michail1> I have rescanned (even though a new wallet), and even reindexed.
118 2014-02-08 18:04:32 <gmaxwell> Michail1: I am assuming you just copied the database from some other system. You can't do thatâ it's not sufficiently portable.
119 2014-02-08 18:04:38 <Michail1> I copied the blocks/chain from a centos machine. When it fires
120 2014-02-08 18:05:17 <Michail1> So, can't copy blocks from a centos box? (I thought the issue was only windows vs linux copying)
121 2014-02-08 18:06:55 <sipa> you get errors when you run the unit tests?
122 2014-02-08 18:07:49 <Michail1> I didn't run any tests. I simply copied .bitcoin from the centos. when I run bitcoind, I see things like...
123 2014-02-08 18:07:52 <Michail1> 2014-02-08 17:54:56 Verifying last 288 blocks at level 3
124 2014-02-08 18:07:53 <Michail1> 2014-02-08 18:01:21 No coin database inconsistencies in last 106 blocks (40693 transactions)
125 2014-02-08 18:08:11 <sipa> that looks good
126 2014-02-08 18:08:20 <Michail1> Even though it looked pretty, I still get errors.
127 2014-02-08 18:08:48 <Michail1> 2014-02-08 18:01:39 InvalidChainFound: invalid block=000000000000000068cd37ef51c531c26a583223e6ce267bc1bebad3ddf537e2 height=284821 log2_work=76.420609 date=2014-02-08 16:09:10
128 2014-02-08 18:08:49 <Michail1> 2014-02-08 18:01:39 InvalidChainFound: current best=0000000000000000030e3738a2a833a1d4fbde0ae6887fd04c96798f54147cd2 height=284498 log2_work=76.367776 date=2014-02-06 18:51:31
129 2014-02-08 18:08:49 <Michail1> 2014-02-08 18:01:39 InvalidChainFound: Warning: Displayed transactions may not be correct! You may need to upgrade, or other nodes may need to upgrade.
130 2014-02-08 18:09:04 <sipa> do you have the log further back?
131 2014-02-08 18:09:11 <Michail1> yuppers.
132 2014-02-08 18:09:19 <sipa> to show the first time when 284498 got connected?
133 2014-02-08 18:10:23 <Michail1> No, the was on the cent box. (Which I reindexed since it is so much faster and rescan/reindex than the pi)
134 2014-02-08 18:10:45 <Michail1> 2014-02-08 18:01:37 trying connection 69.142.56.251:8333 lastseen=7.2hrs
135 2014-02-08 18:10:46 <Michail1> 2014-02-08 18:01:39 InvalidChainFound: current best=0000000000000000030e3738a2a833a1d4fbde0ae6887fd04c96798f54147cd2 height=284498 log2_work=76.367776 date=2014-02-06 18:51:31
136 2014-02-08 18:10:46 <Michail1> 2014-02-08 18:01:39 InvalidChainFound: invalid block=000000000000000068cd37ef51c531c26a583223e6ce267bc1bebad3ddf537e2 height=284821 log2_work=76.420609 date=2014-02-08 16:09:10
137 2014-02-08 18:10:46 <Michail1> 2014-02-08 18:01:39 received block 000000000000000068cd37ef51c531c26a583223e6ce267bc1bebad3ddf537e2
138 2014-02-08 18:11:02 <Michail1> So, if received it, and instead said invalid.
139 2014-02-08 18:11:07 <Michail1> instantly
140 2014-02-08 18:11:07 <sipa> well the database you have considers 284499 and everything after it invalid
141 2014-02-08 18:11:44 <sipa> it won't try to connect 284821, as the chain it connects to is already considered invalid
142 2014-02-08 18:12:03 <Michail1> suggestion?
143 2014-02-08 18:12:21 <sipa> don't run bitcoin on a rpi :)
144 2014-02-08 18:12:25 <Michail1> (Also, after the error, then mapsz fills up to 10001, etc.
145 2014-02-08 18:12:27 <Michail1> LOL
146 2014-02-08 18:12:35 <sipa> i don't really have any suggestions apart from that
147 2014-02-08 18:12:45 <Michail1> sipa - Thanks. I know that. It's just for "fun" the concept.
148 2014-02-08 18:12:45 <sipa> if you can make it work, please submit a patch
149 2014-02-08 18:13:28 <Michail1> Got 4x pis in different stanges trying to make it work now. thanks. will do.
