1 2014-05-03 00:27:19 <GAit> maaku: thanks, that was my worry
2 2014-05-03 01:05:47 <jgarzik> sipa, RE mingw & bswap... thus my comment
3 2014-05-03 01:05:57 <jgarzik> sipa, it is a Good Idea, but portability is a bitch
4 2014-05-03 01:06:33 <jgarzik> sipa, don't plunge too far down the rathole -- initial commit with dumb naive provable version which is later fixed up is just as good
5 2014-05-03 01:06:47 <jgarzik> We can use "boring" version unless endian.h is present, etc.
6 2014-05-03 01:14:23 <akstunt600> Hey all developing a new coin here and having issues getting the merkel root to show in the debug log
7 2014-05-03 04:12:59 <netg_> <710
8 2014-05-03 04:31:22 <fsk141> can anyone help me remember the name of that app that helps you search the blockchain
9 2014-05-03 04:36:43 <maaku> GAit: if you look at the mailing list there were 3-4 different schemes suggested for implementing stealth addresses, with various tradeoffs to each
10 2014-05-03 05:04:32 <playball> I need someone to kick the tires on a project I am working on. This involves reviewing code and architecture as well as security decisions. Cryptography knowledge is required, and I need about 40 hours and/or possible travel. I pay very well (this is an opportunity to make some extra cash to take that vacation you deserve), so if you have any interest message me :)
11 2014-05-03 06:34:54 <netg_> /
12 2014-05-03 11:33:57 <random_cat_> what is all the bikeshedding over decimal point placement/unit name about? folks are generally aware of their immediate wealth. people seem to continue to function in hyperinflations. who is confused twice about ounces of gold? or grams for that matter? i am all for standardization, but this seems a prime candidate for allowing the market to sort out the winners and losers
13 2014-05-03 11:36:14 <survic> random_cat_: it's literally bikeshedding. it's an insignificant issue that people can relate to and feel as if they're making a difference. it seems to come up fairly regularly, people wanting to assign names or do a "stock split" or all manner of stupid things.
14 2014-05-03 11:44:44 <GAit> survic: it's no big difference to us maybe but i can see how it makes a huge difference in marketing and people mentality. is it easier to educate people or to to change a few lines of code in N different products?
15 2014-05-03 11:45:30 <random_cat_> what difference?
16 2014-05-03 11:49:01 <random_cat_> in the iron recycling business (for example) it is commonplace in the US to accept material in pounds but get paid in tons; knowing your bid/ask (without regard to anyone's favored units) is key to trade
17 2014-05-03 11:49:11 <sl01> I dunno about it being bikeshedding, it's probably dogecoin shills attempting to derail Bitcoin from removing dogecoin's only advantage over it :P
18 2014-05-03 11:50:08 <survic> random_cat_: the United States is fairly unique in refusing to use SI unit.
19 2014-05-03 11:50:57 <random_cat_> survic: i object to any qualifiers to the word "unique"
20 2014-05-03 12:06:55 <skinnkavaj> Where do I get testnet coins?
21 2014-05-03 12:07:37 <SomeoneWeird> from the testnet
22 2014-05-03 12:07:38 <SomeoneWeird> c_C
23 2014-05-03 12:07:55 <SomeoneWeird> http://faucet.xeno-genesis.com/
24 2014-05-03 12:24:16 <wumpus> random_cat_: it's a favourite topic for some people in the community, but doesn't really have a place in development, people can use whatever units they want let the community sort it out
25 2014-05-03 15:44:06 <playball> I need a bitcoin developer to kick the wheels on hardware I am building. This includes code, architecture, and code review. To start I need 1-2 full days, which might include travel to our location. Cryptography experience is a must. I can pay up to $500 an hour depending on skill and knowledge. I can also pay up front and in btc.
26 2014-05-03 15:45:23 <sipa> playball: not here
27 2014-05-03 15:45:42 <playball> sipa: what do you mean?
28 2014-05-03 15:45:56 <shesek> playball, not in this channel
29 2014-05-03 15:46:05 <playball> oh,ok... sorry
30 2014-05-03 16:13:43 <pointychimp> I'm trying to get information about individual (non-wallet) transactions from bitcoind. I have put "txindex=1" in the conf file. I added the "-reindex" flag last time I started bitcoind and watched it run through the blockchain again. However, I still cannot run "bitcoind gettransaction <txid>" successfully. Please advise on what blatant mistake I'm probably making.
