1 2014-04-20 01:02:13 <saizai> so… anyone want to comment on the bitcoin doc before I put it up?
  2 2014-04-20 01:05:01 <sipa> which?
  3 2014-04-20 01:06:45 <saizai> comments on our own comments on the two bitcoin draft aos
  4 2014-04-20 01:06:50 <saizai> can PM link
  5 2014-04-20 01:07:02 <saizai> if you want to comment on ‘em yourself, instructions @ makeyourlaws.org/fec/bitcoin#comment
  6 2014-04-20 01:07:05 <sipa> aos?
  7 2014-04-20 01:07:13 <saizai> see links at top of that link
  8 2014-04-20 01:07:15 <saizai> FEC
  9 2014-04-20 01:07:17 <sipa> oh, legal stuff
 10 2014-04-20 01:07:22 <saizai> yes
 11 2014-04-20 01:10:43 <tyrick> Is there a bitcoin PAC being made?
 12 2014-04-20 01:10:52 <tyrick> what is this?
 13 2014-04-20 01:11:43 <saizai> ACTION runs makeyourlaws
 14 2014-04-20 01:11:51 <saizai> see above for the summary
 15 2014-04-20 01:11:56 <saizai> @ link
 16 2014-04-20 01:12:09 <saizai> we’re going to post comments on the 2 draft AOs
 17 2014-04-20 01:12:14 <saizai> and I have a draft of those comments
 18 2014-04-20 02:07:04 <BlueMatt> warren: is there more than one builder on those nightlies? otherwise gitian doesnt help much.....
 19 2014-04-20 02:13:17 <sipa> BlueMatt: i think it's pretty useful that people can try a gitian build before a release (candidate) and check that it matches with something
 20 2014-04-20 02:13:25 <sipa> whether they will... that's another question
 21 2014-04-20 02:13:57 <sipa> also, why am i awake?
 22 2014-04-20 02:16:01 <warren> BlueMatt: wumpus was planning on adding his own auto-builder.  we'll eventually publish code for anyone to replicate it.
 23 2014-04-20 02:26:47 <BlueMatt> sipa: I dont think anyone will check it......in any case, it would be nice for jenkins to use gitian
 24 2014-04-20 02:26:58 <BlueMatt> I was just pointing out that we have a builder already, paid for by the foundation
 25 2014-04-20 02:27:02 <BlueMatt> no need for 10 :p
 26 2014-04-20 02:27:15 <BlueMatt> wumpus: can you re-open #3945, its not fixed?
 27 2014-04-20 02:27:20 <sipa> BlueMatt: fully agree there
 28 2014-04-20 02:27:34 <BlueMatt> or sipa
 29 2014-04-20 02:28:40 <WOODMAN> http://bitcoinmacroeconomics.com/2014/04/19/white-paper-complete-payment-methodology-management-tool-for-bitcoin-or-any-cryptocurrency-proof-of-work/
 30 2014-04-20 02:28:47 <WOODMAN> heres my white paper
 31 2014-04-20 02:28:52 <sipa> done
 32 2014-04-20 02:28:58 <WOODMAN> thats right , done
 33 2014-04-20 02:29:02 <WOODMAN> whats done is done
 34 2014-04-20 02:29:12 <WOODMAN> cat is out of the bag
 35 2014-04-20 07:20:49 <olalonde> does anyone have a master public key on testnet?
 36 2014-04-20 07:20:55 <olalonde> bip32
 37 2014-04-20 07:35:27 <twizt> sup
 38 2014-04-20 07:36:16 <twizt> anyone know why blockchaininfo fires a 403 error message when trying to retrieve the json string?
 39 2014-04-20 07:39:39 <phantomcircuit> twizt, rate limiting probably
 40 2014-04-20 07:40:06 <twizt> ah
 41 2014-04-20 07:40:15 <twizt> well that sux
 42 2014-04-20 07:40:34 <phantomcircuit> that they dont provide you with unlimited api calls for a free service?
 43 2014-04-20 07:40:37 <twizt> it works when i go on browser tho
 44 2014-04-20 07:40:44 <deego> :)
 45 2014-04-20 07:40:44 <phantomcircuit> yeah terrible
 46 2014-04-20 07:40:55 <twizt> y would it work on browser
 47 2014-04-20 07:41:15 <twizt> and not for the app
 48 2014-04-20 07:41:46 <deego> twizt: ikr, lolz, so lam3!
