< NewBTCDev>
Compiled just fine, and setup the config file... but running ./bitcoind doesn't give me any feedback on what its doing... I stopped it and checked that ./bitcoind -version worked. That worked as expected... I set printtoconsole=1 to see if that would spit out progress but it didnt... novice linux user so I just discovered the TOP command and noticed bitcoind Is running. I'm running on the test net so I assume its synchin
< Chris_Stewart_5>
and then you can use bitcoin-cli to run commands, this is more on topic for #bitcoin not bitcoin-core-dev
< Chris_Stewart_5>
also if anyone is feeling generous, I'm trying allow 'chainActive' to be used in the interpreter, but I am having trouble figuring out how to exactly allow that to be reachable without bitcoin-tx failing to compile
< NewBTCDev>
Thank you Chris, I'll go there! Appreciate the help
< jtimon>
Chris_Stewart_5: why would you want to use chainActive inside the interpreter? feels like a terrible layer violation
< Chris_Stewart_5>
jtimon: For the current proposal of blind merge mining we are integrating a new op code that only allows a miner to claim an output iff they include a hash in the coinbase tx
< jtimon>
can't you just pass whatever you need to TransactionSignatureChecker's constructor ?
< jtimon>
with a fast look, all you need is chainActive.Tip()->coinbase right?
< Chris_Stewart_5>
Yes
< Chris_Stewart_5>
so you would suggest just passing that as an arg to TransactionSignatureChecker?
< jtimon>
maybe pass the relevant coinbase to the TransactionSignatureChecker constructor?
< Chris_Stewart_5>
Yeah, I didn't think about doing it that way. That would be much cleaner.
< Chris_Stewart_5>
I'll code it up and see what it looks like, thanks!
< jtimon>
or perhaps something more similar to what is done with the locktime or something, but I don't like that much anyway, I consider BaseSignatureChecker having those methos kind of a layer violation already
< jtimon>
Chris_Stewart_5: no problem, happy that you like the idea
< Chris_Stewart_5>
I agree it is weird to have locktime checking stuff in a 'SignatureChecker' but I'm not going to worry about organization right now, I just want to get some sort of MVP for BMM done
< Chris_Stewart_5>
and see if it is actually viable.. not sure if I am convinced this scheme will actually work..
< kallewoof>
luke-jr: what's up?
< kallewoof>
(you pinged)
< luke-jr>
kallewoof: nm, your listsinceblock PR tests relied on features silently missing in 0.14 test_framework
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] practicalswift opened pull request #10631: Use the override specifier (C++11) where we expect to be overriding the virtual function of a base class (master...overrides-ii) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10631
< achow101>
Could someone help me out here with fixing this? I have figured out that it has something to do with linking order and the fact that IsMine is not used in libbitcoin_server which is linked first