1 2015-06-28 03:53:12 <leakypat> Luke-Jr hi, first of all thanks for making the instructions for titian building
 2 2015-06-28 03:53:36 <Luke-Jr> I have no idea what you are talking about.
 3 2015-06-28 03:53:43 <leakypat> Gitian
 4 2015-06-28 03:54:09 <leakypat> The debian gitian instructions
 5 2015-06-28 03:55:28 <leakypat> I have followed the instructions but it seems like it is trying to use kvm instead of LXC
 6 2015-06-28 03:55:54 <leakypat> "Warning: kvm not loaded, this will probably not work out"
 7 2015-06-28 03:56:48 <leakypat> Ah maybe my Env isn't right...
 8 2015-06-28 04:05:03 <Luke-Jr> I don't think I did those instructions; I've only ever used it in KVM mode
 9 2015-06-28 04:19:18 <leakypat> Trying with kvm instead
10 2015-06-28 05:12:51 <Luke-Jr> CodeShark: re ML, the problem is that fraud proofs *aren't* practical :P
11 2015-06-28 05:13:28 <CodeShark> for global consensus, generally no - but you don't need global consensus for everything
12 2015-06-28 05:14:15 <Luke-Jr> just for your own wallet security :p
13 2015-06-28 05:15:19 <CodeShark> I'm not talking about what I'll be focusing the real efforts of my develoment right now, Luke-Jr :p
14 2015-06-28 05:15:32 <CodeShark> eventually...this is what could happen
15 2015-06-28 05:16:16 <CodeShark> but we should probably take that talk to wizards :p
16 2015-06-28 05:27:47 <CodeShark> I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing
17 2015-06-28 05:28:12 <CodeShark> SPV is fundamentally broken - that's not the issue :p
18 2015-06-28 05:28:39 <leakypat> I'm face palming because I'm on day 5 of trying to build Bitcoin
19 2015-06-28 05:30:38 <phantomcircuit> leakypat, wat
20 2015-06-28 05:31:45 <leakypat> Started off trying to build on windows , now have moved on to nested VMs and gitianbuilder
21 2015-06-28 05:37:29 <leakypat> All I actually want is a windows build of Full RBF patched 0.10.2
22 2015-06-28 05:37:42 <leakypat> Figured it would be useful to have my own build system a naysay
23 2015-06-28 05:37:45 <leakypat> Anyway
24 2015-06-28 05:38:28 <Luke-Jr> doesn't petertodd ship that?
25 2015-06-28 05:38:40 <leakypat> No builds yet
26 2015-06-28 05:38:48 <Luke-Jr> not that I see a point to running Bitcoin Core on a compromised machine
27 2015-06-28 05:39:08 <leakypat> It's just for testnet
28 2015-06-28 06:01:20 <phantomcircuit> leakypat, i dont think bitcoin has built on windows since 2009
29 2015-06-28 06:02:07 <phantomcircuit> all builds except os x are run on linux
30 2015-06-28 06:03:18 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: it builds fine on windows; I believe diapolo does that.
31 2015-06-28 06:03:26 <gmaxwell> but leakypat is also trying to use MSVC.
32 2015-06-28 06:03:36 <Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: including on OS X
33 2015-06-28 06:03:43 <Luke-Jr> s/on//
34 2015-06-28 06:04:08 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, i assume that's with gcc in a posix environment thingy?
35 2015-06-28 06:04:33 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: yea.
36 2015-06-28 06:05:03 <phantomcircuit> i haven't built for anything other than linux since...
37 2015-06-28 06:05:05 <phantomcircuit> 2011?
38 2015-06-28 07:34:17 <CodeShark> wumpus: you said you had made some custom tools for tracking soft fork deployments?
39 2015-06-28 07:35:13 <CodeShark> or something you hadn't published, rather
40 2015-06-28 07:38:52 <CodeShark> I guess right now the easiest way to do it is just look at block versions directly...
41 2015-06-28 07:39:38 <CodeShark> did someone hack up an RPC to do that already? :)
42 2015-06-28 09:13:16 <Diablo-D3> leakypat: dont you love when shit runs with little to no prodding?
43 2015-06-28 09:40:00 <leakypat> Diablo-D3: it happens once in a while
44 2015-06-28 09:40:49 <Diablo-D3> yeah, not too often =/
45 2015-06-28 11:57:17 <s3gfault> can we update the checkpoint in the next release?  last one is 295,000... we're at 428,000 now.... this makes SPV clients slow to load on first install.
46 2015-06-28 11:57:21 <s3gfault> thanks guys
47 2015-06-28 11:59:32 <Donster> sup guys
48 2015-06-28 12:03:34 <leakypat> Finally got my build system working , it is windows 8.1 running virtual box > Debian 64 > LXC
49 2015-06-28 12:06:26 <phantomcircuit> s3gfault, 428 is testnet
50 2015-06-28 12:11:29 <s3gfault> phantomciruit... you're right...
51 2015-06-28 12:11:39 <s3gfault> oops.
