I am was using Bitcoin-Qt v0.8-5-beta then I updated to Bitcoin Core 0.15.0 and they both keep crashing at start up
What have you tried so far? Please post the entire debug.log file. |
|
|
|
|
There will be one, but Bitcoin Gold has not officially launched yet so such a client has not been release. They only have the snapshot of the blockchain/UTXO set so far.
|
|
|
|
Thank you. However, although this won't save the password to history, even with -stdin, the password gets displayed without any encryption on the screen. Is there a workaround to this?
Once you get the data you need, you can do clear a bunch of times. And one more thing. I noticed that the newest version of bitcoin core has support for multiple wallets. How do I set this up to have for example 5 different wallets but all using the same blockchain, so basically I do not want to download the entire blockchain again and store the blockchain 5 times, I only need the bitcoin-cli or the RPC to view / spend bitcoins from any wallet I want. Are there specific bitcoin-cli commands that are useful for selecting the wallet file I want to use?
Start Bitcoin Core with as many -wallet=<wallet name> arguments (or add them to your bitcoin.conf file) as you want wallets to use. When you use bitcoin-cli with any wallet related command, you will need to use the -rpcwallet=<walet name> argument to specify the wallet that you want to use. For example, you might do $ bitcoind -daemon -wallet=wallet1 -wallet=wallet2
To start Bitcoin Core with two wallets, wallet1 and wallet2. If you want to do stuff with wallet1, you would do $ bitcoin-cli -rpcwallet=wallet1 getwalletinfo
|
|
|
|
|
Can you post full the debug.log file for Bitcoin Core?
|
|
|
|
|
What software are you using? What version number (don't just say latest)?
|
|
|
|
Depending on the fork, and whether it has replay protection or not, it is possible that the transaction could become confirmed on BOTH forks. In either case, the most recent confirmed transaction on a given fork will determine which address has control of the coins on that fork.
Is this something that has been "implemented"/fixed in bitcoingold already? Various articles i've read over the past week tells me they don't have such a thing, but i'm wondering with what they are going to replace that, if they're not adding it. https://support.bittrex.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002320451-Statement-on-Bitcoin-Gold-BTG-Seems to me that they really don't think that it is such a big deal..? Replay protection is supposed to be implemented for Bitcoin Gold but they have not done so yet. |
|
|
|
So Bitcoin Gold forked with minimal fireworks...
It technically hasn't even launched yet. They just now have the UTXO/blockchain snapshot that they want. Coinbase also announced that segwit2x will be call B2X on thier platform. Does the segwit2x update create a new coin?? Why is Coinbase labeling it at B2X?
Segwit2x is a hard fork, so it will create an altcoin. |
|
|
|
|
What you want to know is whether you have the address in your wallet. I'm not sure that a search function is necessarily the way to go, you don't want to search for it since you already have it, you just want to know if it is in your wallet. You can do that right now using the debug console with the validateaddress command. Just do validateaddress <address> and in the output you will see something that says ismine. If the address is yours and you have the private key, that field will say true.
|
|
|
|
Is there a safer way to not post the password directly on command line?
This command is also stored on bash history, and it would require removing the history file every time you decrypt your wallet for a short period of time.
Use bitcoin-cli with the -stdin parameter. The parameters will then be entered on stdin after you enter the command, one on each line. This keeps it out of the bash history. So you would do something like $ bitcoin-cli -stdin walletpassphrase
<passphrase>
<timeout> and complete the command with Ctrl + D to signal EOF. Then the command will be sent and you will get a response. |
|
|
|
I sent it to a Multibit Wallet on the stolen laptop. I’ve seen Multibit has since stopped being supported. Will it be possible to recover this wallet? I’ve got the private key and a code word phase about 17 or 18 words long.
I’ve tried to restore through electrum wallet but think perhaps it might pre-date the BIP 32 seeds it asks for as I set up the original wallet in 2014.
