< GitHub178>
[bitcoin] randy-waterhouse opened pull request #7944: Re-instate TARGET_OS=linux in configure.ac. Removed by 351abf9e035. (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7944
< cfields>
gmaxwell: we could make sure the bitcoin configs are covered in the downstream matrix, but yea, I suppose it's best to keep them running in case we get out of sync
< cfields>
sipa: in the bitcoin repo. They're pretty redundant, I should think
< gmaxwell>
kanzure: it's intentional incompetence in bitcoinj... it used to be worse, google up the bitcoin-dev logs for this lovely conversation
< Guest32930>
kanzure: bitcoin core at most pings once per minute, i think
< GitHub173>
[bitcoin] Christewart opened pull request #7941: Fixing comment in script_test.json test case (master...fix_script_test_comment) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7941
< GitHub25>
[bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #7939: qt: Make it possible to show details for multiple transactions (master...2016_04_qt_multiple_transaction_details) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7939
< phantomcircuit>
NotAnNSAgent, you've been unbanned from #bitcoin please move your discussion there
< NotAnNSAgent>
Just one more note, since sipa isn't in ##bitcoin: yes, I learned what "accounts" actually are in Bitcoin, but I also learned that the labels stuff is not stable/finished either, and that I can use "accounts" as a form of label until things stabilize, but I cannot use them to segregate money in the way I first thought was possible.
< GitHub66>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7688: List solvability in listunspent output and improve help (master...helpspendsolv) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7688
< GitHub91>
bitcoin/master 46880ed Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7688: List solvability in listunspent output and improve help...
< GitHub91>
bitcoin/master c3932b3 Pieter Wuille: List solvability in listunspent output and improve help
< wumpus>
bitcoin core is not something you should upgrade without paying attention, especially if you use it in production and there's actual money involved
< NotAnNSAgent>
There is very little interest in making it possible to have any idea who owns a given address in a "Bitcoin bank" (wallet)?
< wumpus>
this is the label API that will replace it: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7729 ... note that this is mostly just a subset of the account functionality, the only thing that will disappear is the account balance
< NotAnNSAgent>
That is, any label I need for my own reference to know which "account" (not the deprecated Bitcoin concept of "accounts") it belongs to.
< NotAnNSAgent>
wumpus: I manage to not get the bitcoin-cli binary because I only installed bitcoin-daemon because why would I want the -cli thing?
< da2ce7_mobile>
Ok, I have just the blkXXX files, and a wallet.dat file. Will load bitcoin.
< da2ce7_mobile>
I'm using Bitcoin 0.12.1
< da2ce7_mobile>
hello, I wish to copy the blocks from one PC to another, what is the minimum I need to copy? It If I just copy the blk0xxx files it overwrites the files. If I include the rev00xxx files bitcoin throws an assertion. I suppose it has something to do with the chainstate obfuscation.
< wumpus>
how do you manage to not get the bitcoin-cli binary?
< NotAnNSAgent>
(I don't have bitcoin-cli binary)
< wumpus>
NotAnNSAgent: the best documentation for the API is in bitcoind itself, using bitcoin-cli help
< instagibbs>
NotAnNSAgent, bitcoin-cli help ?
< NotAnNSAgent>
And has "not been reviewed by Bitcoin developers", which makes no sense to me.
< NotAnNSAgent>
wumpus: I'm talking about the API to talk to bitcoind. Which seems to be explained (messily) at https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#bitcoin-core-apis , but that documentation is full of dangerously outdated information.
< NotAnNSAgent>
This is obviously going to offend you, but I have to ask... Is the not only poor, but grossly *misleading* documentation deliberately so? I mean, maybe you don't want Bitcoin to be easy to implement to ensure job security or something? I've seriously begun asking myself if that could be the case. Again, though, I understand that this is both very difficult stuff, and you can't change things directly as individuals without first talking
< GitHub121>
bitcoin/master b69836d Wladimir J. van der Laan: dbwrapper: Pass parent CDBWrapper into CDBBatch and CDBIterator...
< GitHub160>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7927: Minor changes to dbwrapper to simplify support for other databases (master...2016_04_dbwrapper_modernization) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7927
< GitHub121>
bitcoin/master 878bf48 Wladimir J. van der Laan: dbwrapper: Remove CDBWrapper::GetObfuscateKeyHex...
< GitHub121>
bitcoin/master 74f7b12 Wladimir J. van der Laan: dbwrapper: Remove throw keywords in function signatures...
< NotAnNSAgent>
You make about as much sense as the Bitcoin API.