150 2014-02-08 18:14:03 <Michail1> was hoping someone had a precompiled copy to try on the DB I have setup
151 2014-02-08 18:22:17 <Michail1> Question - does bootstrap.dat have to be loaded at the beginning, or can I use it at a middle point. Meaning, let's say I have the client (on its own) sync to 100000. Can I shut down the daemon and fire back up with loadblock?
152 2014-02-08 18:22:45 <sipa> yup
153 2014-02-08 18:23:00 <sipa> -loadblock and bootstrap.dat just feed blocks to the client as if they were received from network
154 2014-02-08 18:23:23 <Michail1> thanks
155 2014-02-08 18:23:53 <PLM3> Say, If I have couple hosts in a NAT which doesn't port map, can I easily connect their bitcoin clients one to another?
156 2014-02-08 18:24:27 <PLM3> connect=192.168...
157 2014-02-08 18:24:49 <PLM3> or will the connection be automagically dropped, because it's the same external IP for both hosts
158 2014-02-08 18:25:17 <sipa> connect will work fine
159 2014-02-08 18:25:32 <sipa> the limitation on per-ip-block connections is only for outgoing ones
160 2014-02-08 18:27:07 <PLM3> I'm stuck on this somewhy, when I try to "telnet 192.168... 8333" I can see in iptables output, where the counter is that the packet went through
161 2014-02-08 18:27:15 <PLM3> but when bitcoind tries to connect nothing happens
162 2014-02-08 18:27:40 <PLM3> debug.log of the one initiating connection just says "trying connection 192.168"
163 2014-02-08 18:28:53 <PLM3> must be some voodoo stuff... I'll just go and replug the cables or something
164 2014-02-08 18:33:49 <Michail1> sipa - Not that you care or want to; however, do you want SSH to the pi for a look before I blow it up again tonight? (Public facing IP)
165 2014-02-08 18:34:56 <gavinandresen> sipa: say no, I don't want you to get distracted....
166 2014-02-08 18:35:29 <Michail1> OK. no prob gavin. Didn't know he was taken already. :)
167 2014-02-08 18:36:25 <sipa> gavinandresen: no worries, no time :)
168 2014-02-08 18:55:10 <midnightmagic> ô/window goto 18
169 2014-02-08 19:04:19 <michagogo> cloud|ACTION hands midnightmagic a backspace key
170 2014-02-08 19:09:56 <pjorrit> ACTION hands the ^ remover
171 2014-02-08 19:10:33 <midnightmagic> dern thing anyway
172 2014-02-08 19:20:38 <pjorrit> i just got killed so hard.. don't even know where they came from
173 2014-02-08 19:21:07 <pjorrit> wow
174 2014-02-08 19:23:36 <jcorgan> ?
175 2014-02-08 19:24:24 <sipa> ?
176 2014-02-08 19:25:19 <pjorrit> wrong window, don't worry still very much alive irl
177 2014-02-08 19:35:54 <liori> hello, can i safely remove ~/.bitcoin/blkindex.dat? it's 1.8GiB here, and i am not sure, but it might be just an artifact of pre-0.8?
178 2014-02-08 19:36:10 <sipa> you can remove it
179 2014-02-08 19:36:16 <sipa> 0.8.x and above don't use it
180 2014-02-08 19:37:18 <liori> i've also got ~/.bitcoin/blk000[123].dat files, which are hardlinks to similar files in ~/.bitcoin/blocks. can i do the same thing with them?
181 2014-02-08 19:37:43 <michagogo> cloud|yep
182 2014-02-08 19:37:59 <michagogo> cloud|(they don't hurt anything, because they're just links, but no reason to keep them around)
183 2014-02-08 19:38:52 <liori> and last question. i remember that in pre-0.8, i had to back up the whole ~/.bitcoin for safety. if i understand correctly, i can now skip ~/.bitcoin/blocks without breaking the wallet?