 49 2014-04-20 07:41:46 <phantomcircuit> because it's cloudflare
 50 2014-04-20 07:41:54 <phantomcircuit> they detect that you're using a script
 51 2014-04-20 07:42:58 <twizt> learn something new everyday
 52 2014-04-20 07:43:03 <twizt> ty
 53 2014-04-20 07:59:34 <olalonde> does latest bitcoin use bip32?
 54 2014-04-20 08:08:40 <gpmnlxdw> Hi guys, does bitcoin-qt can run without X in linux?
 55 2014-04-20 08:08:58 <gpmnlxdw> Hi guys, can I get bitcoin-qt run without X in linux?
 56 2014-04-20 08:10:07 <gmaxwell> olalonde: no
 57 2014-04-20 08:10:32 <gmaxwell> gpmnlxdw: the GUI needs X to display, though it could display remotely.  If you don't want the gui you used bitcoind not bitcoin-qt
 58 2014-04-20 08:11:30 <gpmnlxdw> how to run bitcoind? I just use it to do some rpc call , how could I run it as a daemon?
 59 2014-04-20 08:12:06 <gpmnlxdw> i found it
 60 2014-04-20 08:12:08 <gpmnlxdw> :)
 61 2014-04-20 08:12:11 <gpmnlxdw>     bitcoind -daemon
 62 2014-04-20 08:12:11 <gpmnlxdw> To use locally, first start the program in daemon mode:
 63 2014-04-20 08:12:26 <gpmnlxdw> should be so?
 64 2014-04-20 08:13:01 <sipa> daemon just means it runs in the background
 65 2014-04-20 08:13:13 <sipa> nothing more, nothing less
 66 2014-04-20 08:14:47 <gpmnlxdw> Hi Gmaxwell, in this way, will bitcoind do anything same as bicoin-qt? except that it do not have a GUI?
 67 2014-04-20 08:15:02 <gmaxwell> gpmnlxdw: yes.
 68 2014-04-20 08:18:10 <gpmnlxdw> Good, thanks!
 69 2014-04-20 08:32:10 <warren> wumpus: around?
 70 2014-04-20 09:00:48 <GAit> morning
 71 2014-04-20 09:01:34 <GAit> gmaxwell: nice, looks like both patches to use low 's' values for signatures have been merged
 72 2014-04-20 09:02:14 <sipa> nice!
 73 2014-04-20 09:24:08 <GAit> sipa: we were thinking of using prevouts with 6 confirmations for 0 confirmation out of band signatures of 'instant confirmation' but imho it should be correlated to the amount you are trying to move. i.e. if you are moving 5000/10000 btc maybe your prevout should have more confirmations. Thoughts on this?
 74 2014-04-20 09:25:12 <GAit> likewise, for transactions under 5 euros i don't think you need more than one confirm on prevout
 75 2014-04-20 09:25:50 <sipa> you yourself are one of the signers, right?
 76 2014-04-20 09:26:17 <GAit> yes
 77 2014-04-20 09:26:57 <sipa> so from your own perspective, there will never be a double spend, unless your system is hacked
 78 2014-04-20 09:27:09 <sipa> (assuming you don't sign conflicting transactions)
 79 2014-04-20 09:29:50 <GAit> correct, we also have to be carefull not to allow an instant transaction too close to when the time locked transaction expire, as those will also allow a double spend
 80 2014-04-20 09:31:16 <GAit> i don't want to underestimate reorgs but i also don't want to make it a pain to the users
 81 2014-04-20 09:59:51 <melvster> no blocks on the testnet for half an hour, that's somewhat unusual?
 82 2014-04-20 10:07:16 <melvster> ah there it comes
 83 2014-04-20 11:20:25 <airbreather> Has anyone collected a list of the known... "unintuitive"... behaviors in Bitcoin that need to be reproduced faithfully for an alternative client to achieve consensus with bitcoind?  e.g., OP_CHECKMULTISIG popping off an extra value off the stack, off-by-one difficulty retargeting, SIGHASH_SINGLE permitting vout.size() <= nOut?
