< echeveria>
2017-12-28 02:49:23.455371 LoadExternalBlockFile: Deserialize or I/O error - Read attempted past buffer limit: unspecified iostream_category error
< echeveria>
eh?
< phantomcircuit>
echeveria, disk failure i believe
< echeveria>
looking at the block binaries there's a bunch which fell short of being full. maybe that happens during an unclean shutdown?
< phantomcircuit>
shouldn't
< phantomcircuit>
but i guess a very unclean shutdown could do that
< phantomcircuit>
the blockindex won't point to those but the block file itself would have the partial write
< echeveria>
I'll chalk that up to random corruption.
< karanlearns>
hi
< karanlearns>
when i run make - where is the so file bitcoin-qt generated . is it the one in /usr/bin or the one in src folder
< karanlearns>
arubi: on running make where is the bitcoin-qt so file made ? is it in /usr/bin or the one in src folder ?
< luke-jr>
karanlearns: user questions in #bitcoin
< karanlearns>
luke-jr: i cannot join bitcoin channel, i get switched to bitcoin-unregistered although i have registered. this question is in continuation of my discussion from yesterday do - please accomodate.
< karanlearns>
Hi
< karanlearns>
I tried cd depends , make , cd root , configure prefix = depends build dir , make , I got this error - https://pastebin.com/H1h0z4wY
< luke-jr>
karanlearns: you're not presently identified with NickServ
< luke-jr>
karanlearns: and just because you might not have access to a better place to ask questions, does not justify asking them here
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] lionello opened pull request #12040: fix: add support for CORS headers and pre-flight request (master...http-options-pre-flight) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12040
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] Zelest opened pull request #12041: doc: Rewrite the OpenBSD build instructions (master...openbsd-build-revamp) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12041
< * zelest>
hides in shame
< provoostenator>
sipa: regarding #3220, rather than using a wallet, would it make sense to create a new persistent wallet-ish datastructure that is specifically designed to track a set of outputs?
< sipa>
sorry if i'm sounding grumpy there, but all these use cases assuming access to the historical blockchain at all is available kind of annoy me
< sipa>
it's using the easy totally unscalable approach out of laziness
< provoostenator>
I don't mind grumpiness. Just trying to figure out what the right division of labor should be between the Core node and layer 2 stuff.
< provoostenator>
Especially if there's still an opportunity to get a small but useful change into 0.16 while Lightning is also still in alpha.
< provoostenator>
I'm also still trying to understand what exactly these lightning implementations need that an unindexed node can't provide.
< sipa>
i don't mind helping out - but relying on everyone indexing everything and keeping it around just to being able to query 2 transactions from it later
< sipa>
seems a bit silly
< provoostenator>
Especially if you already know the outputs to keep track of.
< provoostenator>
Which by definition you do if you know which tx ids you want to track.
< provoostenator>
Maybe this new data structure can watch for either outputs or specific transactions (don't know if the latter makes things easier).
< provoostenator>
I also wonder how c-lightning works and if it really doesn't need txindex=1 (there's no getrawtransaction in the codebase). I'll take it for a spin.
< jb55>
provoostenator: you have to paste the raw tx via the cli
< cfields>
maybe a quick 15min meeting? I have one short topic, at least
< achow101>
Merge segwit wallet
< meshcollider>
Ok :)
< jonasschnelli>
cfields: you have the stage
< sipa>
i'm at 34C3 with MarkoFalke and BlueMatt
< cfields>
just an update on the codesigning. I've got the csr just about figured out, we should get going on the key creation in parallel
< jonasschnelli>
#topic code signing
< jonasschnelli>
cfields: can you write a short gist/docu how to proceed?
< cfields>
^^ is mainly aimed at gmaxwell, i guess
< achow101>
Who are going to hold the keys?
< jonasschnelli>
achow101: It will be distributed amoung some devs
< jonasschnelli>
though, at least for apple, who ever holds the login access, can revoke and re-do the cert
< sipa>
one step at a time
< jonasschnelli>
So partially a clown show in terms of user security,.. though we should still do it
< cfields>
jonasschnelli: as far as i can tell, we'll just need to use *procedure* for the setup, grab the pubkey, shove it into the csr, and submit to apple
< jonasschnelli>
cfields: okay. Someone needs to coordinate whos going to create (be a part) a key and who does create the csr
< jonasschnelli>
I can submit the csr and get back with the provisioning file, etc.
< * jonasschnelli>
has no clue how to do this for windows signing cert
< cfields>
jonasschnelli: i'm working on a quick prog to generate the csr from the pubkey, just have to work out exactly which parts get hashed
< provoostenator>
Is this a threshold thing or do you need _all_ particpants for everything you do in the future?