184 2014-02-08 19:39:25 <michagogo> cloud|All you've ever needed in the wallet
185 2014-02-08 19:40:01 <michagogo> cloud|But, if you also back up ~/.bitcoin/blocks and ~/.bitcoin/chainstate, you will save yourself resyncing the entire blockchain if you lose them
186 2014-02-08 19:40:40 <michagogo> cloud|~/.bitcoin/wallet.dat is _the_ inportant file, the one that you should keep safe, back up securely to multiple locations, etc
187 2014-02-08 19:40:46 <michagogo> cloud|(and also keep secured)
188 2014-02-08 19:40:50 <liori> the thing is, the blockchain takes ~100GB of my backup space now (-:. i can take the hit of redownloading the blockchain in case of disk failure, especially as i've got a copy on a second machine anyway
189 2014-02-08 19:40:57 <michagogo> cloud|the blocks and chainstate dirs are "nice to have"
190 2014-02-08 19:41:07 <michagogo> cloud|Also, you don't need more than one revision of them
191 2014-02-08 19:41:38 <michagogo> cloud|s/needed in/needed is/
192 2014-02-08 19:42:15 <sipa> liori: at least of the blocks/ directory, you only need a single copy
193 2014-02-08 19:42:24 <sipa> as the data in it is append-only
194 2014-02-08 19:42:59 <michagogo> cloud|Oh, actually that's right
195 2014-02-08 19:43:07 <michagogo> cloud|Chainstate you may want to keep revisioned
196 2014-02-08 19:44:20 <liori> ok, thank you.
197 2014-02-08 19:47:59 <michagogo> cloud|Hm, does gitian set $OUTDIR on its own, outside of the script?
198 2014-02-08 19:48:41 <michagogo> cloud|yep: https://github.com/devrandom/gitian-builder/blob/master/bin/gbuild#L98
199 2014-02-08 19:52:16 <pjorrit> yea the blockchain is pretty well backed up :)
200 2014-02-08 20:21:42 <Michail1> sipa - Something to note between the centos machine and the pi.... centos is making the files -rw------- 1 root root 134217728 Apr 14 2013 blk00000.dat while the pi is: -rw------- 1 pi pi 134214363 Feb 8 11:31 blk00000.dat
201 2014-02-08 20:22:47 <Michail1> The cent box has all blk files at exactly 134217728 bytes. The compare between them so far show that they are identical other than trailing 00 to make the exact file length.
202 2014-02-08 20:23:08 <Michail1> Not saying this is the issue; however, the files are different so far in that fashion only.
203 2014-02-08 20:24:02 <sipa> Michail1: well bitcoin version on the centos box?
204 2014-02-08 20:25:09 <Michail1> 0.8.6
205 2014-02-08 20:25:16 <Michail1> same
206 2014-02-08 20:26:10 <Michail1> however, it was an upgrade from 0.8.1 (Even the 8.6 is making the block the same size)
207 2014-02-08 20:29:05 <sipa> new block files are almost the max size
208 2014-02-08 20:29:20 <sipa> since 0.8.2, when moving to a new file, the old one is trimmed down to the actually used space
209 2014-02-08 20:29:27 <Michail1> new blocks are the same size...
210 2014-02-08 20:29:31 <Michail1> -rw------- 1 root root 134217728 Feb 2 18:13 blk00110.dat
211 2014-02-08 20:29:32 <sipa> s/almost/always/
212 2014-02-08 20:29:33 <Michail1> -rw------- 1 root root 134217728 Feb 2 18:24 blk00111.dat
213 2014-02-08 20:29:33 <Michail1> -rw------- 1 root root 134217728 Feb 6 10:01 blk00112.dat
214 2014-02-08 20:29:34 <Michail1> -rw------- 1 root root 117440512 Feb 8 08:09 blk00113.dat
215 2014-02-08 20:29:54 <sipa> and that's 0.8.6 making them?
216 2014-02-08 20:30:29 <Michail1> yes
217 2014-02-08 20:30:31 <Michail1> "balance" : 0.00000000,
218 2014-02-08 20:30:31 <Michail1> "blocks" : 284852,
219 2014-02-08 20:30:31 <Michail1> "protocolversion" : 70001,
220 2014-02-08 20:30:31 <Michail1> "version" : 80600,
221 2014-02-08 20:30:31 <Michail1> "walletversion" : 60000,
222 2014-02-08 20:36:55 <sipa> Michail1: what filesystem?
223 2014-02-08 20:37:07 <Michail1> (And yes, I know it is behind. I had it shutdown in order to copy .bitcoin to the pi) It's catching up now.
224 2014-02-08 20:38:48 <sipa> do you see "Leaving block file " entries in your debug.log?
225 2014-02-08 20:39:12 <Michail1> ext4
226 2014-02-08 20:39:45 <Michail1> ext4 on both
227 2014-02-08 20:41:53 <Michail1> on centos (No, because I deleted the debug log this morning. :( I DO have those on the pi.
228 2014-02-08 20:42:06 <Michail1> or wait.