 84 2014-04-20 11:25:13 <Luke-Jr> airbreather: no, I think people have intentionally avoided doing so
 85 2014-04-20 11:26:57 <airbreather> probably to avoid giving the impression that it's a complete list, I imagine
 86 2014-04-20 11:28:18 <buZz> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400753.msg6298413#msg6298413 <- wow
 87 2014-04-20 11:28:25 <buZz> (slightly OT)
 88 2014-04-20 11:40:54 <CheckDavid> Wow. They tried to steal his btcs?
 89 2014-04-20 11:41:00 <Luke-Jr> airbreather: and because "did they discover <these>?" is used as a metric to test alt implementation competency
 90 2014-04-20 11:42:14 <airbreather> Luke-Jr: Sneaky, but sounds effective.  thanks
 91 2014-04-20 11:42:26 <sipa> well, it's better than that
 92 2014-04-20 11:42:42 <sipa> we've actually discovered many quirks through people trying to reimplement it
 93 2014-04-20 11:48:55 <GAit> how many full node clients are there besides btcd?
 94 2014-04-20 11:50:17 <airbreather> there's at least bitcoinj, which needs to at least pretend to be a full node
 95 2014-04-20 11:50:29 <sipa> bop, bitcoinj, btcd, purecoin, ... and several others have attempted full or partial reimplementations
 96 2014-04-20 11:50:35 <sipa> unsure how complete they effectively are
 97 2014-04-20 11:50:44 <sipa> airbreather: "needs to" ?
 98 2014-04-20 11:50:45 <GAit> fair enough
 99 2014-04-20 11:51:22 <gpmnlxdw>  bitcoind --daemon
100 2014-04-20 11:51:23 <gpmnlxdw> Bitcoin server starting
101 2014-04-20 11:51:23 <gpmnlxdw> : Error initializing wallet database environment
102 2014-04-20 11:51:32 <sipa> gpmnlxdw: look in db.log
103 2014-04-20 11:51:36 <gpmnlxdw> ok
104 2014-04-20 11:51:51 <gpmnlxdw> DB_ENV->log_set_config: direct I/O either not configured or not supported
105 2014-04-20 11:51:51 <gpmnlxdw> illegal flag specified to DB_ENV->open
106 2014-04-20 11:51:52 <sipa> airbreather: by default, it doesn't function as a full node, and i heard they're even planning to remove support for it
107 2014-04-20 11:51:54 <gpmnlxdw> just initial
108 2014-04-20 11:52:07 <gpmnlxdw> in the total new server
109 2014-04-20 11:52:13 <gpmnlxdw> does it matter?
110 2014-04-20 11:52:40 <sipa> gpmnlxdw: what device/disk/partition/filesystem are you putting the wallet db env on?
111 2014-04-20 11:52:52 <airbreather> sipa: meant to say "needed to"; when it started, there weren't the fancy SPV-friendly network messages, right?
112 2014-04-20 11:53:06 <gpmnlxdw> DB_ENV->log_set_config: direct I/O either not configured or not supported
113 2014-04-20 11:53:06 <gpmnlxdw> illegal flag specified to DB_ENV->open
114 2014-04-20 11:53:11 <sipa> gpmnlxdw: i can read
115 2014-04-20 11:53:20 <gpmnlxdw> :)
116 2014-04-20 11:53:22 <sipa> airbreather: even then, it was just SPV
117 2014-04-20 11:53:32 <sipa> airbreather: partial full node support came only later
118 2014-04-20 11:53:34 <airbreather> right, thus the "at least pretend" bit
119 2014-04-20 11:53:41 <sipa> no, it never had to pretend anything
120 2014-04-20 11:53:55 <gpmnlxdw> /dev/vzfs on / type reiserfs (rw,usrquota,grpquota)
121 2014-04-20 11:54:17 <gpmnlxdw> and I can access the dir without problem
122 2014-04-20 11:54:38 <sipa> did you compile bdb yourself?
