I've started the undelete request here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Bitcoin

If anyone wants to participate, just edit my undelete request and add more reasons why you think it wasn't fair to delete the article.

Can you put it on the main site in a box somewhere, kind of a like a mini-dashboard? 

Darn, it means the next release, the difficulty is going to have to increase to 1000 or so to keep up, LOL 

You should see the face my wife makes when she sees me typing it  

First thing she said "What hell are you guys talking about"  

If someone started a new chain on the "production" network; it would have to be longer than the current chain. So given how much CPU time it took to generate that one, I don't see anyone trying to start a new chain anytime soon.

Awesome, I'll have to give it a try myself then. 

Oh, ok, that makes more sense now. Didn't know that was being compiled on Ubuntu 10.04, I was thinking of everything from a Ubuntu 9.04 point of view.

Well for me, the libboost1.37-dev was all it needed on a Ubuntu 9.04 box to get a 64bit compile. Seems I'll just need to keep a bunch of virutal box for each one to avoid distro confusion when compiling  

I take it that you've already tested the hash limit before performance starts to suffer against the stock code? I'm just curious myself.

Basically a specialized bitcoind that the buyer sends a payment to and when everything is good, the buyer sends a special "all clear" message to that server that then knows to "release" what it has to whoever it's suppose to go to.

Programming wise, should be possible with direct IP payments for example, where the "From" and "Comment" fields can be used to "reserve" the BTC until later.

One could send a transaction and in the comment field put something like "Escrow=<public hash of seller> Amount=1000.00 Release=<some encrypted string>".

When the buyer gets the stuff and he/she is happy, they send a 0.01 payment to the same escrow server "Escrow=<public hash of seller> Amount=1000.00 Release=<some encrypted string>" and the server sees the match, knows it's ok to send payment to that address, for that amount, etc.

Very doable from a programming standpoint.

Find more info about this here: https://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=643.0

I have a 64bit compile of the linux client bitcoin up here that I just finished. All the debug symbols are stripped as well so the file isn't 60+ megabytes in size.
Test at your own risk (like me right now)

64bit Build Only - Client only (bitcoin)
http://knightmb.dyndns.org/files/bitcoin/bitcoin.tar.gz

64bit Build Only - Daemon only (bitcoind)
http://knightmb.dyndns.org/files/bitcoin/bitcoind.tar.gz

Compiled on a Ubuntu 9.04 box with Glibc 2.9 (so those running 2.9, 2.10, 2.11 should work with this)

[edit]New version has come out since then, so those links are valid not anymore.

That part I highlighted is what got me. You can't install all the libboost packages with that command (I tried to cheat with a * also), but part of my issue is I took it too literal like install *everything* that had to do with libboost, LOL.

Really, all that was needed was the libboost1.37-dev package and that made all the compile errors go away. Everything else worked out just fine as far as compiling your own wxWidgets, compiling Boost 1.4, etc.

So that last command should simply be
sudo apt-get install libboost1.37-dev

On a side note, I compiled mine on a Ubuntu 64bit system, so the finished program came out 64bit aware. I'm testing it out on some 64bit systems to see how well things go.

Victory at last, finally installed enough files to compile, LOL.

But then, I just noticed a 32bit build on Ubuntu 9.04 was just put up, haha.

I can only imagine the pain you went through to get these builds because I'm trying to build the program on a Ubuntu 9.04 box and so far I can't seem to find all the dependencies to compile no matter how much I keep installing packages and compiling source, LOL.

Is there a blanket command with apt-get to install everything that has to do with libboost without it error out on package conflicts? I tried to cheat with a "apt-get install libboost*" but it just complains that it's not possible due to conflicts (which I understand since I can't install 2 versions of the same thing at the same time).

That's what I'm hoping for as well, between compiling from the website then downloading another hundred megabytes worth of files anyway, hehe.

As far as I know, but I finally got past the wxWidgets problem (typo in a command while installing, grrr)

I've finally landed at the libboost-dev-all package to install, but it's not found in the Ubuntu repository for some reason? I guess I'll just install anything/everything that has to do with boost-dev   

Yeah, I'm following those to the letter, but I think that's my issue is, there might be a step missing because when compiling bitcoin, the errors point towards something else missing in the wx2.9 stuff (maybe an additional step) necessary. I think I'm close to figuring it out, if I do, I'll be sure to post it and hopefully have the text updated for future people to avoid any frustration 

I've built a Ubuntu 9.04 box and the irony is, when it finally came time to compile, I get the same errors I got on my Mandriva box.

So I'm stuck at the wxWidgets again. I guess I'm not understanding what my wxWidgets issue is. I've downloaded the 2.9 source directly from the website, compiled and installed without any errors. When it comes time to compile bitcoin, it just throws up a ton of wxWidget errors, too long to really paste here.

Has anyone done a successful build of Bitcoin in Linux, if so I'm curious to which Distro you were using?

Thanks for the help, I did finally get past those errors, got hung up on the wxWidgets even though it's installed exactly as the instructions showed, I don't know enough about wxWidgets to troubleshoot the error.

But I'm building a Ubuntu box on the same setup (well older version) of what the program is being compiled on for release here in hopes it will speed things up for testing rather than troubleshooting different distro builds.