it will not run on windows at all
you should not even bother trying
guess its only for the tux geeks
its still a memhog, not sustainable :S |
|
|
|
[ANN] Emerald - EMD, an innovative alt coin! New version released! dont use the word "innovative" if you dont understand it..." |
|
|
|
I sent 1 BTC on 6/10/13, the transaction was confirmed and my blockchain account charged. As of 6/20/13, I have not gotten my promised $105 USD to my PayPal or a response to my email to support. Anyone have an ideas?
haha, u deserved that! |
|
|
|
they don't even want my paypal money. just credit card for most of their games...
i can understand why u wouldnt want paypal/CC, but why no BTC? oh well, tough i dont need to buy anything from them anyway  just saying |
|
|
|
im interested, tough i need to know 2 things  are they upgraded units (ie, the +100USD upgrade for binned chips), what heatsink do thea have (look inside if you see a aluminium heatsink or if you see copper heat pipes). if you answer the above count me in on a offer (if im too low, just tell me so i go higher, i desperately want em ) |
|
|
|
Which altcoins have working testnet support? Many, if not most, of the new batch of altcoins will fail if you try to run them with -testnet option, popping fatal error messages like: Assertion failed!
...
File: src/main.cpp
...
Expression: block.GetHash() == hashGenesisBlock
...
Tsk tsk! Don't be this guy:  if a coind dosnt support testnet, stay away from it as it shows the creator is no dev, its a copycat |
|
|
|
setup SSL  self-signed is perfect, just post the hashes here and optionally GPG sign it Or you could buy a 5$ SSL cert on namecheap with bitcoins Or are you referring to a downloadable version? i trust a self-signed more than a bought one, as self-signed only someone that hacks him can make fake certs, if you buy it, tonfs of organizations + ppls can create fake certs... |
|
|
|
hey all, just wanted to say thank you!!! to the OP! This stuff is great, lol. So I have two jally's and both have been upgraded to the 1.2.5 Firmware. I started with the image provided, but in the end compiled by own version of the firmware. However, the first questions I have is that to matter the index setting, 7,8,or 9 the hash rate does not change on the miners. Not sure why the changes I make are not uploading to the Jally. I know I have chosen the correct image when compiled to load up the jally, but something just is not right. Also, I believe the chips I have a "lower" quality chips, as one is maxing out aroung 7.8 and the other around 7.2 with a higher error rate than the other, here is the GetInfo result for Jally 1: DEVICE: BitFORCE SC0x0a
FIRMWARE: 1.2.50x0aIAR
Executed: NO0x0a
CHIP PARALLELIZATION: YES @ 20x0a
QUEUE DEPTH:400x0a
PROCESSOR 3: 13 engines @ 255 MHz -- MAP: CFFE0x0a
PROCESSOR 7: 15 engines @ 259 MHz -- MAP: FFFE0x0a
THEORETICAL MAX: 7200 MH/s0x0a
ENGINES: 280x0a
FREQUENCY: 266 MHz
0x0aXLINK MODE: MASTER0x0a
CRITICAL TEMPERATURE: 00x0aX
LINK PRESENT: NO0x0aOK0x0a0x00
And here is Jally 2 GetInfo: DEVICE: BitFORCE SC0x0a
FIRMWARE: 1.2.50x0aIAR
Executed: NO0x0a
CHIP PARALLELIZATION: YES @ 20x0a
QUEUE DEPTH:400x0a
PROCESSOR 3: 15 engines @ 268 MHz -- MAP: FFFE0x0a
PROCESSOR 7: 15 engines @ 258 MHz -- MAP: FFFE0x0a
THEORETICAL MAX: 7890 MH/s0x0a
ENGINES: 300x0a FREQUENCY: 274 MHz
0x0aXLINK MODE: MASTER0x0a
CRITICAL TEMPERATURE: 00x0aX
LINK PRESENT: NO0x0aOK0x0a0x00
Any idea on how to get all the engines running on the first Jally so it can match the others performance? I see in the other precompiled images, there was something done to perform less checks on the procs, but not sure on all of it, just the index. Anyone point me in the right direction please? Thanks in advance and thanks for everyones hard work!!! get ck's -> http://ck.kolivas.org/apps/cgminer/BitForce_SC/ive build myself a similiar one, which uses all engines responding correctly, if you want i can supply you with the .hex/.elf, you can also choose frequency of course |
|
|
|
anyone broke through using GPU to mine QRK?
if so, diff would skyrocket. so it didnt happen |
|
|
|
setup SSL self-signed is perfect, just post the hashes here and optionally GPG sign it |
|
|
|
@rsnel: there has been a bounty of several thousand i0coins if someone fixes the i0coin problems, i just messaged lightlord to pay you the bounty |
|
|
|
somuch effort pushing TOR and i2p dosnt get much  |
|
|
|
I0coin is officially undead! Whooohooo!
Iz0mbieCoin! |
|
|
|
in case you still got some MNC, id love to have some MQBGLAu9nvh9ZNZnnGXWVXJSmLWJ6hJ4Nd ty |
|
|
|
@rsnel: you have a little typo in makefile.unix in <git>/src/ it should be as there is no build target i0coin, only i0coind you had issues disabled @ github so i report it here |
|
|
|
Nope, just one address. I was thinking about moving all 400 over to btc-e, and download the newest client release with a new address and send the coins back to avoid any upgrade/wallet issues. The fee is so damn expensive though.
The wallet uses multiple addresses without telling you. Open your RPC console and enter the command "listreceivedbyaddress" that might help clarify things. 17:39:31
listreceivedbyaddress
17:39:31
[
{
"address" : "LUmrXVibufVSyDtEhJQTWT2DzEtN1sUBzA",
"account" : "",
"amount" : 695.84374004,
"confirmations" : 70
}
]
Is there a way to list the other addresses? That command seems to only list the one. nonono use listunspent change addresses dont show up at all the commands other ppls told you! i guess the account has 1 address with X litecoin and all the others are change addresses holding the rest of your coins if you litecoind has listaddressgroupings, try it out (ie $ litecoind listaddressgroupings) |
|
|
|
could someone upload the current blockchain please? it's still a pain to synch this shit :<
use namecoind + tmpfs and your synced in ~30 min |
|
|
|
|
OP is german, what did you expect? delusion @ german ppls is usual...
|
|
|
|
well, you somewhat deserved it for buying an invite |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