123 2014-04-20 11:54:42 <gpmnlxdw> yes
124 2014-04-20 11:55:15 <sipa> you probably need to compile with --enable-o_direct then
125 2014-04-20 11:56:10 <gpmnlxdw> oooo, I try it now
126 2014-04-20 11:56:51 <sipa> if that doesn't work, i guess it's not compatible with the filesystem or device it's on
127 2014-04-20 11:57:24 <gpmnlxdw> filesys should be ok, I suppose;
128 2014-04-20 11:57:50 <gpmnlxdw> configure file is copied from 0.8.9
129 2014-04-20 11:57:59 <gpmnlxdw> now the source is 0.9.1
130 2014-04-20 11:58:05 <gpmnlxdw> matter?
131 2014-04-20 11:58:40 <sipa> 0.8.9 does not exist
132 2014-04-20 11:58:58 <sipa> and i'm talking about bdb's compilation, not bitcoin's
133 2014-04-20 12:00:20 <gpmnlxdw> so you think the problem should caused by wrong bdb version ?
134 2014-04-20 12:00:43 <sipa> no
135 2014-04-20 12:00:49 <gpmnlxdw> @_@
136 2014-04-20 12:01:08 <sipa> i'm saying it's because either you compiled bdb without direct io support, or the device you're running it on does not support that
137 2014-04-20 12:01:32 <gpmnlxdw> ok, I got you suggestion
138 2014-04-20 12:01:39 <jaakkos> you could use strace to see if it tries to open something with O_DIRECT
139 2014-04-20 12:01:40 <gpmnlxdw> I'll recompile bdb
140 2014-04-20 12:02:07 <gpmnlxdw> not familiar with strace, :)
141 2014-04-20 12:02:17 <gpmnlxdw> let me try the easy way first
142 2014-04-20 12:02:23 <gpmnlxdw> ^_^
143 2014-04-20 12:02:32 <jaakkos> strace just prints out system calls the process makes
144 2014-04-20 12:02:35 <sipa> also, do you need a wallet?
145 2014-04-20 12:02:42 <splitting> anyone familiar with working with python-bitcoinrpc?
146 2014-04-20 12:02:43 <gpmnlxdw> no
147 2014-04-20 12:02:50 <gpmnlxdw> just a daemon,
148 2014-04-20 12:02:50 <sipa> then build bitcoind with --disable-wallet
149 2014-04-20 12:03:02 <sipa> the daemon can have support for wallets or not
150 2014-04-20 12:03:08 <sipa> what rpc calls will you do?
151 2014-04-20 12:03:26 <gpmnlxdw> json rpc, wrapped in go
152 2014-04-20 12:03:34 <sipa> that's not an answer to my question
153 2014-04-20 12:03:42 <splitting> yeah some calls need the wallet
154 2014-04-20 12:03:45 <splitting> like getbalance
155 2014-04-20 12:04:00 <sipa> ok
156 2014-04-20 12:04:02 <gpmnlxdw> oooo, I'd better keep wallet
157 2014-04-20 12:04:06 <gpmnlxdw> try bdb first
158 2014-04-20 12:04:15 <sipa> yes, if you need any wallet rpcs, you need a wallet :)
159 2014-04-20 12:07:01 <gpmnlxdw> so, will o_direct switch corrupt file?
160 2014-04-20 12:07:31 <sipa> no?
161 2014-04-20 12:07:51 <gpmnlxdw> or just make the possiblity got a little higher?
162 2014-04-20 12:07:55 <sipa> no
163 2014-04-20 12:08:06 <sipa> it just bypasses the kernel caching
164 2014-04-20 12:08:37 <gpmnlxdw> ok, clear
165 2014-04-20 12:10:23 <gpmnlxdw> a little curious; why bitcoin need o_direct?
166 2014-04-20 12:11:36 <sipa> it doesn't
167 2014-04-20 12:11:44 <sipa> bdb does, apparently, for some reason
168 2014-04-20 12:23:36 <xdotcomm_> how many transactions can block notify handle like if I get 100 transactions per second ... it seems like it chockes out
169 2014-04-20 12:25:28 <sipa> xdotcomm_: bitcoin can't handle more than 7 transactions per second overall
170 2014-04-20 12:25:49 <Luke-Jr> xdotcomm_: blocknotify runs for blocks, not transactions..