No, you are just restoring it incorrectly. First of all, what you have is a BIP 39 mnemonic, not a BIP 32 seed. However Electrum does not use BIP 39 by default. To tell it to use BIP 39, you must click the Options button and choose the BIP 39 checkbox. Then it should work. |
|
|
|
currently this account was worth 0.02, unbelievable. i think OP should change how the calculating work based on bitcoin price nowadays
It's open source software. Pull requests welcome. |
|
|
|
I'm back and trying to get this going again. I just tried -salvagewallet for the first time (this on dogecoin.app, not bitcoin yet).
This is on a new machine with new versions of the apps, freshly synced to their respective blockchains (which took about 2 months for bitcoin).
So I ran -salvagewallet on my dogecoin wallet. It did something that didn't take very long at all. Then after a minute or so, it quit and left me with wallet.242340234.back and wallet.dat. So I fired up dogecoin core.app and once it rescanned everything, I had..... an empty wallet. Which kind of makes sense since the .bak wallet was 12 MB and the new one, presumably the restored one, was a few KB.
Am I doing something wrong here? There's almost no instructions on the web for how to use the -salvagewallet feature, beyond "just use -salvagewellet".
Don't use -salvagewallet in Bitcoin Core. It is broken and will likely corrupt your wallet further (these are known issues for which we are trying to fix, but salvaging corrupted wallets is a dangerous process in general). Anyways, I don't think your wallet is corrupted here. Have you tried reindexing the blockchain? Or completely resyncing the blockchain? |
|
|
|
Ok let me rephrase my question: Suppose we change the security model of bitcoin, and enforce transaction pruning at the blockchain level (not at the client level) in a fashion described above, for blocks that their height is < (H - N), where H is the current block height and N is a set constant. Would that model be insecure? If not, why?
It is still insecure. The case that you must consider is a new full node that is just coming online and is syncing the blockchain. It has to download it from its peers. So how does it know that a peer didn't just prune a bunch of transactions that have unspent output that are a couple thousand blocks deep and relay that version of the blockchain to them? |
|
|
|
As a follow up question, in airdrop/fork cases like this (where snapshots are taken at block X), is it safe to transfer coins (and still get credited with the new fork) as soon as block X is reached? Or do i have to at least wait until the next block is mined before i send my coins away?
In theory it is safe to transact as soon as block X is mined, but you should still probably wait at least a block or two (on either chain) after the fork to be sure. Also note that Bitcoin Gold does not yet have replay protection so any transactions you make could be reflected on both blockchains. |
|
|
|
If not yet confirmed in block 491405, then it will still get credited for address A right?
It can still confirm in block 491406. So long as the transaction confirms before block 491407 the Bitcoin Gold will be associated with address B. Note that if Bitcoin Gold fails to implement full 2 way replay protection, the transaction could still confirm on Bitcoin Gold following the fork and the Bitcoin Gold coins moved to address B. Or will it be like floating bitcoin not belonging to any address?
That's not how Bitcoin works and can never happen. you say confirmed transactions, does that mean 1 confirmation is enough?
Yes. |
|
|
|
So there is no way to ensure my spv wallet can connect? Seems kinda sub-optimal from a privacy perspective
You can either increase your connection limit so that you have more available connections than people are likely to connect to you, or you can use an external firewall software to manage this for you. If you use an external firewall, you could have it set so that you allow 21 connections (30 connections total - 8 outgoing connections - 1 for your wallet) on the default port from external sources, and then have another firewall rule on a different port which forwards traffic to the Bitcoin node port (8333) internally (so as to bypass the earlier firewall rule). You then connect to that other port with your SPV wallet. |
|
|
|
Maybe you can run two instances of Bitcoin Core with different configurations, but same data directory.
You cannot have two instances of Bitcoin Core share the same data directory. It won't work, and it is not supposed to work. |
|
|
|
|
You can't reserve a connection for a specific peer or reserve ports for specific peers to connect to. The connection limit is global and not just for one network interface.
|
|
|
|
I click the button and nothing happen, the window just stay there. And my bitcoin too.
That's strange. Can you post the armory log file, armorylog.txt? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
