is it possible the have multiple output addresses in a single transaction?
this is not possible with the gui, but it is supported by the electrum library |
|
|
|
There was no update. the client was installed yesterday and the funds where transferred yesterday also.
if the history is pruned, you may want to switch to a 'full' server (with the letter F in the servers list). this will show you the complete history. if you want me to have a look, PM me the master public key. also, are there imported keys in the wallet? |
|
|
|
I also believe I did not include a fee this time. Is this what screwed me up?
I believe too. |
|
|
|
One question: Reading " https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Electrum", I have the impression that sending transactions with an offline wallet is only possible with native (i.e. non-imported) addresses (because it involves deseeding and reseeding the wallet). Is this true? Or is it also possible (or planned) to send offline transactions from imported keys? I am asking because I would like to use offline transactions using imported addresses generated with a 3rd party tool like bitaddress.org or vanitygen. When you deseed your wallet inported privkeys are separated too. Am I right? So it should work also with imported addresses. Indeed you can create a watch-only wallet by importing your privkeys and then deseeding your wallet to only get balances, but not being able to spend. Oh, that would be great. Maybe I was misled by the term "de/re- seed" - I thought "seed" relates to the deterministic part of the wallet only, because that's where the term "seed" is normally used (I thought). So then the correct understanding of the terms is: * deseed = to detach or remove (all) the private keys from the wallet, * reseed = to re-attach the private keys to the deseeded wallet, both irrespective of whether keys are imported or deterministic. Right? the "reseed" command does not exist anymore; the wiki is deprecated. see the documentation in the "docs" directory of electrum. yes, "deseed" will not only remove your seed but also all private keys |
|
|
|
I have tried the lastest version (1.7.1). It starts all right, but then crashes when signing transactions, no matter what.
I will try to download old versions somehow.
do you have a python traceback? old versinos still on the website: e4a-157zip e4a-158zip e4a-160zip e4a-161zip e4a-162zip |
|
|
|
are you using a 1.6 client, or 1.7 ?
in 1.6, a miscalculation may happen and result in that.
it happens if you have imported keys, made transactions where those imported keys were co-input with electrum native keys, and then restored your wallet from seed, or deleted the imported key (even on full servers)
I believe if is fixed in 1.7. otherwise let me know
I'm using 1.7.1. I'm pretty sure i haven't imported any private keys into this wallet nor have i restored it from seed. Hmmm. If it helps i observed something else. I made 3 small transactions with no fee, that were taking long to be confirmed. I shutdown electrum and some hours later i opened it again. Now 2 of 3 were confirmed and showing up in history and the 3rd was nowhere. Instead this message about "pruned transactions" had shown up in history. After rebooting again, i can see the 3rd transaction, not confirmed yet, and the "pruned" message.  oh, then I think it's normal. one of your pending transactions was pruned because all its outputs were spent. visit a full server if you want to view your complete history. |
|
|
|
are you using a 1.6 client, or 1.7 ? in 1.6, a miscalculation may happen and result in that. it happens if you have imported keys, made transactions where those imported keys were co-input with electrum native keys, and then restored your wallet from seed, or deleted the imported key (even on full servers) I believe if is fixed in 1.7. otherwise let me know |
|
|
|
I see no reason to do this; just create a bat file with the flag build in.
that's too complicated for lots of users  |
|
|
|
Was using 1.6.2 installed version on Windows 7 (32bit) and was running fine. After installing the 1.7 windows installer I get a message when trying to run electrum: The version of this file is not compatible with the version of Windows you're running. Check your computer's system information to see whether you need an x86 (32-bit) or x64 (64-bit) version of the program, and then contact the software publisher.
I tried to re-install version 1.6.2, but now that doesn't work either (just does nothing when I try to open Electrum)Managed to get 1.6.2 working again by deleting the /program files/Electrum folder and then re-installing the 1.7.1 builds sould work for you |
|
|
|
...
do you know that there is some documentation about Bitcoin fees? maybe you could read it? this is a Bitcoin related question, completely off topic for this thread. |
|
|
|
Is v1.7 portable as announced?
I am not sure which announcement your are talking about. 1.6.2 already had the portable flag build in. I think they mean an executable that starts with the flag on. |
|
|
|
78c616dffe7b4fd30788e3c721e37a543a80ef55790e38134563b6f192522d3c so, I decided to decode that for you: {
"inputs": [
{
"address": "12HMTWSXTX9aQCBU6kRAZU5MwgNmGr8HjS",
"prevout_hash": "14be8b3f7257ef80633580a96b25a48c01dfdb7db476d87f30eee4df4fc73b6c",
"prevout_n": 35,
"sequence": 4294967295,
}
],
"lockTime": 0,
"outputs": [
{
"address": "1PouBPPf25kkS8VHgmYa4Ta62UXU7iomVc",
"index": 0,
"raw_output_script": "76a914fa31755858f134cefcd2722e9f3eb1b1fbbce90a88ac",
"value": 1
},
{
"address": "1HvXPqcKM891wpHpBg3M8FWyJKPnCcuNhb",
"index": 1,
"raw_output_script": "76a914b9a16e111aaec38c69de1c273d4c56ef519edb7788ac",
"value": 2978007199
}
],
"version": 1
}
So, your total output is 2978007199 + 1 = 2978007200 satoshis. According to blockchain.info, your input had 2978007200 satoshis too. This means that you decided to pay zero fee to miners for your transaction. Good luck with that... I wrote above that the most likely cause for the rejection of your first transaction was insufficient fee. Even though I did not write it explicitly, I was implying that your new transaction should include a fee. |
|
|
|
I get "No module named plugins" as a console error on startup.
sorry about that. I released 1.7.1, it should work fine |
|
|
|
I mean he had to know that its not needed anymore and that the new transaction replaces the old one.
bitcoin does that. it's called a double spend. For that it does have to be the same sender and the same target plus the same amount? That wouldnt be possible then if using change addresses right? no, no, no, no.... a double spend means that you are trying to spend the same money twice. if you broadcast a new transaction, it will conflict with the one that's still in the memory pool of that server. the latter will be removed. |
|
|
|
Hello, will the freeze option work even if other addresses' balance is 0 ? Thanks
yes. if you try to do a transaction that would require coins from frozen addresses, Electrum will complain that there are not enough funds. |
|
|
|
Is there a portable 1.7? If so, could you please provide a link?
not yet, but there should be one soon. |
|
|
|
"Can someone with the list of words from the Electrum code get an electrum user's seed trough brute force? How can it be avoided?"
The list of words used by Electrum is public; everyone can read it: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/master/lib/mnemonic.pyThe security of your seed does not reside in a secret algorithm; Electrum is open source, anyone can see how it works. Security is based on the length of your seed: your seed is safe because it is long enough to make brute force attacks impossible. |
|
|
|
I mean he had to know that its not needed anymore and that the new transaction replaces the old one.
bitcoin does that. it's called a double spend. |
|
|
|
I was originally writing this as an patch to Electrum, but it seemed like it'd take too much time to integrate so I decided to make a standalone utility. This is also why I wrote it in Python at all (which I'm not a big fan of).
please read my answer here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=153990.msg1641145#msg1641145I do not know how much entropy you get from those 6 words, but that really is the only question you should ask yourself. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