171 2014-04-20 12:25:54 <sipa> also, blocknotify is caller per block, not per transaction
172 2014-04-20 12:25:54 <xdotcomm_> sipa: I am talking about memory pool walletnotify
173 2014-04-20 12:26:09 <xdotcomm_> sorry been up for a while... I meant walletnotify
174 2014-04-20 12:26:44 <xdotcomm_> I gets called 2x once on memory pool visible transaction and another on 1 confirmation
175 2014-04-20 12:27:03 <sipa> there still can't be more than 7 per second that get confirmed, so if you see spikes of 100s of transactions, they certainly won't last long
176 2014-04-20 12:27:12 <sipa> but indeed, walletnotify isn't a very efficient mechanism
177 2014-04-20 12:27:39 <sipa> you should probably consider a more dedicated wallet system if you need that
178 2014-04-20 12:27:57 <xdotcomm_> sipa: yea it got bogged down.. and stopped firing walletnotify until restarted the daemon
179 2014-04-20 12:28:52 <xdotcomm_> sipa: what do you mean by dedicated wallet system... as a backup I can use listtranasctions and see if there is anything missed by walletnotify
180 2014-04-20 12:29:14 <sipa> xdotcomm_: i mean not using bitcoind's wallet
181 2014-04-20 12:29:22 <sipa> it's not very scalable
182 2014-04-20 12:30:14 <xdotcomm_> sipa: writing a new wallet would be beyond my "pay grade"
183 2014-04-20 12:30:40 <sipa> there are different wallet implementations, both free and commercial
184 2014-04-20 12:30:42 <xdotcomm_> especially something as reliable and tested as bitcoind
185 2014-04-20 12:30:54 <xdotcomm_> any suggestions?
186 2014-04-20 12:31:02 <sipa> not really, i work on bitcoind :)
187 2014-04-20 12:32:27 <xdotcomm_> sipa: perfect since there is a whole community of altcoiners that need your work and I doupt any alternative wallets would work for altcoins :)
188 2014-04-20 12:32:38 <gpmnlxdw> not work :(
189 2014-04-20 12:33:00 <gpmnlxdw> what's the preferred bdb version? is it 4.7.25?
190 2014-04-20 12:33:07 <sipa> 4.8 or 5.1
191 2014-04-20 12:33:35 <sipa> xdotcomm_: i don't work for altcoiners
192 2014-04-20 12:33:43 <xdotcomm_> sipa: not directly :)
193 2014-04-20 12:33:56 <sipa> i wished it was not at all
194 2014-04-20 12:34:13 <xdotcomm_> sipa: thats like wishing internet would only be in your house
195 2014-04-20 12:34:14 <sipa> (well, apart from the few interesting ones)
196 2014-04-20 12:34:22 <xdotcomm_> its unstopable now
197 2014-04-20 12:34:27 <sipa> i doubt it
198 2014-04-20 12:34:32 <xdotcomm_> marvelous
199 2014-04-20 12:34:51 <sipa> of course, i won't stop anyone from using code in interesting or uninteresting ways
200 2014-04-20 12:35:50 <xdotcomm_> what i like is that there is some conformity in all this maddness so there is no need to learn new commands for every coin :)
201 2014-04-20 12:36:18 <gpmnlxdw> db4-4.7.25-18.el6_4.x86_64
202 2014-04-20 12:36:18 <gpmnlxdw> db4-cxx-4.7.25-18.el6_4.x86_64
203 2014-04-20 12:36:18 <gpmnlxdw> db4-devel-4.7.25-18.el6_4.x86_64
204 2014-04-20 12:36:18 <gpmnlxdw> db4-utils-4.7.25-18.el6_4.x86_64
205 2014-04-20 12:36:18 <gpmnlxdw> rpm -qa | grep db4
206 2014-04-20 12:36:33 <gpmnlxdw> hi sipa, is this db4 what I'm looking for?
207 2014-04-20 12:36:48 <sipa> gpmnlxdw: #bitcoin or #fedora or something; this is not a distro support channel
208 2014-04-20 12:37:18 <xdotcomm_> so i guess i would have to recompile bitcoind to change amount of confirmations needed for walletnotify to run and some other tweaks
209 2014-04-20 12:37:26 <gpmnlxdw> ok ...
