Show Posts
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »
|
I welcome any updates to the man pages for the newer versions of bitcoin that have come out since I originally wrote the current man page.
I also think it would make sense to include it in the upstream source. I'm a bit puzzled by the assertion that the GPL is incompatible with the MIT license. Its not incompatible, unless someone is thinking that they want to redistribute bitcoin, and the man page, under a more restrictive license for some purpose. Which MIT permits, but GPL does not. For what purpose would someone want to restricting users' rights?
|
|
|
For the most part, gribble talking in the channel is not necessary, I've seen a lot of people doing gpg authentications in the channel and people complaining that they should be done in private because of the noise... I support moving it to PM!
|
|
|
Announced doesn't mean working, he's trying to get it started, which is fine but there are still some problems with it.
Once we have a working prototype then great, once all (most) parties are satisfied then go for it.
What qualifies as working? I'm able to generate namecoins through mining, I've registered domain names with the namecoins that I mined. I've changed those domain name properties to have A records, and subdomains, and I've setup nameserver forwarding.... all of this works. I feel like there IS a working prototype. What problems are you saying are sticking points for holding back the bounty dispersal?
|
|
|
What happened with this? It seems like the name chosen in this poll was BitDNS, but the only current running DNS project is Namecoin.
|
|
|
Would you consider setting up BBE for namecoin's block chain?
If you are not interested in doing so, would you release the source so someone else could host it?
thanks!
|
|
|
Bitcoin is now available in Squeeze backports....
|
|
|
Hmm.
There is nothing to be happy with.
Debian have a release cycle that is not appropriate for bitcoin. As my experience suggests me, bitcoin software were released very often in the past and often introduced changes with major incompatibilities.
When the next Debian stable is getting close to release, we can decide if we want to ship the version that is contained within the proposed release, or keep it out. Also, there is a mechanism for updating packages in stable, its more strict, but if there were protocol changes that made the older version no longer work, it could be updated to support that. Would it possible to incorporate ./debian directory into the official bitcoin source repository? Isn't that a better option to support Debian (or to be supported by Debian)?
This actually does not help Debian, in fact it usually makes things more complicated and problematic. Please do not do this.
|
|
|
You can always download the source package, compare the source with the original distributed source, all it takes is a simple diff, and then build your own package out of it.
Last time I tried, I had compilation errors. I've just tried again, I get: $ uname -a Linux aptosidbox 2.6.38-1.slh.4-aptosid-686 #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Mar 26 13:12:20 UTC 2011 i686 GNU/Linux $ make -
Err, this isn't how you should build a debian source package. You should have downloaded the source package. First you need to make sure you have apt-src lines in /etc/apt/sources.list, and then you can simply do: $ apt-get source bitcoind
Then you need to make sure you have the proper build-dependencies installed: $ sudo apt-get build-dep bitcoind
Then while in the directory you can do the following to build the package: $ dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc
EDIT: fixed code block formatting
|
|
|
I confess I am a bit reluctant to use it, though.
After all what exactly prevents it to have a trojan inside?
You can always download the source package, compare the source with the original distributed source, all it takes is a simple diff, and then build your own package out of it.
|
|
|
SO is it possible to install bitcoind on debian lenny?
Once the package migrates to wheezy, I'll create a backport ( http://backports.debian.org) for squeeze.... but lenny is no longer stable, so that probably will no longer be supported and instead you should consider upgrading to squeeze. Edit: oops, it has, so I'll do that backport now.
|
|
|
Awesome news! Do we know who contributed the package? Is it someone that spends time on this forum?
Mostly it was Jonas, but I also worked and still work with him on the package.
|
|
|
I'm having a new problem that just started: backend ( http://127.0.0.1:5847/) connect error: Connection to http://127.0.0.1:5847 refused I have my bitcoind running locally, and the username/password are set properly, and I haven't changed anything. It just started.
|
|
|
Is there a projected point where payout will equal what is expected for mining solo, is that a particular hash/sec rate? At this point it seems 1/4 of what difficulty is (and what one can get on slush's pool, even with the 2% fee)
|
|
|
The Web server is back online now.
I'm getting: Problems communicating with bitcoin RPC I also don't seem able to traceroute to the server, although I can load the web page That's odd. I checked my remote miner and it's able to communicate with the server. What's the full command line your running? (Filter your username and password of course  Its working now, must have been some network issue between me and you.
|
|
|
The Web server is back online now.
I'm getting: Problems communicating with bitcoin RPC I also don't seem able to traceroute to the server, although I can load the web page
|
|
|
As we're a new pool, with less users, we are currently solving blocks at a slower rate than other pools, which will cause your overall payout to be lower for the time being.
Thanks, is there a projected point where payout will equal what is expected for mining solo? At this point it seems 1/4 of what difficulty is. We recommend you update to our latest version and read this post about how to configure it properly to check against your local bitcoind. I'll do this, but it looks like the server is down right now, so I'll wait for that.
|
|
|
Alright, I've been running on this pool for over 24 hours now, using an unmodified m0n miner. It seems like my estimated earnings are about 1.3btc, which is quite low compared to what I would get on slush's pool and what I would expect with a 5870 (approximately 4btc/day right now).
I know that the modified miner only helps the pool server, and not me, but is the low payout because there are not enough people in the pool yet, or did I miss something in the flame fest?
|
|
|
Thanks for setting up this pool, its fun to have more pools to really bring out the debate on different tactics. If anything, I've enjoyed reading the debate in this thread.
I know some people think other people are trolling, and don't appreciate the criticisms, but I'd ask that you refrain from shutting people down and refusing to engage in the discussions. I've also noticed that people are sometimes thinking that argumentation is an unfair attack, I don't think that is a correct characterization. Textual mediums do not convey tone, no matter the number of emotions included. So I'd ask people who feel like they are being unfairly attacked to reconsider responding in-kind with an aggressive response, that just raises the heat. Even if you cannot read anything but an attack in the post, be a better person and respond in a way that de-escalates the aggression, rather than matching it.
Likewise, I think its fair to ask people who are disagreeing to refrain from making angry or aggressive attacks, especially those that are ad hominem and don't serve any argumentative purpose, but to piss off the other person.
With that said, please do continue debating the different approaches its fun! But be sure to read what people are saying, even when you have decided ahead of time that they are not going to say anything correct, or nice.
On another note, I'm trying out this pool to see how it compares. I'm using the "original" poclbm for a while and then I'll switch to the mod to see how they compare. I'm discouraged from continuing to use this modified miner if the changes aren't going to be pushed 'upstream' or at least offered to upstream for consideration (hint: git repository, pull request on github if you use that).
|
|
|
Suggestion: What about putting poclbm under git or the like. Downloading 7mb clients only to delete 6mb of windows exe's and dll's was not very "efficient".
I agree, put it under git. I dont care about the size, but having version control is really useful for seeing what changed, its also much easier to get updates regularly.
|
|
|
I am also quite unlucky. I've found 8 blocks for the pool, but my balance is just 328. I've also noticed my 7-day average go down quite a bit since Feburary 8th for reasons I cannot understand.
Unlucky?  Surely this means you are rather lucky - you have found more blocks than the average person would. But the pool averages it out. Well, considering that 8 blocks would have given me 400 coins solo, obtaining only 328 from the pool means unlucky to me. My hash rate is around 340125 khash/sec, this is my plunge: 
|
|
|
|