|
@mmpool i do certainly understand what you are saying, however what do people expect me to do? the ixcoin testnet is non-existent. The original source did not contain a valid testnet, and creating one is a job in itself since a lot of the IXCoin code in particular has no seperation of code for mainnet and testnet which breaks a lot of things on testnet.
At best the only thing i can do is test when i get my pool functioning properly (HDD ran out of space on my last test server *doh*) without it i cant do any testing whatsoever on the mining end which truly makes things impossible for me. This is what most people fail to understand. Only few pools have the capability to test this, thats you and cex.io
I do wish this wasnt the case but it sadly is.
Ahmed
|
|
|
|
|
Thats it, i'm done for now. When and IF i get the time i'll complete the testing of the IXCoin code on my own pool after ive got it set back up. Until then it's going to take a back seat. Sick of being taken for a ride.
Ahmed
|
|
|
|
I told you they are prompt!
Bob K. (CEX.IO)
Jan 12 20:46
Dear Jumbley
Our devs have informed me that after careful consideration they have decided not to test the code that was not approved to release phase. They said they will play around with it when there is an available time slot in a controlled environment to see how it runs. Once I have any updates - i will let you know. We'll do nothing until you've tested it all and made sure it all works perfectly for us so we can continue doing fuck all
Kind Regards,
Bob Krieger
CEX.IO Support
There corrected that sack of shit for you |
|
|
|
|
big difference. We're asking IXC to TEST some code for usage on their pool. there's a big difference. No one has asked them to write a single line of code. If they dont get it to work they can come back to me with logs and i can fix it.
You dont seem to notice that.
|
|
|
|
Not really fair to expect CEX to implement something that is untested, do you need additional resources to complete your work here ahmed?
It's tested as far as i can do so. It's completely unfair of you people to expect me to to do something i cannot with what little capability i have..... CEX.IO CAN test the coind on main-net very-very easily and can report back to anyone here with any issues. They have the hashpower and capability to do so. Whereas i do not. <rant> Why do i even bother with you all. Me, GR and cinnamon have done all we can to get everything working as best as we can, asking little in return while dirtbags like cex.io and co can't be bothered to give something a quick test which is very, very easy for them to do rather than stringing this out. And on top of that we get comments like i've quoted above. You think things are fair on us? Slaving away for nothing trying to get something to work which you cant? </rant> |
|
|
|
|
My server ran out of HDD space before i was able to succesfully test a block. I know for sure it's not working on testnet. On mainnet i think it may do. With testnet i was having an issue where it complained that the block time was too far in the future
|
|
|
|
|
hey GR. i've started on integrating the BTC commit histories into our code for 0.9.3 to ease off the upgrade to 0.10. Once ive finished that (done everything besides 1/2 the files in the SRC folder) then we can work on the 0.10 upgrade. i do think you should PR the 0.9.3 depends build stuff. since i want to have a repo similar to the DGC one i have. Where each version is in a seperate branch. This'd make it easier for everyone since it's easy to find an old version if ever needed. (There's been lots of occasions where ive had to search round the web for old versions for various alts)
Ahmed
|
|
|
|
|
really i doubt anyone else will add a pool. the chance of finding a block is nill for most people since they take weeks to confirm
|
|
|
|
Could you add multicoin.co to the site under pools. It's an auto-exchanging, profit switching multipool (which also pays out in select currencies)
hey - was just about to add multicoin.co to the site but the site but the URL doesn't seem to work. There's not a typo or anything is there? The server ran out of disk space. Currently working with eth2 of SuchPool to migrate it to a new server. It will be up sometime this week |
|
|
|
The 1:1 feature is what makes BTE special.
I do kind of agree which is why I got on board too but would defo be good to get an active community around BTE. I like the idea of keeping it 1:1 but no one will mine due to diff. I think ahmedbodi is a great asset to the coin and I'll contribute anyway I can. It'd be awesome to get BTE working, not because I have a stash, I don't. But because it could be an awesome alt. thanks  but yes i agree, no one will mine it due to the diff making BTE useless and imo a dead alt |
|
|
|
Hi ahmedbodi I think that's a great idea. The difficulty is causing nobody to mine it. a) I think no merged mining, keeping it something like the original idea... Other people may have thoughts on that though b) Not sure c) and not sure what you mean by this one? Sorry probably not a great reply but I think it's great that you're going to keep up the work on it. Let me know of any changes and i'll update the website Hey long time a) sure, we could also take the multi-algo route like we did with DGC if anyone likes b) Im considering using Fractalcoin's slingshot? retarget system c) Keep the block reward at 50 per block or reduce it (or keep it the same amount generated per day just speed up the block time) Could you add multicoin.co to the site under pools. It's an auto-exchanging, profit switching multipool (which also pays out in select currencies) |
|
|
|
|
I agree with cinnamon there. I wouldnt be working on IXC if it wasnt for vlad. Now that would apply wether it was the most popular coin out there too. It's vlad thats getting things done around here even if just with his passion for the coin
|
|
|
|
|
ive got a node on my pool (which mines FFC quite regularly) @multicoin.co
|
|
|
|
|
I've got bytecoin on my multipool and blocks from weeks ago are still not confirmed. I'm going to hard fork bytecoin and swap out the diff algo. Rather than listening to the non existant supporters who only were only active last time i wanted to fork and are not gone. I'll release it and if the exchanges, and pool's update then the fork will take place.
Any suggestions as to:
a) merged mining or not?
b) what diff algo?
c) Cut subsidy or not?
(The fork will be based off my work on IXC's 0.9.3 client and DGC's 0.9.3 client)
(btw ahmedbodi here )
|
|
|
|
|
correct me if im wrong but i thought there was something to do with a counterparty being part of the ixcoin software?
|
|
|
|
0.9.3 is COMPLETE. As i stated earlier it has been for some time (In the time since its been done ive even hard forked DGC to V3 from the original V2 code) which shows the time since its been done. If @Frictionless you do plan on doing it. I must insist that you start ASAP. Once v0.10 launches i plan on upgrading straight to it, and any of your counterparty work if not completed will NOT be ported. Which will leave you left with porting counterparty to a 0.10 base.
Ahmed
@Ahmed: Are you saying a 0.9.x implementation of Counterparty won't work with 0.10.x clients? Please clarify. not at all. I'm saying i wont put put a 1/2 backed counterparty implementation into 0.10. It'll have to be fully working when i upgrade ixc to 0.10 or it wont go in at all. (I've already started work on the changes needed) |
|
|
|
|
Got it in testing atm. Getting a overwrite transaction and a block timestamp issue in testnet atm. Not completely sure if our issues are something to do with testnet (like i had with the diff stuff on testnet) so im going to setup a seperate main-net chain starting from block 0 tomorrow to test
|
|
|
|
|
not if we've got anything to do with it
|
|
|
|
|
i'll get a testnet up soon. Almost got myself a pool running
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