210 2014-04-20 12:37:37 <sipa> walletnotify doesn't run on confirmations, it runs on "changed state"
211 2014-04-20 12:37:44 <sipa> (and the first confirmation is a changed state)
212 2014-04-20 12:39:32 <xdotcomm_> I still wonder why it gets bogged down
213 2014-04-20 12:39:44 <xdotcomm_> and stops doing walletnotify
214 2014-04-20 14:04:58 <gpmnlxdw> bitcoind
215 2014-04-20 14:04:59 <gpmnlxdw> bitcoind: key.cpp:134: <unnamed>::CECKey::CECKey(): Assertion `pkey != __null' failed.
216 2014-04-20 14:05:05 <gpmnlxdw> sorry to bother you guys again ....
217 2014-04-20 14:05:10 <gpmnlxdw> anybody see this before?
218 2014-04-20 14:05:21 <gpmnlxdw> then coredump
219 2014-04-20 14:08:24 <gpmnlxdw> so bad experience ..... >_< I'd like to try 0.9.0 ...... wish I can be a little luck than now ....
220 2014-04-20 14:09:07 <splitting> ohhh
221 2014-04-20 14:09:09 <splitting> hold on
222 2014-04-20 14:09:11 <splitting> gpmnlxdw,
223 2014-04-20 14:09:15 <splitting> what distro are you on?
224 2014-04-20 14:09:24 <splitting> if its not windows
225 2014-04-20 14:09:34 <gpmnlxdw> centos 6.5
226 2014-04-20 14:09:41 <gpmnlxdw> I just update from 6.4 this noon
227 2014-04-20 14:10:35 <gpmnlxdw> any suggestion?
228 2014-04-20 14:10:41 <splitting> hmm
229 2014-04-20 14:10:45 <splitting> i had the same issue on fedora
230 2014-04-20 14:10:55 <splitting> fedora's repos dont ship openssl with elliptical curve support
231 2014-04-20 14:11:03 <splitting> which causes that error im pretty sure
232 2014-04-20 14:11:07 <splitting> im not sure about centos though
233 2014-04-20 14:11:40 <gpmnlxdw> both of them are redhat's , maybe the same problem
234 2014-04-20 14:11:47 <gpmnlxdw> how do you fix it?
235 2014-04-20 14:13:14 <gpmnlxdw> and I have update the openssl to the latest one for the recently known bug
236 2014-04-20 14:13:17 <gpmnlxdw> do you?
237 2014-04-20 14:13:37 <robonerd> try freebsd
238 2014-04-20 14:13:41 <robonerd> it's great!
239 2014-04-20 14:14:18 <gpmnlxdw> my suse is fine, but now my vps is installed with centos, dame it
240 2014-04-20 14:14:35 <robonerd> enjoy!
241 2014-04-20 14:15:37 <Starduster> try https://www.centos.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=44438 "litecoind: key.cpp:134: <unnamed>::CECKey::CECKey(): Assertion `pkey != __null' failed. "
242 2014-04-20 14:16:28 <gpmnlxdw> great, I know your guys are cute enough!!!!!  :D
243 2014-04-20 14:16:34 <gpmnlxdw> ^_^
244 2014-04-20 14:16:42 <uiop> heh
245 2014-04-20 14:17:37 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: centos6 (==rhel6) ships with ecc support in openssl
246 2014-04-20 14:17:47 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: if you have centos*5*, i'm not sure
247 2014-04-20 14:20:14 <gpmnlxdw> centos 6.5
248 2014-04-20 14:20:27 <uiop> umm, actually centos6 may *not* have it enabled..
249 2014-04-20 14:20:58 <gpmnlxdw> how to fix it? In previous post, no useful clue
250 2014-04-20 14:21:10 <uiop> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=319901
251 2014-04-20 14:21:21 <gpmnlxdw> en, I see it first
252 2014-04-20 14:22:12 <uiop> ah, here for fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1021898
253 2014-04-20 14:22:20 <uiop> checking for centos6..