229 2014-02-08 20:44:08 <Michail1> Ok, yes, I have them. The "size" in the debug log does not match the actual file sizes in the folder.
230 2014-02-08 20:45:05 <sipa> what is being logged is the preallocation
231 2014-02-08 20:45:19 <sipa> anytime we move to a new block file, we preallocate it on disk, to prevent fragmentation
232 2014-02-08 20:45:34 <sipa> at that point, the old block file is trimmed to its actually used size
233 2014-02-08 20:46:24 <Michail1> Understood, but it would appear the file isn't being trimmed. It is full size with zeros at the end.
234 2014-02-08 20:47:46 <Michail1> This is on the working cent machine. Not saying this is the issue with the pi; however, just something noticed. So, maybe the pi daemon doesn't like the 00's. Just a thought.
235 2014-02-08 20:48:18 <sipa> very unlikely
236 2014-02-08 20:48:30 <sipa> the problem seems to be that the database you copied over is being read incorrectly
237 2014-02-08 20:48:50 <sipa> as it considers some old block that was processed correctly by the centos machine as invalid
238 2014-02-08 20:50:15 <Michail1> thanks.
239 2014-02-08 20:50:36 <sipa> iirc, there have been leveldb compatibility problems reported before on rpi
240 2014-02-08 20:50:50 <sipa> which is strange, as the leveldb file format is well defined up to the byte level
241 2014-02-08 20:51:01 <sipa> so that must mean there's a bug in leveldb on arm
242 2014-02-08 20:51:46 <sipa> also, and completely unrelated, i don't understand why the files aren't being trimmed on your centos machine
243 2014-02-08 20:54:30 <Michail1> days.
244 2014-02-08 20:54:30 <Michail1> Which makes me worry that I am spinning wheels. Well, will just let them click away and see if they ever catch up before the SDcards kill themselves. (In hopes that I could cross copy from PI to pi. I do find it strange the if I delete index and chainstate (run with rescan and reindex both tried), that it will not work. Will find out of a start from scratch will help. ETA 2 or so
245 2014-02-08 20:58:59 <sipa> reindex doesn't work?
246 2014-02-08 20:59:06 <sipa> that means something is very broken
247 2014-02-08 20:59:25 <sipa> either the block files are corrupted, or there's something weird with the binary
248 2014-02-08 21:06:17 <Michail1> reindex did not work. That's what I fear as well. It's why I originally asked if anyone has a compiled bitcoind to try.
249 2014-02-08 21:06:30 <Michail1> will look at it later. taken enough of your time.
250 2014-02-08 21:17:03 <rusty78> a
251 2014-02-08 21:35:05 <volante> is vanitygen as good as it gets for generating secure offline addresses?
252 2014-02-08 21:38:18 <jcorgan> you don't need vanitygen to create secure offline addresses
253 2014-02-08 21:41:13 <Luke-Jr> volante: offline addresses are overrated; these days, you're probably better off with an offline wallet
254 2014-02-08 21:44:32 <volante> what's the most secure tool for generating an offline wallet?
255 2014-02-08 21:46:12 <jakov> offline bitcoind i guess
256 2014-02-08 21:46:42 <jakov> download bitaddress.org, read its source and run it from an offline computer
257 2014-02-08 21:46:52 <volante> bitcoind is non deterministic as well so i might as well use vanitygen in that case
258 2014-02-08 21:47:26 <volante> and i dont want to use a browser / javascript to do address generation, it just seems wrong
259 2014-02-08 21:47:29 <xaptah> jakov: armory
260 2014-02-08 21:47:47 <jakov> what does armory have?
261 2014-02-08 21:48:06 <jakov> volante electrum then for a deterministic wallet?