< cfields>
fyi, our cert expires on Jan 11, so the apple key is the priority
< jonasschnelli>
provoostenator: it's a one time thing
< cfields>
provoostenator: threshold
< jonasschnelli>
cfields: oh. Yes. The expiration!
< jonasschnelli>
So thanks then for beeing behind it.
< provoostenator>
Happy to help geneate the key regardless.
< jonasschnelli>
I expect the already signed binaries do still validate after jan 11th?
< cfields>
jonasschnelli: if it's possible to have more than one at a time, it might be wise to go ahead and request one in only your name
< jonasschnelli>
cfields: I can do that...
< cfields>
then we could revoke it assuming we got the other one going
< meshcollider>
Just in case we don't get it done in time?
< cfields>
but that would save us in case we get tripped up and don't have it ready in time
< cfields>
yea
< jonasschnelli>
I think already signed binaries are not affected,... it's just the new 0.16 release that needs the new cert
< jonasschnelli>
So we need a cert for the 0.16 release... making one where I hold the key is a 5min thing... that's always possible
< cfields>
jonasschnelli: great, thanks
< cfields>
ok, that's all from me
< meshcollider>
We could just release 0.16 before the 11th :)
< jonasschnelli>
Other topics?
< jonasschnelli>
meshcollider: heh.. yeah... but I'm happy if "Bitcoin Foundation" is gone in 0.16.
< jonasschnelli>
I mean gone from our OSX/Windows binaries
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] jeromer opened pull request #12042: Add hdenabled flag in getwalletinfo (master...getwalletinfo/hdenabledflag) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12042
< meshcollider>
jonasschnelli: yep :) no other topics from me
< cfields>
jonasschnelli: oh, remind me and I'll sign some message with the old key containing the new pubkey
< jonasschnelli>
I think that needs to wait until we BlueMatt's points have been worked out?
< jonasschnelli>
cfields: Good point!
< jonasschnelli>
cfields: where would you pubish that?
< provoostenator>
If there's still a lot of outstanding issues, are there parts of that PR than can get merged earlier?
< cfields>
jonasschnelli: we can stick it in git next to the new pubkey
< meshcollider>
provoostenator: I think sipa wanted to leave most of the points raised for a follow-up PR yeah
< jonasschnelli>
provoostenator: I need to catch up there,... I think at some point, a merge can be done even when there are some minor points to fix later
< jonasschnelli>
I guess the main trigger for a merge is when BlueMatt's points are done (maybe they are already) and sipa thinks it's ready
< jonasschnelli>
But that will happen next year
< jonasschnelli>
(IMO)
< provoostenator>
It might be easier to review if all the stuff that BlueMatt is already happy with can get merged earlier?
< sipa>
i'd like an avkby BlueMatt
< sipa>
*ack by
< jonasschnelli>
sipa: yes. Agree
< provoostenator>
But maybe that's impractical to tease apart.
< sipa>
it could be merged commit by commit
< jonasschnelli>
provoostenator: Yes. Involves some risks,.. and may need aditional reviews...
< sipa>
though the biggest part is really just one commit
< provoostenator>
Alright, giant atomic change it is :-)
< sipa>
it's not giant by any metric
< jonasschnelli>
Yes. Let's try to get an ack from BlueMatt, merge it in a whole, and do fixups later...
< jonasschnelli>
Other topics?
< jonasschnelli>
#endmeeting
< lightningbot>
Meeting ended Thu Dec 28 19:19:15 2017 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
< cfields>
thanks for taking the lead, jonasschnelli :)
< jonasschnelli>
np
< achow101>
do we know how/have software that can do more than just 3 of 3?
< achow101>
the think that gmaxwell pointed me to only works for 3 of 3.
< jo__>
hi
< jo__>
anyone here
< sipa>
no
< Chris_Stewart_5>
-brought to you by sipabot(TM)
< zelest>
hehe
< zelest>
might be insulting to ask, but i'll ask anyway.. when is 0.16 scheduled to be released? :)
< Randolf>
zelest: It will be released when it's ready.
< zelest>
ah, the perfect answer. thanks :)
< bob___>
o_O
< sipa>
O_o
< warren>
To whom it may concern, somebody wrote this in a random channel: "ehm, dunno if im right here, i stumbled upon a severe translation error in bitcoincoreWallet..at the transaction window, " abandon transaction" has been translated with " transaktion einstellen" - well this means exactly the opposite in german, something like: enter transaction into database,ledger - the better translation imo would be: " transaktion senden einstellen"...