254 2014-04-20 14:23:30 <uiop> aha, ok. centos6 *does* have ecc support
255 2014-04-20 14:24:31 <uiop> [admin@everest ~]$ rpm -q openssl
256 2014-04-20 14:24:31 <uiop> openssl-1.0.1e-16.el6_5.7.x86_64
257 2014-04-20 14:24:44 <uiop> has the "openssl *ec*" commands
258 2014-04-20 14:25:07 <splitting> does getbalance return the balance from the blockchain or wallet?
259 2014-04-20 14:25:19 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: try "sudo yum update openssl" maybe to get the newest version (if you don't have it)
260 2014-04-20 14:25:55 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: if you *do* have at least the version above, then it's not openssl ecc support that's causing the problem (right?)
261 2014-04-20 14:26:24 <gpmnlxdw> version should be ok, I have update all package to the latest
262 2014-04-20 14:27:53 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: i'm not familiar with the code enough to what can trigger that assertion, but someone does. also, it's easter so people may be away today
263 2014-04-20 14:28:10 <uiop> *..enough to _know_ what...
264 2014-04-20 14:28:59 <gpmnlxdw> I know, thank you all anyway
265 2014-04-20 14:29:50 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: if you're a programmer, you could clone the git repo and do "git grep 'pkey != __null'" (search for the assert() callsite with that argument)
266 2014-04-20 14:30:50 <uiop> then walk backward in the control flow until you find the reason or give up :)
267 2014-04-20 14:32:39 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: (just a thought) could it be possible that bitcoind needs a password at startup time that you haven't given it (either on the command line or in a config file) ?
268 2014-04-20 14:33:20 <uiop> one could imagine that being a plausible scenario that triggers an assert that sounds like that one
269 2014-04-20 14:36:05 <gpmnlxdw> i can try gdb to figure out the context
270 2014-04-20 14:36:20 <gpmnlxdw> but the root cause maybe a little hard for me
271 2014-04-20 15:09:18 <gpmnlxdw> ystarnaud had fixed the problem, but do not address it in detail >_<
272 2014-04-20 15:09:30 <gpmnlxdw> I got the post at here, http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2014/03/20
273 2014-04-20 15:10:32 <gpmnlxdw> 03:48 
274 2014-04-20 15:11:06 <gpmnlxdw> must I recompile openssl in centos?
275 2014-04-20 15:11:08 <gpmnlxdw> >_<
276 2014-04-20 15:25:22 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: http://sprunge.us/IaUN?lang=sh
277 2014-04-20 15:25:39 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: (i was curious myself about ecc support in rhel/centos openssl)
278 2014-04-20 15:29:51 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: (this paste gives reason for that test .c file)
279 2014-04-20 15:30:01 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: http://sprunge.us/iaZi?lang=sh
280 2014-04-20 15:33:53 <uiop> gpmnlxdw: this might help http://mikeminneman.com/2013/12/getting-dogecoind-to-run-on-centos/
281 2014-04-20 15:34:01 <uiop> ACTION </>
282 2014-04-20 15:34:43 <gpmnlxdw> wa ooooo, you are so nice ....
283 2014-04-20 15:34:55 <gpmnlxdw> I will check the post right now
284 2014-04-20 15:34:58 <gpmnlxdw> thank you so much!
285 2014-04-20 15:35:09 <uiop> you're welcome
286 2014-04-20 16:30:37 <sipa> wumpus: i had no idea you put 'bit's in horse's mouths :)
287 2014-04-20 16:31:24 <sipa> wumpus: but wikipedia teaches me that bit also has that meaning in english
288 2014-04-20 16:44:28 <wumpus> sipa: hah, didn't know that 'bit' in that meaning was also used in english, that makes it even funnier
289 2014-04-20 16:57:13 <maaku> wumpus: it's the same word
290 2014-04-20 16:57:23 <maaku> just the rise in information technology has dilluted older meanings...
291 2014-04-20 17:33:22 <gpmnlxdw> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=85228.0 this instruction seems works
292 2014-04-20 17:54:01 <gpmnlxdw> Hi guys, it is because the openssl of centos do not support EC cipher, so the bitcoin will corrupt;
293 2014-04-20 17:54:09 <gpmnlxdw> I got my bitcoind works
294 2014-04-20 17:54:14 <gpmnlxdw> >_<
295 2014-04-20 17:54:18 <gpmnlxdw> dame it!!!!