52 2015-06-28 12:11:46 <s3gfault> forgot testnet was way ahead
53 2015-06-28 13:31:38 <belcher> is it possible to use bip65/op_checktimelockverify before the entire mainnet moves over, on the testnet maybe somehow..
54 2015-06-28 13:37:23 <harding> belcher: I haven't looked at the mempool-only merges that recently occurred, but you may be able to test it now using master on a regtest.
55 2015-06-28 13:37:46 <belcher> interesting, thats worth a try
56 2015-06-28 15:09:15 <phantomcircuit> Belxjander, testnet is already switched voer
57 2015-06-28 15:09:17 <phantomcircuit> over*
58 2015-06-28 15:09:24 <phantomcircuit> oops wrong person
59 2015-06-28 15:09:26 <phantomcircuit> and he hleft
60 2015-06-28 16:35:35 <langerhans> Can some of the devs who know the details abot the DoS issue quickly confirm for me we got the right patches to fix the issue? Just 5 mins :)
61 2015-06-28 17:09:28 <Luke-Jr> langerhans: "we"?
62 2015-06-28 17:10:04 <langerhans> Luke-Jr, If I say that here I get killed :P
63 2015-06-28 17:11:02 <Luke-Jr> langerhans: then don't bring off-topic here
64 2015-06-28 17:11:09 <Luke-Jr> ##altcoin-dev perhaps
65 2015-06-28 17:11:28 <langerhans> One assumes noone has an idea about the patches apart from the "inner circle" ;)
66 2015-06-28 17:11:36 <langerhans> but nvm, we just blindly release then :)
67 2015-06-28 19:58:46 <btcdrak> Looks like BIP66 enforcement will be any day now, 917/1000 were version 3
68 2015-06-28 20:01:22 <petertodd> btcdrak: and slush is still mining nversion2 blocks :(
69 2015-06-28 20:01:48 <btcdrak> has anyone opened a ticket with their support?
70 2015-06-28 20:01:54 <petertodd> btcdrak: I did yesterday
71 2015-06-28 20:02:10 <petertodd> btcdrak: and marshall long from finalhash has been in contat with them before IIRc
72 2015-06-28 20:02:48 <btcdrak> I got 21 Inc to upgrade so there's very few left.
73 2015-06-28 20:03:31 <petertodd> btcdrak: p2pool needed an upgrade; no new version=3 blocks yet from them, but probably will be soon
74 2015-06-28 20:04:08 <davec> 15:03:36 Block count: 362960 -- Number of version 3 blocks in the last 1001: 919
75 2015-06-28 20:04:50 <petertodd> btcdrak: oh, and btc nuggets is still on 2: https://blockchain.info/block-index/911821/00000000000000000d93e1d74c795428cafb7f50db5087cdd47f252801de4b06
76 2015-06-28 20:05:51 <btcdrak> petertodd: you should be banned for linking to BC.i
77 2015-06-28 20:06:03 <petertodd> btcdrak: heh, they still have the best UI :)
78 2015-06-28 20:06:22 <btcdrak> petertodd: nope https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/block/00000000000000000d93e1d74c795428cafb7f50db5087cdd47f252801de4b06
79 2015-06-28 20:07:07 <petertodd> btcdrak: close second :P
80 2015-06-28 20:35:49 <phantomcircuit> hmm
81 2015-06-28 20:35:56 <phantomcircuit> p2pool.info seems to be stuck
82 2015-06-28 20:35:59 <phantomcircuit> (maybe forked?)
83 2015-06-28 20:44:23 <petertodd> phantomcircuit: been stuck for quite awhile now
84 2015-06-28 23:30:55 <Luke-Jr> hm
85 2015-06-28 23:31:48 <Luke-Jr> if a node tries to relay an invalid block, other nodes will DoS-ban them, right? why does this not isolate hardforks from the original nodes?
86 2015-06-28 23:48:39 <sdaftuar> Luke-Jr: depends on the reason.  eg for bip66, after version 3 blocks are locked in, version 2 blocks are rejected but don't result in dos-ban
87 2015-06-28 23:49:14 <sdaftuar> (i double-checked that one after seeing the testnet fork last week)
88 2015-06-28 23:50:27 <Donster> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/29/business/greek-debt-crisis-european-central-bank.html?_r=1
89 2015-06-28 23:51:09 <sdaftuar> but to your point, i think you're basically right and hardforks typically would partition the network
90 2015-06-28 23:51:10 <Luke-Jr> sdaftuar: I'm thinking old versions banning new ones.
91 2015-06-28 23:52:35 <sdaftuar> yeah i think we could expect that to be true
92 2015-06-28 23:57:50 <Luke-Jr> I wonder if this is a problem.
93 2015-06-28 23:58:39 <sdaftuar> well i worry about that specifically as we start to relax checkpoints
94 2015-06-28 23:59:26 <sdaftuar> ie if an older node with strong checkpoint protections DoS-bans a node that has relaxed checkpoints because it has a non-checkpointed block in its chain at some point
95 2015-06-28 23:59:47 <sdaftuar> then potentially a new node might never get to join the honest network