< NotAnNSAgent>
It feels as if I'm desperately trying to help get some enthusiasm going for Bitcoin as a project, but everyone seems to have sort of given up mentally.
< belcher>
the gui client is generally called bitcoin-qt, bitcoin core is the project that includes both of those
< NotAnNSAgent>
Also, Bitcoin Core is bitcoind, no?
< NotAnNSAgent>
phantomcircuit: To be able to support Bitcoin donations to one of my services, and to deal with another Bitcoin account for my commercial site.
< NotAnNSAgent>
Why is it so hard for Bitcoin to simply support multiple wallets? Why do I have to run entire separate blockchains and instances of the daemon for this?
< phantomcircuit>
NotAnNSAgent, in bitcoin terms a "wallet" is just a collection of private keys and the transactions related to those keys in the blockchain
< NotAnNSAgent>
I have to ignore the accounts stuff, because I learned it's practically removed from the Bitcoin software.
< NotAnNSAgent>
Why didn't Bitcoin support multiple "wallets" right away? I have no idea what you mean that "accounts" are supposed to be, still.
< phantomcircuit>
NotAnNSAgent, the "accounts" stuff is completely separate from handling of bitcoin transactions
< NotAnNSAgent>
And why Bitcoin forces me to have separate instances and separate blockchains for each "account" I want to have (each "wallet" in your terms).
< NotAnNSAgent>
phantomcircuit: I'm trying to discuss the concept of "accounts" in Bitcoin and why they were made the way they were.
< NotAnNSAgent>
But the "wallet" idea is also an attractive thing to advertise. Though I think the "wallets" could rather be Bitcoin's own term for an "account", all inside a "Bitcoin bank" (bank.dat).
< NotAnNSAgent>
So I would've liked it better if the initial metaphor wasn't "wallet" and "wallet.dat", but instead "virtual Bitcoin bank" and "bank.dat".
2016-04-24
< NotAnNSAgent>
Which could only be known to somebody who is very intimately familiar with the Bitcoin development process.
< sipa>
the documentation on bitcoin.org is often very good though, and better than what developers would write :)
< NotAnNSAgent>
If Bitcoin.org is unofficial.
< NotAnNSAgent>
Where is the actual manual for Bitcoin?
< sipa>
at least, not the Bitcoin Core maintainers
< sipa>
Bitcoin developers do not run that site.
< NotAnNSAgent>
I mean "you" as in "Bitcoin developers".
< belcher>
i think i found out accounts were deprecated from the bitcoin wiki or something
< sipa>
18:12:28 < NotAnNSAgent> Since Windows 10, the Bitcoin Core client for Windows uses the awful Windows 10 notifications, which I've been forced to turn off globally.
< sipa>
NotAnNSAgent: i must say that i'm somewhat surprised to see someone comment about using bitcoin on both Win10 and FreeBSD :)
< NotAnNSAgent>
My experiences especially these last few weeks have really convinced me that Bitcoin has a looooong way to go before it can be implemented by anyone other than hardcore experts.
< sipa>
NotAnNSAgent: for the longest time i was not paid to work on bitcoin, and i still spent weekends and evenings on it. please don't say that money is the only reason to do things
< NotAnNSAgent>
Now you're just being ridiculous. Are you saying that every Bitcoin business in the world uses third-party clients because the official one only allows one single wallet?
< gmaxwell>
There isn't really any "from" in the design of the bitcoin protocol in any case-- that people often think there is an artifact of the forensic analysis done by block explorers and the presentation of that analysis as 'transactions' in a way that doesn't actually reflect the operation of the bitcoin system.
< gmaxwell>
sturles: the lack of good durability options for bitcoin wallets probably makes that workflow suboptimal. You probably want to have something that lets you send a transaction atomically with making a backup.
< sipa>
but it's good to know that we should probably ask the bitcoin.org people to mark those RPCs as deprecated on the site
< NotAnNSAgent>
And it appears to be impossible to enable them only for Bitcoin Core.
< NotAnNSAgent>
Since Windows 10, the Bitcoin Core client for Windows uses the awful Windows 10 notifications, which I've been forced to turn off globally.