31 2014-05-03 16:25:27 <sipa> pointychimp: gettrabsaction queries the *wallet* for a ledger entry
32 2014-05-03 16:25:52 <sipa> pointychimp: if you want just to query a raw butcoin transaction in the blockchain, you need to use getrawtransaction
33 2014-05-03 16:26:25 <sipa> *bitcoin
34 2014-05-03 16:27:21 <pointychimp> sipa: I would like to get information such as inputs/outputs for arbitrary txs. I see that getrawtransaction actually returns something--a long hex string--but is there a way for me to get useful info out of that locally with bitcoind?
35 2014-05-03 16:29:43 <pointychimp> I figured it out I think. Add a one to the end it looks like
36 2014-05-03 16:30:25 <pointychimp> for archival purposes: do more googling with the right terms, people. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8734694/see-foreign-bitcoin-transactions
37 2014-05-03 16:31:32 <pointychimp> thanks
38 2014-05-03 17:10:19 <MaxSan> thinking about zero confirmation transactions
39 2014-05-03 17:10:41 <MaxSan> a well connected node which propagates a transaction helps well
40 2014-05-03 17:11:33 <MaxSan> can nodes currently not relay transactions transactions if there is a matching transaction from an outgoing address which has not yet been confirmed
41 2014-05-03 17:12:10 <MaxSan> it may not be a full proof, but surely it would greatly reduce the feasability sending out a second transaction
42 2014-05-03 17:13:52 <survic> MaxSan: the network doesn't relay double spends at present. it also doesn't really care about addresses, and keeps no record of them.
43 2014-05-03 17:14:27 <survic> you can't ever securely accept zero confirmation transactions, being "well connected" doesn't change that fact.
44 2014-05-03 17:14:52 <MaxSan> how can it know if its a double spend if it doesnt check which unconfirmed transactions are available?
45 2014-05-03 17:15:54 <survic> transactions are only relayed if they are valid. currently tranactions which attempt to spend already spent outputs are invalid.
46 2014-05-03 17:59:04 <gpmnlxdw> hi guys, my website is running, but still get a problem
47 2014-05-03 17:59:26 <gpmnlxdw> I send a transaction , it is reject with code -22;
48 2014-05-03 17:59:45 <survic> gpmnlxdw: this is a question for #bitcoin rather than here.
49 2014-05-03 17:59:46 <gpmnlxdw> but right after not more than 10seconds, I send it again ,it is OK
50 2014-05-03 18:00:26 <gpmnlxdw> ok, I will ask for help at there
51 2014-05-03 18:00:28 <gpmnlxdw> thank you
52 2014-05-03 18:00:29 <survic> gpmnlxdw: er maybe it is one for here, I jumped on that one too quickly.
53 2014-05-03 18:00:44 <gpmnlxdw> >_<
54 2014-05-03 18:00:44 <sipa> gpmnlxdw: which bitcoin version?
55 2014-05-03 18:01:01 <gpmnlxdw> v0.9.0.0-g15ec451-beta
56 2014-05-03 18:01:07 <gpmnlxdw> I compiled it from source
57 2014-05-03 18:01:20 <sipa> and it doesn't report what the problem is with the transaction?
58 2014-05-03 18:01:33 <gpmnlxdw> and always with -22 in windows bitcoin-qt v0.8.3
59 2014-05-03 18:02:01 <sipa> yes -22, but which message?
60 2014-05-03 18:02:59 <gpmnlxdw> TX rejected (code -22)
61 2014-05-03 18:03:06 <sipa> in 0.9 i mean
62 2014-05-03 18:03:22 <gpmnlxdw> that's the transaction : c0a5aed196317bed7b5e7a0cb94d62d6a055bd4b06bec313928f9e55e5294a28
63 2014-05-03 18:03:57 <gpmnlxdw> all of the error message are : TX rejected (code -22)
64 2014-05-03 18:09:02 <gpmnlxdw> oooh, more than ten seconds, but with one minute; 01:56:40 failed, but I execute the same command at 01:57:23, then it is OK;
65 2014-05-03 18:09:18 <gpmnlxdw> and no obviously error message shown at that moment
66 2014-05-03 18:10:04 <gpmnlxdw> is it because my client not get the transaction yet?
67 2014-05-03 18:10:18 <gpmnlxdw> sync data with network?
68 2014-05-03 18:12:46 <gpmnlxdw> I must sleep, I'm from another side of the earth, wish you can find something useful....
69 2014-05-03 18:13:25 <gpmnlxdw> I'm afraid of this error, I will crazy once my website is used by the newbies .....
