1 2017-07-19 04:05:44 <dongcarl> I'm wondering if it'd be acceptable to make a few pull requests to `doc/init.md' under the linux section 3a to clarify how to do things mentioned in the guide, e.g. 1. proper creation of a bitcoin user and group 2. chowning and chmoding the configuration file and data directory for security reasons 3. adding the user's perferred user to bitcoin group in order to access bitcoin-cli and other bitcoind rpc clients
 2 2017-07-19 04:25:38 <dongcarl> Anyone?
 3 2017-07-19 04:55:55 <kallewoof> Best way to find out is to make a PR and see how people react.
 4 2017-07-19 05:01:46 <dongcarl> kallewoof: thanks
 5 2017-07-19 05:43:02 <eck> the bitcoin coding conventions kill me
 6 2017-07-19 05:43:04 <eck> why so inconsistent
 7 2017-07-19 05:43:22 <eck> not even consistent within the same file
 8 2017-07-19 08:51:24 <Chicago> Hello, I went to bitcoinuasf.org to grab the latest version of 0.14.2-uasfsegwit1.0 and found the Mac OS X binary is an unsigned dmg.  Why wouldn't there be a signed release available for download?
 9 2017-07-19 09:56:56 <bincap> Chicago: there is https://bip148.org/ (that I run) with nice downloads over SSL,  and as for uasf.co there is a small link below, if you ctrl-F for "downloaded here".  I recommend to download from both and verify it's same file
10 2017-07-19 09:57:31 <bincap> wait, nevermind, not that question.  As for signed mac builds, don't you need mac devel licence?
11 2017-07-19 10:04:12 <bincap> wumpus: I have a question about Gitian (also on ##uasf) - uafs.co produces binaries named "bitcoin-0.14.2-uasfsegwit1.0-x86_64-linux-gnu.tar.gz", while I got files without the -assfsegwit1.0 part.
12 2017-07-19 10:04:29 <bincap> was there option in Gitian that affects that? or do users rename files manually
13 2017-07-19 10:08:07 <Chicago> bincap, right -- looking for the signed OS X UASF build; which afaik Core team possesses the Apple code signing key so I'd have just figured/hoped there would have been a signed release.
14 2017-07-19 10:09:48 <bincap> Chicago: is it important to have the signed file, on mac, or do you mean that just as a way to confirm that you got the right file and not some virus over hijacked internet connection?
15 2017-07-19 10:11:59 <Chicago> bincap, well.... I do Gitian builds for regular releases and those are built with detached signatures and then eventually signed and can be verified; since UASF is contentious - -I want same assurances for the build as we go into the end of the month through these changes.
16 2017-07-19 10:14:13 <Chicago> in other words, the signed releases usually go through the Gitian build process and can be verified against the builder's PGP keys.
17 2017-07-19 11:08:21 <wumpus> bincap: no, there is no option that affects the file names, they're manually renamed
18 2017-07-19 12:23:57 <bincap> Chicago: oh, that type of signing is always done. it's a separate file
19 2017-07-19 14:23:44 <SopaXorzTaker> Uh, I propose a vanity header for addresses
20 2017-07-19 14:24:06 <SopaXorzTaker> so that a hash does not need to be bruteforced to yield a nice address
21 2017-07-19 14:25:01 <SopaXorzTaker> currently <id: 1> <hash: 20> <chksum: 4>
22 2017-07-19 14:25:32 <SopaXorzTaker> proposed <vNonce> <<address = 25b>>
23 2017-07-19 14:54:39 <Mad7Scientist> Is there a way that I can trim off the latest few blocks in bitcoin-qt?
24 2017-07-19 14:54:44 <Mad7Scientist> even if I have to -renidex
25 2017-07-19 15:19:35 <Murch> Mad7Scientist: Are you trying to switch to another chain?
26 2017-07-19 20:30:25 <Murch> Mad7Scientist : bitcoin-cli invalidateblock <blockhash>
27 2017-07-19 20:30:56 <Murch> if you're trying to switch the chain: https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#preciousblock
28 2017-07-19 20:31:26 <Murch> ah never mind, the latter only works at the same height
29 2017-07-19 22:01:20 <Mad7Scientist> Murch, Actually I got a block checksum error and I was hoping to avoid a complete redownload
30 2017-07-19 22:01:26 <Mad7Scientist> by making it go back a few blocks
31 2017-07-19 22:04:31 <Murch> Mad7Scientist: Then just `-reindex` should fix it, right?
32 2017-07-19 22:05:02 <Mad7Scientist> Murch, I guess so. But I assumed that the checksum error was the block itself not the other database around it
33 2017-07-19 22:05:06 <Mad7Scientist> but it must not be
34 2017-07-19 22:05:22 <Murch> mh
35 2017-07-19 22:05:47 <Murch> gimme a minute
36 2017-07-19 22:05:52 <Mad7Scientist> I also noticed that if I delete chainstate/ and index/ that I must use -reindex otherwise bitcoin-qt will try to download the whole thing from the network
37 2017-07-19 22:06:04 <Mad7Scientist> I've deleted those and I'm doing -reindex now we'll see what happens
38 2017-07-19 22:08:38 <Murch> Mad7Scientist: From what I find on Bitcoin.STackexchange.com reindex is the only solution and it might be a hardware issue
39 2017-07-19 22:08:44 <Murch> https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/51383/5406
40 2017-07-19 22:08:52 <Murch> (See the comments on the question)
41 2017-07-19 22:11:17 <Mad7Scientist> thank you
42 2017-07-19 22:11:32 <Mad7Scientist> Use bad Maxtor USB/firewire bridge
43 2017-07-19 22:12:45 <Mad7Scientist> Murch, after I have deleted index/ and chainstate/, can I delete one of the rev* or dat* files or are both sets needed?
44 2017-07-19 22:13:02 <Murch> Mad7Scientist: You shouldn't delete anything
45 2017-07-19 22:13:12 <Murch> Mad7Scientist just start with "-reindex"
46 2017-07-19 22:13:35 <Mad7Scientist> What can I delete to save space while still allowing -reindex to work?
47 2017-07-19 22:14:03 <Murch> Mad7Scientist: If you had the whole blockchain before, reindex won't need more room than before.
48 2017-07-19 22:14:19 <Murch> If you are space restrained, run with -prune
49 2017-07-19 22:14:31 <Murch> but then you'd definitely have to redownload if something goes wrong
50 2017-07-19 22:14:54 <Murch> Mad7Scientist: In case it is a hardware issue, I hope you have a backup of your wallet.dat somewhere?
51 2017-07-19 22:15:01 <Mad7Scientist> yeah
52 2017-07-19 22:15:20 <Murch> Mad7Scientist: You're synching the Blockchain to an external harddrive?
53 2017-07-19 22:15:24 <Murch> That explains it.
54 2017-07-19 22:15:56 <Mad7Scientist> but if for some reason I want to reduce the size of the database to move it somewhere and then build it again with -reindex what can I delete other than chainstate/ and index/?
55 2017-07-19 22:16:02 <Mad7Scientist> Yes external hard drive
56 2017-07-19 22:18:17 <Murch> Mad7Scientist: The blocks are what takes space, all the rest is pretty small.
57 2017-07-19 22:18:41 <Mad7Scientist> oh ok
58 2017-07-19 22:18:51 <Mad7Scientist> rev must be some kind of metadata for the blk block files
59 2017-07-19 22:19:03 <Murch> I've seen a number of issues reported when synching to external hard drive, I'd suspect that's what is causing the corrupted block checksum in the first place
60 2017-07-19 22:19:13 <Murch> yeah, for reorgs