< mmgen>
and instructions for creating bech32 addr are missing there
< mmgen>
i take back the last comment. there is Native Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash under 'Advanced designs'
< mmgen>
however, the page needs a general update to reflect bech32 adoption
< arubi>
dongcarl, right mkroot is really sweet. I'm basically in the process of migrating away from debian to an mkroot native setup. it seems so clean. also good to hear that at least virtualbox works
< dongcarl>
arubi: cool. What does your setup look like roughly? It'd be extremely nice to get canonical and its bloat out of the picture
< arubi>
(continuing in #bitcoin-dev)
< mmgen>
From BIP141: However, a scriptPubKey with OP_0 followed by a 41-byte non-zero data push will pass, since it is not considered to be a witness program
< mmgen>
unless i'm missing something, this is a mistake
< mmgen>
and OP_1 was intended
< arubi>
mmgen, segwit scriptpubkeys are a maximum length of 42 bytes, where the first byte is the version, and the rest is the push of a witness program
< arubi>
so that program is a maximum of 40 bytes. 41 bytes is not a valid witness program, so it's just a normal scriptpubkey
< mmgen>
arubi: got it, thank you!
< arubi>
np
< mmgen>
yep, here's what i was missing: "A scriptPubKey ... that consists of a 1-byte push opcode (for 0 to 16) followed by a data push *between 2 and 40 bytes* gets a new special meaning."
< felco>
Hi, were is the translation work is being done? I have submitted some changes in the past but I just forgot to bookmark the website
< mmgen>
felco: i think it's transifex
< felco>
mmgen Thanks!
< felco>
I have corrected a line on the 0.15 release, it got fixed in the 0.15.1 but I see that in the 0.16 the same translation error come back
< kosta>
Guys, I have a C++ related question... There is `src/uint256.cpp` file... Why do we need Explicit instantiations for base_blob<160> and base_blob<256>?
< kosta>
I'm talking about the lines 69-81 if `master` branch...
< kosta>
Guys, sorry for C++ 101 question. I found the answer. ))
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 7ba2d57 Russell Yanofsky: Fix ListCoins test failure due to unset g_wallet_allow_fallback_fee...
< bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 6012f1c MarcoFalke: Merge #12582: Fix ListCoins test failure due to unset g_wallet_allow_fallback_fee...
< bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #12582: Fix ListCoins test failure due to unset g_wallet_allow_fallback_fee (master...pr/listg2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12582
< nman999>
has anyone installed Berkeley DB on Debian Stretch using contrib/install_db4.sh ?
< felco>
In the "Verify Message" window you read this: "Be careful not to read more into the signature than what is in the signed message itself, to avoid being tricked by a man-in-the-middle attack." - Were it says "not to read more into the signature" should I understand that it is saying to me to be careful to inclune anything besides what is in the signed message, right?
< felco>
Sorry - "to be careful *to not include* anything besides what is in the signed message, right?"
< luke-jr>
felco: no
< luke-jr>
felco: it means the signature proves only one thing: that the message came from the same person who will receive funds sent to that address
< luke-jr>
felco: in particular, it does not imply the person owns any number of bitcoins at the present; or that the person will uphold their word
< luke-jr>
it also does not imply the person owns the private key backing the address in question
< felco>
luke-jr Thanks!
< esotericnonsense>
luke-jr: it doesn't prove that the message came from the person who will receive the funds either?
< esotericnonsense>
well. that they are the originator of the message anyway. i suppose they are signing off on it.
< luke-jr>
esotericnonsense: it does prove that, that's my point
< luke-jr>
is it just me, or has the "Inputs:" part of the GUI transaction details been broken for confirmed transactions ever since ultraprune? :x
< luke-jr>
(maybe for the best, since it seems to be confusing addresses for inputs!)
< felco>
Reviewed the whole ptBR translation and found lots of errors, corrected all of them, now it needs review! =)