296 2014-04-20 17:54:31 <gpmnlxdw> thank you all's suggestion!
297 2014-04-20 18:08:31 <melvster> did anyone ever notice that the block reward halving every 4 years sort of follows moore's law?
298 2014-04-20 18:31:21 <haqe17> is it possible for a bitcoin address to be a txin for 2 different transactions within the same block?
299 2014-04-20 18:31:25 <haqe17> also: s/txin/txout/
300 2014-04-20 18:31:38 <sipa> yes
301 2014-04-20 18:31:53 <sipa> addresses don't exist at the protocol level, though
302 2014-04-20 18:32:48 <haqe17> meaning... at the protocol level there is only txouts?
303 2014-04-20 18:33:15 <sipa> and txouts consist of amounts and a script
304 2014-04-20 18:33:43 <haqe17> ok
305 2014-04-20 18:34:38 <haqe17> so when you spend a txout, it is necessary to spend the entire amount of the txout?
306 2014-04-20 18:36:15 <haqe17> you cant for example... spend only part of it and keep the same txout for use in another transaction
307 2014-04-20 18:44:22 <sipa> nope
308 2014-04-20 18:44:28 <sipa> it's spent entirely
309 2014-04-20 18:44:39 <sipa> for both technical and privacy reasons
310 2014-04-20 18:51:07 <haqe17> cool
311 2014-04-20 20:24:30 <davec> In regards to BIP0014, it is not clear to me which order each element of the stack should be added in (appended or prepended).
312 2014-04-20 20:24:33 <davec> Browser user agents tend to prepend each newest stack element as the example in the BIP shows.
313 2014-04-20 20:24:36 <davec> On the other hand the Bitcoin examples in the BIP appear to append each new stack element.
314 2014-04-20 20:24:39 <davec> Which one is preferred?
315 2014-04-20 20:54:23 <bitmia> yo, any php lovers in here? :)
316 2014-04-20 20:59:24 <saizai> our comments on & summary of the FEC Bitcoin AO drafts are up. makeyourlaws.org/fec/bitcoin#drafts
317 2014-04-20 21:13:41 <splitting> question
318 2014-04-20 21:13:57 <splitting> can you send coins that you have on the blockchain, but dont have synced to your wallet?
319 2014-04-20 21:14:17 <splitting> so lets say i reset the data directory
320 2014-04-20 21:14:37 <splitting> and restore the wallet backup, will i be able to spend the coins instantly or will i have to wait for the blockchain to download?
321 2014-04-20 21:15:39 <sipa> bitcoin core's wallet implementation allows spending without confirmations only for coins you have sent to yourself (so change or explicit sends to an address of your own)
322 2014-04-20 21:16:03 <sipa> 0.9 may be even strixter and not allow sending at all until it can verify that the coins are actually spendable
323 2014-04-20 21:16:35 <sipa> so no, the reference client implements a full node and is not really intended to be used without synchronizing
324 2014-04-20 21:16:47 <sipa> of course, with the raw transaction api you can do anything
325 2014-04-20 21:16:59 <splitting> yeah i was about to ask that
326 2014-04-20 23:41:55 <ProfMac> I want funding for a project.  I have a draft approved Kickstarter description ready to read.  I want to see if there is any bitcoin interest before I launch.  What is a good place to discuss & publicise this?
327 2014-04-20 23:43:31 <jakov> everywhere
328 2014-04-20 23:43:45 <jakov> make a website, send press releases to coindesk and other bitcoin newspapers, post on bitcointalk and /r/bitcoin
329 2014-04-20 23:44:10 <jakov> but please please do stuff that convinces people you're not just another neoandbee
330 2014-04-20 23:45:13 <gmaxwell> but not here please.
331 2014-04-20 23:58:26 <Emcy_> what even happened with neobee
332 2014-04-20 23:58:42 <Emcy_> i think the principal did a runner or somthin
333 2014-04-20 23:58:59 <jcorgan> yep
334 2014-04-20 23:59:21 <Emcy_> but they had suits and everything
335 2014-04-20 23:59:23 <Emcy_> how could this happen