70 2014-05-03 19:23:47 <tyrick> which thread listens for new blocks on the network?
71 2014-05-03 19:25:59 <sipa> the socket handler thread will receive messages from peers, and parse them into receive buffers
72 2014-05-03 19:26:15 <sipa> the message handler thread will call ProcessMessages on it, which eventually processes them
73 2014-05-03 19:26:35 <tyrick> sipa, thanks
74 2014-05-03 19:26:43 <tyrick> I really appreciate your answers
75 2014-05-03 19:26:50 <sipa> yw
76 2014-05-03 19:35:21 <Luke-Jr> maaku: your implementation woudl allow 41 sigops
77 2014-05-03 19:35:38 <Luke-Jr> actually 820 really
78 2014-05-03 19:36:49 <sipa> they would never execute though
79 2014-05-03 19:36:54 <sipa> so be pretty silly :)
80 2014-05-03 19:44:15 <Luke-Jr> sipa: they'd still be counted toward the miner's limits
81 2014-05-03 19:44:49 <Luke-Jr> so kinda a DoS
82 2014-05-03 19:45:08 <sipa> i expect that miners would just charge heavy fees for it
83 2014-05-03 19:45:27 <sipa> if they implement sigop-aware prioritization
84 2014-05-03 19:45:30 <Luke-Jr> if
85 2014-05-03 19:45:40 <sipa> it's easy to implement :)
86 2014-05-03 20:14:17 <dexX7> ;;later tell gmaxwell "hey, i did not face the problem of too many open files anymore. will report back, if i do, but right now it looks like something between 0.9.0ish and now did the trick. thanks a lot! :)"
87 2014-05-03 20:14:17 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
88 2014-05-03 20:18:41 <michagogo> cloud|maaku: the suggestion wasn't to allow multiple OP_RETURN outputs
89 2014-05-03 20:19:11 <michagogo> cloud|It was to allow the script to be made up of multiple data pushes
90 2014-05-03 20:20:07 <michagogo> cloud|The transaction given had two pubkeyhash outputs, and one output that was "OP_RETURN <5 bytes> <2 bytes>"
91 2014-05-03 20:52:42 <melvster> someone was asking me today about peter todd's tree chain idea, does anyone have a pointer to a write up of this concept?
92 2014-05-03 20:59:57 <melvster> ah this must be it
93 2014-05-03 20:59:59 <melvster> https://github.com/petertodd/tree-chains-paper
94 2014-05-03 21:23:23 <gmaxwell> FWIW, dexX7 reported to me that updating to the latest git fixed his FD exhaustion.
95 2014-05-03 21:25:29 <sipa> cool
96 2014-05-03 21:48:24 <gmaxwell> wumpus: sorry about the misclick on 4102 (I accidentally closed it, I instantly reopened it... I started to ask a question then went and read the code and realized the question was stupid and clicked the wrong button to cancel)
97 2014-05-03 22:03:07 <dexX7> gmaxwell: correction, it appeared again
98 2014-05-03 22:05:01 <jcorgan> dexX7: what problem are you having?
99 2014-05-03 22:05:55 <dexX7> LevelDB read failure: IO error: ... Too many open files,
100 2014-05-03 22:06:33 <jcorgan> ah, misunderstood an earlier comment, nm
101 2014-05-03 22:08:33 <gmaxwell> jcorgan: while running the addrindex patch.
102 2014-05-03 22:09:34 <jcorgan> hmm
103 2014-05-03 22:09:39 <dexX7> it looks like this originates from ReadTransaction
104 2014-05-03 22:10:01 <dexX7> https://github.com/dexX7/bitcoin/blob/0f8537e1b246c72e52812a82507568400030cf2f/src/main.cpp#L1014
105 2014-05-03 22:29:42 <PRab> Is http://mikegerwitz.com/papers/git-horror-story relevant to Bitcoin? I know tags are signed, but I don't think commits are.
106 2014-05-03 22:30:03 <sipa> commits can be signed
107 2014-05-03 22:30:21 <PRab> They can be, but is that enforced right now?
108 2014-05-03 22:32:24 <sipa> "enforced" ?
109 2014-05-03 22:33:02 <PRab> Have a rule in place that all commits must be signed before they are merged.
110 2014-05-03 22:33:08 <sipa> oh, no
111 2014-05-03 22:33:16 <sipa> but usually our merge commits are signed
112 2014-05-03 22:33:32 <PRab> Oh, I didn't realize that.