< GitHub10>
[bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #7933: Fix OOM when deserializing UTXO entries with invalid length (master...fixcompressoroom) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7933
< belcher>
wrong channel, go to #bitcoin-otc or similar
< airmac>
anyone wanna trade i got 29g of bitgold with trade for bitcoin intrested msg me for trade we can use escrow if you want\
< sipa>
#bitcoin-otc or similar channels please
< airmac>
anyone wanna trade i got 29g of bitgold with trade for bitcoin intrested msg me for trade we can use escrow if you want
< NicolasDorier>
in the bitcoin folder does not compile bitcoin2 does
< randy-waterhouse>
recent commit 351abf9e035581e3320fbb72ec5b1fa452b09c2f (depends build) introduces following error http://pastebin.com/q5cP70y8 (and core dump) on bitcoin-qt
< luke-jr>
NicolasDorier: ideally, copy the entire bitcoin/ dir somewhere, then re-do it successfully and compare
< GitHub187>
[bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #7927: Minor changes to dbwrapper to simplify support for other databases (master...2016_04_dbwrapper_modernization) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7927
< GitHub6>
[bitcoin] instagibbs opened pull request #7926: [RPC] push back getaddednodeinfo dead value (master...getaddedpushbackmaster) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7926
< GitHub82>
[bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #7918: [qa] mininode: Use hexlify wrapper from util (master...Mf1604-qaMininodeHexlify) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7918
< MarcoFalke>
Basically https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7918 would conflict with segwit (on purpose) to get rid of the wildcard import and other cleanup. Should I submit this to the segwit branch instead?
< wumpus>
MarcoFalke: I've just enabled commit access to bitcoin/bitcoin for you - to get you started, can you try to merge #7912 using the github-merge.py script? If you need any help setting it up let me know
< GitHub128>
[bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #7868: net: Split DNS resolving functionality out of net structures (master...net-cleanup-resolve) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7868
< murch>
sipa: We've actually met once (very briefly) at Bitcoin 2014. :) I said hi, and told you that I'm a moderator on Bitcoin.SE. and you said, you love our work. Heh.
< murch>
Completely different topic: I'm going to have a meeting later today about a potential master thesis in the area of Bitcoin. I've proposed to do my master thesis on Coin Selection (which I've did some simulation work before, e.g. gmaxwell had commented then). I've seen that CoinSelection is scheduled to be "looked at" for 0.13. Do you think it would make sense to have a more systematic analysis of CoinSelection even though that's schedu
< murch>
My intent is to point out an easy improvement that could be made in the communication with the broader Bitcoin community. Unless I'm mistaken and the table is up-to-date. Then I'll rest my case of course. ;)
< murch>
btcdrak: E.g. adam3us has referred to the table 16 days ago (https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4d3pdg/clearing_the_fud_around_segwit/d1nxxq6) as showing that secondary projects are working on SegWit. I've called him out on that, because the table doesn't actually show that. (I'm Xekyo on reddit). I would like to propose that development teams listed on that table get nudged to update their status, because it is my understanding
< GitHub192>
[bitcoin] yurizhykin opened pull request #7913: Fix for incorrect locking in GetPubKey() (keystore.cpp) (master...getpubkey-locking-fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7913
< GitHub79>
[bitcoin] sdaftuar opened pull request #7912: Tests: Fix deserialization of reject messages (master...fix-mininode-reject) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7912
< GitHub181>
[bitcoin] theuni opened pull request #7911: leveldb: integrate leveldb into our buildsystem (master...leveldb-integration) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7911
< sipa>
bitcoin.sipa.be is a node, and run with -segnet
< NicolasDorier>
morcos: there is this bug https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/issues/73, I'll find out what happen later, but the problem is that the transaction is rejected by mempool but still added to wallet transactions. Then after one block, the transaction is rebroadcasted but this time accepted to mempool. The caller of sendtoaddress got an error and thought the money
< GitHub76>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7762: [ZMQ] append a message sequence number to every ZMQ notification (master...2016/03/zmq_seq) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7762
< GitHub37>
bitcoin/master a1eb344 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7762: [ZMQ] append a message sequence number to every ZMQ notification...
< GitHub37>
bitcoin/master 0b25a9f Jonas Schnelli: [ZMQ] append a message sequence number to every ZMQ notification
< GitHub37>
bitcoin/master de821d5 Jonas Schnelli: [ZMQ] refactor message string
< GitHub199>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7625: Bugfix: Check for bench_bitcoin being enabled where needed, and skip UniValue dependency when unused (master...bugfix_bench_checks) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7625
< GitHub112>
[bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7905: test: move accounting_tests and rpc_wallet_tests to wallet/test (master...2016_04_accounting_tests_to_wallet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7905
< GitHub49>
bitcoin/master a25a4f5 Wladimir J. van der Laan: wallet_ismine.h → script/ismine.h...
< GitHub49>
bitcoin/master f4eae2d Wladimir J. van der Laan: test: Create test fixture for wallet...
< GitHub49>
bitcoin/master de39c95 Wladimir J. van der Laan: test: move accounting_tests and rpc_wallet_tests to wallet/test...