< binarycat> .
< binarycat> I have a Bitcoin Core wallet.dat which I've had forever. Today, I made a fresh wallet.dat, created a receive address and went back to the original wallet.dat and transferred almost all of the Bitcoins to the new one, for the sake of being able to safely "claim" Bitcoin Gold/Cash/whatever without risking that the software just steals my Bitcoin instead of giving me other coins (and also to put the new wallet.dat in offline storage.... But the
< binarycat> problem I now face is that the old (now almost empty) wallet.dat still contains my full transaction history with the internal labels I've entered. I don't want that info to "get out", obviously. How do I work around this? What's the solution?
< phantomcircuit> binarycat, dump the private keys and load them into a new wallet
< sipa> #bitcoin
< phantomcircuit> oh right
< binarycat> Can't chat in that stupid room.
< binarycat> Some idiot-head must have abused this VPN in there.
< binarycat> phantomcircuit: "Dump the private keys" how?
< valval> hi, anyone able to assists me in setting up of bitcoin core for modification?
< cluelessperson> binarycat: I'm confused, if you simply don't want the labels to "get out", just delete them
< cluelessperson> or delete the file and keep the privat ekeys.
< valval> im trying to see if i can make any form of optimization and i'd like to possibly do this using an IDE. Netbeans doesnt seem to work well in terms of building because its constantly hanging due to lack of memory
< sipa> valval: i think most people use simple text editors to develop
< valval> is there any form of source code walkthrough?
< valval> like where i can start off to understand the structure of the codes
< sipa> that looks like a very small random dubset of function
< sipa> i don't think there is much of a guide, and certainly no up to date one
< spence> valval: do you know C++ pretty well? I've modified the Core code before, but as a C++ noob it was pretty difficult.
< binarycat> cluelessperson: "Just" delete them? Manually, one by one?
< binarycat> cluelessperson: "or delete the file and keep the privat ekeys" <-- I really don't get what you mean by this.
< sipa> binarycat: not here
< binarycat> sipa: What?
< sipa> binarycat: this is a development channel, not support
< binarycat> It's an idle channel, just like every other place.
< binarycat> And you ALWAYS fucking tell me it's off-topic. Fuck off.
< sipa> you're welcome
< achow101> lol
< esotericnonsense> binarycat | Some idiot-head must have abused this VPN in there.
< esotericnonsense> totally not that he's likely banned for being a royal arsehole. :>
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #11851: scripted-diff: Rename wallet database classes (master...pr/wren) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11851
< GAit> any reason not to disable building the samples for libevent make's depends? helps with building on NDK and as far as I understand they are not needed/used, seems a waste to build them each time
< adiabat> regarding the weird fee estimates mentioned yesterday, I have similar behavior on mainnet with bitcoin-qt right now
< adiabat> 6 block fee is 128740 sat/KB, 12 blocks in 111776, and 24 block is back up to 128740
< adiabat> and it stays at 128 sat/B for all the longer times
< adiabat> this is on 0.15.0 though
< adiabat> so anyway doesn't seem to be testnet only, at least in 0.15.0, don't think it's changed since though
< BlueMatt> adiabat: can you a) shutdown and copy over your fee_estimates.dat or at least b) with debug=feeest (which you can turn on without restarting from logging rpc) can you do the fee estimate rpc calls again and get the FeeEst debug.log entries?
< BlueMatt> adiabat: and then can you post those things at #11800 ?
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11800 | Bitcoin is returning higher fees for 36 block window than 2 block window (on testnet) · Issue #11800 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< adiabat> BlueMatt: a couple blocks later, the estimates now make sense
< adiabat> it was right after syncing up
< adiabat> but can get the current fee_estimates.dat file
< BlueMatt> ah, ok, shame
< adiabat> have the fee_estimates.dat and will save a copy but when I shut it down it was ok and higher, something like 500 sat/B
< adiabat> the weird dip only lasted for a block or two. Wouldn't have noticed, but was looking for it since someone mentioned yesterday
< BlueMatt> yea, ok, well thanks for the note anyway
< adiabat> ok sure, will try again and grab the .dat if I see it
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #11854: Split up key and script metadata for better type safety (master...pr/scriptmet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11854
< morcos> adiabat: had you recently restarted that node?
< morcos> if you had debug on, could you also grep for lines that contain FeeEst around that time
< adiabat> morcos: yes, had started the node after ~2 days offline, and it had just finished sync when I checked the fees
< adiabat> Didn't have debug, just regular logs. I do have the fee_estimates.dat though from when I shutdown
< gyanp534> heey
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #10149: gentlejack (master...0.12.1-bitcore) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10149
< cluelessperson> Question, does a prunine Bitcoin Core node keep a certain number of blocks?
< sipa> yes
< sipa> the minimum pruning target setting is 550 MB
< cluelessperson> ah, so easily a good number of blocks back
< cluelessperson> that's good enough for me
< sipa> a pruned node can't reorg past its pruning depth
< jamesob> is the indentation in this logging output meaningful in some way? I'd assumed it was, but parent times obv aren't the sum of their children https://gist.github.com/jamesob/a203bb0e50737bbfdad0d8847bf94635
< sipa> jamesob: it's meaningful when read in backward order
< sipa> so Connect is a subnode of Verify
< sipa> and Sanity, Fork, Verify, Index, Callbacks are subnodes of Connect total
< jamesob> sipa: ahh gotcha
< sipa> would be neat to buffer them up and print them out in backwards order to make it more readable
< jamesob> yup; will submit a patch
< cluelessperson> sipa: how can I verify the fee of transactions incoming against the UTXO set?
< sipa> cluelessperson: i assume your question is: how do i verify the fee of incoming transactions is not negative?
< cluelessperson> yes?
< sipa> by looking up the UTXOs being spent, summing their value, and comparing that with the value of all outputs of the transaction
< cluelessperson> sipa: is there a method I can use to look them up myself?
< cluelessperson> sipa: say I'm iterating over all the txes in a new block?
< sipa> cluelessperson: CCoinsView::AccessCoin
< cluelessperson> sipa: over RPC?
< sipa> cluelessperson: no
< sipa> there is a gettxout RPC though
< sipa> cluelessperson: but that won't work for the transaction in a new block, as as soon as the node learns about that blocks, those UTXOs will be gone
< cluelessperson> sipa: basically, I'm trying to get fee information about every transaction in the mempool and in each new block
< Sentineo> cluelessperson: http://node.ispol.sk/#!/mempool
< Sentineo> cluelessperson: look in the sources for server.js (rawtx event) for how I do it ...
< Sentineo> not sure though if you want something like that ..