113 2014-05-03 22:33:45 <sipa> the meaning a commit signature for us is agreement with the change the commit itself brings
114 2014-05-03 22:33:55 <sipa> not agreement necessarily with its entire history
115 2014-05-03 22:34:16 <sipa> we have a script that does github merges loca
116 2014-05-03 22:34:18 <sipa> lly
117 2014-05-03 22:34:24 <sipa> displays the change to verify
118 2014-05-03 22:34:30 <sipa> amd the offers to gpg sign it
119 2014-05-03 22:34:34 <sipa> before pushing to github
120 2014-05-03 22:34:49 <PRab> Yeah, but at least then if all code is added via merges (and --no-ff) then all new code should be signed all the time.
121 2014-05-03 22:35:09 <PRab> That actually sounds a lot better than I was expecting.
122 2014-05-03 22:35:13 <sipa> basically preventing github from doing nasty things underneath their 'merge' button
123 2014-05-03 22:35:24 <sipa> the script is somewhere in our repository
124 2014-05-03 22:35:48 <PRab> I'll poke around and see if I can find it.
125 2014-05-03 22:36:42 <sipa> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/contrib/devtools/github-merge.sh
126 2014-05-03 22:39:51 <PRab> Ah, just ran "git log --show-signature" and found that commit 2364b11 isn't signed.
127 2014-05-03 22:40:07 <PRab> Looks like pretty good coverage, but not perfect
128 2014-05-03 22:40:30 <sipa> some of the people with commit access use it, others don't
129 2014-05-03 22:47:24 <maaku> ACTION advocates switching to monotone, and ducks
130 2014-05-03 22:48:53 <sipa> monotone?
131 2014-05-03 22:49:13 <maaku> sipa: http://www.monotone.ca/
132 2014-05-03 22:49:22 <maaku> a crypto-geek's DCVS, and pre-dates git
133 2014-05-03 22:49:28 <PRab> I've never heard of it.
134 2014-05-03 22:50:19 <PRab> Overall I like git, but its windows integration is a bit rough.
135 2014-05-03 22:50:46 <PRab> For example, right now it is trying to find my pubring.gpg in the wrong folder.
136 2014-05-03 22:50:53 <sipa> never heard of it either
137 2014-05-03 22:51:10 <sipa> only sha1 as well :(
138 2014-05-03 22:51:32 <maaku> sipa: sha-256 disn't exist back then
139 2014-05-03 22:51:45 <PRab> I thought sha1 is still considered secure.
140 2014-05-03 22:52:01 <sipa> maaku: really? :o
141 2014-05-03 22:52:03 <maaku> true story: linus torvolds was going to switch the kernel from bitkeeper to monotone, but the then-current version of monotone was illperformant at importing the kernel history
142 2014-05-03 22:52:23 <CoinHeavy> I donât see any reference to $(OPENSSL_INCLUDE_PATH) in the current bitcoin source. How can I point the makefile to a specific verstion of openssl? (I am on centos and had to compile openssl for EC support)
143 2014-05-03 22:52:39 <maaku> but the monotone devs were on holiday that week so he wrote git over the weekend instead :\
144 2014-05-03 22:53:28 <sipa> CoinHeavy: --with-openssl, i guess
145 2014-05-03 22:53:32 <maaku> bloody shame because monotone is a very finely architected version control system, at the right abstraction level and with well-thought-out designs
146 2014-05-03 22:53:35 <sipa> to comfigute
147 2014-05-03 22:53:42 <sipa> *comfigure
148 2014-05-03 22:53:45 <sipa> grr!
149 2014-05-03 22:53:48 <gmaxwell> maaku: sha256 existed when all these scms were created.
150 2014-05-03 22:53:52 <sipa> coNfigure
151 2014-05-03 22:53:57 <gmaxwell> SHA2 was first published in something like 2000 or 2001.
152 2014-05-03 22:53:58 <sipa> sha256: 2001
153 2014-05-03 22:53:59 <CoinHeavy> so something like â./configure âwith-openssl <path_to_ssl>â?
154 2014-05-03 22:54:05 <sipa> CoinHeavy: rtfm
155 2014-05-03 22:54:15 <sipa> ./comfigure --help
156 2014-05-03 22:54:17 <CoinHeavy> sorry sipa â still learning
157 2014-05-03 22:54:19 <CoinHeavy> ah, thanks
158 2014-05-03 22:54:35 <sipa> monotone: 2003
159 2014-05-03 22:54:47 <gmaxwell> CoinHeavy: compiling it against a specific one is not good enough; you must also link the right one.