Some answers grouped.

@MonkeyGang
I read your article, well, but I have the impression that some details must be reviewed
when anonymity start.

@GreedyJohn
What do you mean when you say that the thread is frozen?

@BsPlus
I did not understand. You do not see the listing of all three markets?
It also happens to others?

I would also like to remind those who are absolutely new, to change the "rpcuser=" and "rpcpassword="
which are present in the file navajocoin.conf.  NEVER leave the default values.


Bye Bye

Hi!
I am gradually re-importing routines for analysis, and I have the first preliminary results,
which are based on what my wallet loaded, although I can not swear on their accuracy.

Regarding the fork, actually there were a couple, one already mentioned by the operator
of Bittrex (which I would like to thank), about 7 blocks long, ending with the last block
orphan 5fdb3400f535bae5fa1b8c8627cea860dfa298090541c857ecb21cef3842673e and
originating from b2ac1020174b0cbe530bcc46451b01b15e16e9d506bdbd28829752058b7b99b6
after the regular block 1028800.

And another longer and older, about 164 blocks, which ends with the block orphan
d7f04eed72a78e74dc4b3ce2517b3d6ee46032342eabe96536f6db22800964c8 and
originating from 0ced41c9fb23e7f0568bc9e2ae0f0e6b96dabfd6f057015715f2d6f8e80c6577
after the regular block 1021725.

The good news is that none of the two fork contained transaction, so no damage
and no worries.

Indeed there were many blocks orphans, in particular in the last 48 hours, as it was
expected, but generally do not form chains greater than 4 consecutive blocks.

And if I compare the data calculated on window of 4000, 1000, and 500 most recent
blocks, i notice that their percentage is decreasing with time.

The average frequency of the blocks is around 25 seconds, slightly too fast, and in this
regard I would like to remind everyone, but especially to sYf5qH to control the correctness
of their system clock.

After a quick look the first 20 positions of the top rich list, it seem to me in the right order,
just the usual difference based on updating time.

In summary, if you want the opinion of those who see the glass half empty...
could be better, but it does not go that bad.

Have patience.

Remy5

Yes the method is correct, only you have to take the precaution of not taking the block in absolute latest,
but choose one that is older than a couple of blocks.

In blockchain in a normal state of health, the spontaneous fork of length greater than 3 or 4 blocks,
are rather rare.


Bye Bye

I thank you for the thought, but I'm not part of the DevTeam or foundation, and I never
published my address so far.
So be careful to imitators. ^_^

Regarding the post of Litebit, I think it can be deleted, but not correct in its content
from other people. Only Litebit can, if he want.

Bye Bye

Ok, thanks guy for collaboration.

So, about 10% of the wallet is not yet updated.
Or we have to consider that the wallet is not updated are only 6?

I hope that the last stragglers wake up and proceed to the upgrade,
although for a couple I think we can really talk about coma.

PS:
Regarding BTER, AFAIK has long been that the deposits and withdrawals of
NAV are disabled, I would not consider it as "on-line".
At least until we have official news from the DevTeam.


PS2:
Happy Birthday !!!!

Not in space, they seems to be in Bulgaria (2.0.2) and USA the 2.0.3.

But surely lost in time, and in meaning.  


Bye Bye

Thanks Shahim.

I currently have 21 node.

One 2.0.2. (shame), one 2.0.4, and 2 version 2.0.5, the rest are 2.0.6.

Bye Bye

LOL!!

Relax!

Probably, Litebit for a few minutes he was right, but it is the nature of blockchain,
occasionally two miners can produce at the same time a block.

Typically one of the two forked chains is abandoned after a few blocks, and the winner
becomes the new main-chain official.

Bye Bye

Can you see if all of them are updated?
(getpeerinfo)

Procedure technically correct, but from what I can see, on my wallet, and on official explorer, the correct
block # 1027238 is 82cbdbbe21ffa7ffb0e570f5708fdd0cd1caadda0b3f8bd5dbba0a267f371159
url: http://www.navajocoin.org/abe/b/1288hZkbQA

the other is the forked one.

Sorry, but until re-integrate my routine can't do other research.

PS:
This morning, the sync was already finished, now I'm waiting for the first stake. But usually it takes me a lot.

Hard to say.

I'm doing a test, I'm reloading the entire bockchain from 0 in a natural way,
without zip, bootstrap or other data copied, precisely in order to have
a possible estimate of the time required.

Now, after at least 24 hours, a part of which skipped due the reset of pc
for M$ automatic updating (many compliments for the timing of the release),
and there are still about 155K blocks to the end.
I may be missing a few more hours to complete.

So given this, it all depends on when the exchanges are able to perform the
compilation, and how they intend to do the reloading of blockchain,
and when they start the reload.

Meanwhile, I gave a look to peers:
I have 15 connections, 13 are updated to the new version 2.0.6,
there is one still at version 2.0.5, and even one still obsolete version 2.0.2,  
probably located in Bulgaria.

Perhaps an Alert peremptory directed to the older versions would be a wise
thing to do.


Bye Bye

PS: I'm still disappointed.

HI! Any news by from Exchanges wallet's update?

As reference, my "normal" sync is now over block 600K, and count advancing regular.

Bye Bye

Quick fix for you:

from  "main.cpp" -> Line 2712
        txNew.strTxComment = "text:NavajoCoin genesis block";
        CBlock block;
        block.vtx.push_back(txNew);

   
to:
        txNew.strTxComment = "text:NavajoCoin genesis block";
        txNew.nVersion=1;
        CBlock block;
        block.vtx.push_back(txNew);


This seem to solve the 0 block merkle issue.

I have started a sync from zero.

Goodnight

This is a type of problem that occurs only when there is still no block loaded.
Once you have the first block the rest shall work regularly.

As a temporary solution downloads the complete block chain which Shahim prepared, and put the file in the Navajocoin directory.

Someone managed to do a sync from scratch?  And the exchange to which point they are?

Ok.. got the replied while writing question. 

Hi Hi Hi!
Shahim,  when do you have really much time, i think you have to cancel
the richlist's internal data and rebuild it from zero, re-parsing all the blockchain.
Best wishes.

Bye

Hashforce101, Happy to see you again, I hope you're feeling better.

For a moment I thought that the postponement of the update, while you were debilitated
would have killed you.

I hope you get better soon at best.

Bye

I have a little afraid to ask, but what kind of chili you've eaten?
 

Please you could check the post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=679791.msg10647921#msg10647921

Probably the data are now a bit obsolete, but it would be helpful to know if your data is more
similar to that post, or to the richlist of Shahim.

Bye

I read the latest, and I avoided answering hot to not overdo it, but I must admit
that I was disappointed by recent events, not so much for delays of 'Anon', which as
you know is one thing of which I do not care about, but how it was handled the whole affair.

It is not my intention to make the provocateur, but there are still some things that I have to ask:

1) When you had the epiphany, that it would take more time of the exchange to enable
new wallet, and then you could not release in time to public, the code of the wallet?

2) You have planned to send a series of alert along the blockchain, for
warn everyone wallet, even those people who do not frequent the forum,
of the imminent fork and mandatory update?

3) If the network AnonBeta is no longer needed, do you sent a series of alert
with the warning that the test is finished and that it is now time to close the wallet?

4) The fork will be operating from a specific block number in the future, or immediately operational?

I would have other questions, but I'll wait to see the code on GitHub and find them the answers,
without filling the forum with useless bizarre technical details.

And I hope for the good of the community, that this time the DevTeam work is clean, and with all the
old bugs fixed.

Bye