262 2014-02-08 21:48:14 <volante> my understand was that vanitygen was a good implementation, because i see offline wallet printers using it, and it appears to use openssl libraries. so im just wondering if anyone can vouch for the implementation being sound
263 2014-02-08 21:50:48 <xaptah> jakov: offline + deterministic
264 2014-02-08 21:51:11 <jakov> ok good
265 2014-02-08 21:53:46 <rusty78> Hello, I am looking to hire 1-2 PHP back-end devs for a crypto-project am working on. Where is the best place to go for looking? Thanks
266 2014-02-08 21:54:14 <jakov> maybe /r/jobs4bitcoins
267 2014-02-08 21:54:18 <jakov> or bitcointalk forum
268 2014-02-08 21:54:34 <volante> basically i want to build a raspberry pi for generating offline addresses in the most secure way possible, but if it can be a completely deterministic wallet then that would be convenient
269 2014-02-08 21:54:56 <Luke-Jr> volante: Armory is probably the easiest, but not sure it uses the standard yet
270 2014-02-08 21:54:58 <rusty78> jakov: thanks
271 2014-02-08 21:55:14 <Luke-Jr> jakov: bitcoind does not support offline wallets, nor does bitaddress.org (which is also full of insane ideas)
272 2014-02-08 21:55:31 <jakov> i thought he meant addresses
273 2014-02-08 21:55:48 <jakov> he means like a cold storage wallet
274 2014-02-08 21:55:51 <jakov> i guess
275 2014-02-08 21:56:01 <jakov> which insane ideas are in bitaddress.org ?
276 2014-02-08 21:56:04 <Luke-Jr> a single address is not very useful
277 2014-02-08 21:56:15 <Luke-Jr> jakov: it encourages sending to an address more than once, which is broken by design
278 2014-02-08 21:56:42 <jakov> so paper wallets in general
279 2014-02-08 21:57:01 <Luke-Jr> it also encoruages "brainwallets", which are totally insecure
280 2014-02-08 21:57:11 <Luke-Jr> jakov: no, a single address/ECDSA keypair is not a paper wallet
281 2014-02-08 21:57:18 <Luke-Jr> jakov: a paper wallet has infinite addresses
282 2014-02-08 21:57:58 <volante> so there is no standard for deterministic wallet which has a watch-only key and can have a secure passphrase-protected seed?
283 2014-02-08 21:58:24 <jakov> depends how you define paper wallet i guess, the wiki page shows single ECDSA keypair printed on paper
284 2014-02-08 21:58:27 <Luke-Jr> volante: there is, but only pycoin supports it right now I think
285 2014-02-08 21:58:51 <Luke-Jr> jakov: then fix the wiki. a single ECDSA keypair is not a wallet in itself
286 2014-02-08 21:59:39 <jakov> unless its been changed recently, it costs money to edit that wiki
287 2014-02-08 21:59:54 <Luke-Jr> â¦
288 2014-02-08 22:00:00 <jakov> antispam measure at first, but with ballooning bitcoin price its just dust payments anymore
289 2014-02-08 22:00:01 <Luke-Jr> should be under $1
290 2014-02-08 22:00:03 <jakov> not just
291 2014-02-08 22:00:09 <jakov> ill check
292 2014-02-08 22:00:28 <volante> Luke-Jr: any idea what the BIP# for that is?
293 2014-02-08 22:00:54 <Luke-Jr> volante: 32
294 2014-02-08 22:04:07 <michagogo> cloud|jakov: It was recently lowered from 0.01 BTC to 0.001 BTC
295 2014-02-08 22:04:20 <jakov> ok
296 2014-02-08 22:05:56 <volante> Luke-Jr: does that standard support passphrasing the seed? i can't find that in the BIP document. or would i need to do my own encryption scheme to keep the seed safe?
297 2014-02-08 22:06:34 <jcorgan> volante: it does not. there is a proposal on bc.i for doing so, that has yet to be assigned a bip, but that should be soon
298 2014-02-08 22:06:41 <jcorgan> bct.org, not bc.i
299 2014-02-08 22:07:00 <volante> i like how BIP38 has the "intermediate code", so i could put that in an offline device without compromising my passphrase
300 2014-02-08 22:07:28 <jcorgan> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=258678
301 2014-02-08 22:08:13 <jcorgan> this specifically addresses the use case of storing an HD wallet seed with a PBKDF scheme to create an encrypted backup that still requires a passphrase to restore
302 2014-02-08 22:08:30 <volante> jcorgan: awesome, thanks
303 2014-02-08 22:08:37 <Luke-Jr> volante: I don't think that BIP does.
304 2014-02-08 22:08:54 <Luke-Jr> what jcorgan said
305 2014-02-08 22:09:09 <volante> so it seems i need to wait for that to become a standard and be implemented
306 2014-02-08 22:09:35 <volante> ..before i can build an awesome offline wallet printer :p
307 2014-02-08 22:09:38 <jcorgan> it has a reference implementation listed at the very end of the thread
308 2014-02-08 22:09:51 <jcorgan> i'm working on another one for my bip32utils
309 2014-02-08 22:12:58 <volante> also can have a 2nd passphrase for plausible deniability. this sounds awesome