|
Realistically, GBT (BIP 22/23) solved this for the pool/software end a long time ago, and stealing 8 bits from the ntime (about 3 minutes of rolling) is probably plenty for the hardware side for a while...
While using [part of] the block version as another nonce was at one time a possibility, starting with 0.7.0 any changes there will cause the client to report an upgrade required. And again, it's not necessary.
|
|
|
|
Indeed, besides pushing a new bitstream he also implemented difficulty >1 support, wow!
Yeah, because I had a similar unexpected-downtime experience with EclipseMC -- they recently started rejecting two-low-difficulty shares. Unfortunately since the X-Reject-Reason headers aren't standardized the safest thing to do is assume that when a share is rejected that work ought to be thrown out. This wrecks the hashrate. Well, the reasons are standardized as part of BIP 22. Obviously it's not necessarily a rule for the now-obsolete getwork protocol, but there's no reason not to use the same strings either. But more importantly: if your miner had supported the target - which has been standard since getwork was created - you wouldn't have these rejects at all. |
|
|
|
This is a bad idea, because the browser isn't guaranteed to copy the invisible TC.
Are you sure? The characters are "visible", but the font defines them to have zero width. Is the "TC" supposed to actually be invisible? I see it as "B⃦TC" (Ok, seriously, are you talking about this: BTC? So either it should load the Webfont resulting in BTC being displayed as "B with decoration", "invisible T", "invisible C" or your w3c/lynx on a non-unicode console should just display BTC … or your smart browser decides that there is something wrong with letters that have zero width so it defaults to another font. Which browser are you using?) "B⃦TC" is shown by Konqueror/KHTML, Rekonq, and QupZilla. "B⃦" alone is shown by Chromium and Firefox. |
|
|
|
This is a bad idea, because the browser isn't guaranteed to copy the invisible TC.
Are you sure? The characters are "visible", but the font defines them to have zero width. Is the "TC" supposed to actually be invisible? I see it as "B⃦TC" |
|
|
|
[...]
Websites and websites, I want bitcoin symbol in my text files, dammit! Ok, so use a working text editor/viewer... Unicode's only been around for well over a decade now. |
|
|
|
|
If you can, try running it in valgrind for a few minutes with the --leak-check=full valgrind option, --debuglog bfgminer option, and stderr piped to a file. Upload that file somewhere and link it in a new issue.
|
|
|
|
Technically speaking, BitcoinTalk is using a "webfont" for this, not a regular image. You're asking to install custom font, just to have currency symbol properly displayed in a spreadsheet or email. How many people are going to do that? Think about it. The web is easier as this only has to be done once per site, but that's one extra uneccesary step. We should make life easier, not harder. No. Webfonts are automatically downloaded and used by your browser. Point is, it doesn't work for majority of users here with modern computers and modern, very popular, operating systems who also happen to have technical skills way above the average. If it doesn't work for us, it won't work for general population, period. And that's why most Bitcoin websites are still using images for the BTC symbol... |
|
|
|
BTC853 - stands out only because it looks bolded, so sucks anyway (being an image earns three bonus sucks) Technically speaking, BitcoinTalk is using a "webfont" for this, not a regular image. B⃦ sucks extra hard for being 2 chars (we invented new problems for you!) B⃦ is itself a single character, even if comprised of two codepoints. It's also the same character the forum is using a webfont to render in BTC. Using multiple codepoints for a single character is not new. and not being displayed properly on my unicode friendly win7 machine, despite 64bit processor and 8gb of ram. Obviously not very Unicode-friendly, if it can't display Unicode. |
|
|
|
The B double vertical strokes is a Unicode symbol? What is its code? I can't find it on any list of Unicode symbols (maybe I'm not looking in the right place?). Yep. Unicode defines symbols like this using "combining" characters (the "already combined" characters exist only for compatibility with legacy encodings such as Latin-1), so for B⃦ you do: This works to some extent for all possible combinations (apparently some people are getting blocks, though?). From there, fonts can specialize with "ligatures" (renderings that represent a sequence of characters) - which is where things can definitely use improvement. |
|
|
|
Iman, when I run yaourt i give it an ignore architecture flag. "yaourt -AS packagename" That alone should not solve my first error, but it is probably the fact that it configures everything through autogen.sh and not ./configure. Make finished compiling but building the package failed because I got a write error. I assume I ran out of space on /tmp (this thing only has 128mb ram), so I moved the compiling temp directory to one on the hard drive. I'm still getting an error though. The executable is under /var/abs/local/yaourtbuild/bfgminer-git/src/bfgminer-build, so I can run it, but I would like to have it packaged. make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/abs/local/yaourtbuild/bfgminer-git/src/bfgminer-build'
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/abs/local/yaourtbuild/bfgminer-git/src/bfgminer-build'
==> Tidying install...
