The next step is to send a small amount of BTC to the generated address and then create an unsigned tx (on your online computer) to send it back to yourself and then send this via a QR code to the offline computer - the "usage.html" details this (got that to appear yet?).

If you are still having troubles with usage.html then use: https://github.com/ciyam/safe/blob/master/usage.html (was designed as a <pre>...</pre> anyway so just as readable from there).

Okay - you did use ImageWriter to create the USB image from the .raw file (also note that this is a 32 bit image)?

Just use Firefox (File Open and select Images from the File Type) and Ctrl-+ to enlarge the size (and F11 for "full-screen" to make it even easier for the online computer's webcam).

Hmm... usage.html should be in /home/tux (file:///home/tux/usage.html - just checked on my offline computer and it is there - you did run "./install" and you got the right directory?) and *yes* the whole idea is that the offline computer only communicates to the online one via QR codes.

Okay - the instructions are in "usage.html" (use Firefox to read them).

The first thing you need to do in the "console" is:

./install
and then

./init

(also don't stress about what User Key and Password you use - just make sure they are not empty and you write them down so I can check that they will let me unlock the "tux master" GPG private key to verify your work)

Yup - the *first* boot can take quite a while (subsequent boots are much faster) - am pretty sure as long as it doesn't "freeze" altogether it should be working.

Good point - will be adding that to the distro description then.

BTW - feedback about anything not well documented, etc. would be greatly appreciated (although making the UI nicer is not a priority for me unless others are interested to work on this).

Yup - exactly what I had tried.

Great - much appreciated (and I think a very good chance that you'll get 2 BTC for your efforts).

Any problems just post questions here and I will answer them (this is not a competition but instead an example of exactly how CIYAM Open will be doing its work).

I would recommend using ImageWriter from SUSE Studio http://en.opensuse.org/SDB:Live_USB_stick#Install_ImageWriter instead (as I tried to use unetbootin and had no luck) but yes it is the .raw file you need to use (if it does work with unebootin please let us know).

I read C++ fluently (and have been doing hardcore C++ development since the mid 90's) and although I do agree that "what we have is a spec written in C++" I do not think we really want this to be the case in the future (even C++ itself has a "spec" - ISO/IEC 14882:2003 currently).

Transitioning from "C with Classes" to C++ took many years and it took many more for vendors to get "up to spec" (Microsoft being one of the main lagers until Herb Sutter joined them).

The same "slow" process will need to take place with Bitcoin as I don't think having "source code" as the "specification" (written in any programming language) is the correct (or desirable) way that things should be done (however I do appreciate that until the "source code" has any quirks that the don't make sense to put in the "specification" removed over time then the "specification" will also have to include them).

Algorithms are not described by "source code" and neither are any of the major internet protocols or programming languages (that aren't privately owned) - I can't see why Bitcoin *needs* to be an exception in the long term (although I do agree that in until a spec that matches the way the "reference client" behaves perfectly is written it cannot take precedence).

I guess the main thing I disagree with is that "it is useless/pointless to even try" (and BTW C++ had a "draft spec" for many years before finally becoming approved and adopted as being "standard").

This is not something that can or should be "rushed into" but something that like Bitcoin itself would need to evolve over time.

Hmm... a big part of the test is really the whole "gapped by air" comms - if you have a smartphone then you could still work it out by sending the image on the offline computer's screen via email and then scanning using zbarimg (rather than zbarcam).

This approach is a little more clumsy I'm afraid - but it is definitely doable (as I originally was testing things using a Galaxy Tab as a "go between" before I remembered that I had an old webcam lying around that I could use with my offline computer).

BTW - timezone is not an issue (you just need to post a solution within 48 hours of your *own* initial post to this topic) - if you end up with a little more time to "edit your result" because no-one quoted your "result" then that will not be a problem (I have to sleep at sometime and am not trying to be too anal about the rules).

Be sure to install ZBar on your online computer (http://zbar.sourceforge.net/) and from https://github.com/ciyam/safe the batch/script files check(.bat) and scan(.bat).

No wukkas!

Great - am in the same timezone and most likely will be online until at least 11pm.

Absolutely as it's a LiveOS (and exactly how I have used it)!

Okay - perhaps I will take a different approach to this (as I really do want to get the testing done).

The first five people who reply to this thread will be entitled to the (let's raise it to) 2 BTC reward provided that they have posted the required information (and it is proven to be correct) within 48 hours of posting here (once posted I will quote it to ensure that edits aren't done later) and using the same User Key and Password as another poster will not be accepted.

Actually in playing around with the "raw tx's" API and then using "importprivkey" for an "offline" generated address I experienced a similar problem (didn't see the address in the "receive" list but did see the unspent output in the "listunspent" list).

I resolved my problem by sending another tx from the unspent output to another address that *was* in my "receive" list but still don't quite understand why the problem happened.

I do understand exactly what you are saying and unfortunately Bitcoin was released *before* any real spec was written (so the code is what is being used as the spec which IMHO is unfortunate) - whilst it is not possible to "go back and start again" I do think it would be a very important thing to "specify" the Bitcoin protocol in much the same way as other protocols and computer languages are (preferably as an ISO spec) but of course this would not be in any way a trivial thing to do (but something I would certainly donate and/or contribute to if the Foundation were to get behind it).

And as I also pointed understanding C++ *deeply* is not a skill that many people at all have (so how can they *ever* fully understand Bitcoin if they don't *fully* understand every single function in say "boost" works little own OpenSSL and the rest?).