-> Purging unwanted files...
-> Compressing man and info pages...
-> Stripping unneeded symbols from binaries and libraries...
==> Creating package...
-> Generating .PKGINFO file...
-> Compressing package...
/usr/bin/makepkg: line 1290: 4821 Killed xz -c -z -
bsdtar: Write error
==> ERROR: Failed to create package file.
==> ERROR: Makepkg was unable to build bfgminer-git.
That sounds like some kind of OOM killed xz. dmesg? |
|
|
|
Honestly, everyone should just continue using BTC until a Bitcoin symbol is standardized and viewable on 95% of computers without modifying the default fonts or encodings. Everyone is already using B⃦ via images  |
|
|
|
This guy is a nut. Plain and simple. Coming from someone promoting Bitcoin as a tool for illegal activities (and thus harming Bitcoin), I guess I should take this as a compliment... |
|
|
|
I'm running ubuntu and I'm trying to mine with more then one modminer. When I start the program it only picks one up. I'm using ./bfgminer at the command line. Isn't the newer version supposed to autodetect the boards?
Is anyone able to answer this question? Are you running the latest firmware? Using BFGMiner from PPA or source? It was built from source following the instructions outlined on on the wiki for the mmq. With older MCU firmwares, you need libudev-dev for autodetect to pick up more than one. If you want to use more than one MMQ, don't you have to specify it with multiple uses of the -S flag and its arguments? No, every device except Icarus and Lancelot support autodetection. |
|
|
|
It's missing libjansson-dev; and -S auto is the default. |
|
|
|
I'm running ubuntu and I'm trying to mine with more then one modminer. When I start the program it only picks one up. I'm using ./bfgminer at the command line. Isn't the newer version supposed to autodetect the boards?
Is anyone able to answer this question? Are you running the latest firmware? Using BFGMiner from PPA or source? |
|
|
|
Luke-Jr, if you go to Tools/Encoding in your Chrome browser while in Wikipedia, you should have the UTF-8 option checked. Is that so? I'm not the one having problems... |
|
|
|
|
My autotools skills aren't so great, and I'd appreciate any input in how it could be improved.
|
|
|
|
I noticed nothing in a scan of the README (though I was looking for 'arm' and not 'mips' which was a mistake since I've not done this kinds of stuff in a while) and noticed no assembly for anything but x86's. But it is not unheard of for people to optimize for an architecture with assembly while supporting other architectures with compiled code. And also common to build a sub-set of functionality on less well supported architectures. That's why I said 'or at least not fully. Assembly is only used (optionally) for CPU mining, though that does support both x86 (SSE) and PowerPC (Altivec). CPU mining is mostly pointless, though, so I wouldn't consider other platforms really "less" supported. But, since you are here, is it known that the code should work on his platform, or is he blazing trails in trying to get it going? I know a number of users have had success on Raspberry Pi, at least. That's hopeful, and probably useful info to someone trying to build the code. Do you know what OS's they might have been running? I presume whatever RPi ships with. The guy's initial attempt (with ./configure presumably from the release) crashed in platform recognition. Ideally the user could trust that message to indicate whether the platform is supported, but it's understandable if/when it cannot be 100% reliable. Much of the time (imho) when there is a failure here, the maintainer has simply not leveraged the autoconf system to it's potential. Possible... but Google has never heard of armv6l-unknown-linux-eabihf either, so not sure what I can do there. |
|
|
|
Uh, guys... what am I missing here?  A working web browser, perhaps. Explain to me how Chrome 22.0.1229.79 m is not a working browser? Chromium 21.0.1180.89 works fine here. More to the point, I can see the other symbols here just fine. If B⃦ is supposed to be the best symbol, and I (and others) cannot see it properly on standard systems, perhaps it would be better to move to a different symbol that IS displayed properly on a standard system. Images seem to be working fine until mainstream fonts are updated. Thankfully, we also have webfonts now. |
|
|
|
Uh, guys... what am I missing here? A working web browser, perhaps. Or maybe it's a font issue with your system. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
