sickpig
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
|
 |
July 13, 2015, 08:09:37 PM |
|
The sentence
"Block pruning is currently incompatible with running a wallet"
should be exposed in the changelog.
definetly. it will be less problematic if the user will be alerted in the beginning of the pruning process, though. |
Bitcoin is a participatory system which ought to respect the right of self determinism of all of its users - Gregory Maxwell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Gods or Kings. Only Bitcoin
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
Cubic Earth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1018
|
|
July 14, 2015, 03:00:14 AM |
|
Thanks team! Really, really looking forward to the coming update that will enable the wallet functionality. In the meantime, I am going to install QT back on my MacBook air for the first time in 9 months, as soon as I get back to a fast connection.
|
|
|
|
|
Rampion
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1018
|
|
July 14, 2015, 09:56:39 AM |
|
Could we say that 0.11 is not affected by the fork problem, as stated by the sticky at the top of this forum? If you are using any wallet other than Bitcoin Core 0.10.x or 0.9.5, then you should not trust incoming transactions until they have ~30 confirmations Also, could we use 0.11 as a wallet, if we do not enable pruning (which if i understood correctly is not enabled by default)? |
|
|
|
dserrano5
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1029
|
|
July 14, 2015, 11:39:26 AM |
|
Also, could we use 0.11 as a wallet, if we do not enable pruning (which if i understood correctly is not enabled by default)?
Confirmation from the devs is always nice, but in this case I think it's pretty safe to assume if you don't enable pruning, you're running the same good old full node you've always been running, with wallet and all. |
|
|
|
|
Mikestang
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 14, 2015, 10:06:03 PM |
|
New version of bitcoin-qt looks odd - small fonts, ugly icons. Is this something with new version of QT used?
I agree, the new look is horribly ugly, it's all black and white the the icons for incoming/outgoing tx are terrible. Give me back my colorized lock, connectivity monitor, and check mark! |
|
|
|
|
CoinCidental
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1000
Si vis pacem, para bellum
|
|
July 15, 2015, 06:00:20 AM |
|
the new client is unfunctional as a wallet ??
WTF #
if i wanted a node i could set one up but most people want the wallet first and foremost i would imagine
they need to get on this ASAP
if i upgrade what happens to my old wallet + addresses + priv keys + btc balance ??
|
|
|
|
|
dserrano5
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1029
|
|
July 15, 2015, 06:02:55 AM |
|
if i upgrade what happens to my old wallet + addresses + priv keys + btc balance ??
Nothing, you run as usual. If you upgrade and set pruning up, then the wallet functionality is disabled. You don't lose any funds, the privkeys are still stored in the wallet.dat file, it's just that Bitcoin Core would ignore it. |
|
|
|
|
|
MarketNeutral
|
|
July 16, 2015, 11:35:32 PM |
|
I'm very pleased to see some fledgling support for big-endian architecture. This is great news!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Icon
|
|
July 17, 2015, 09:49:47 PM |
|
if i upgrade what happens to my old wallet + addresses + priv keys + btc balance ??
Nothing, you run as usual. If you upgrade and set pruning up, then the wallet functionality is disabled. You don't lose any funds, the privkeys are still stored in the wallet.dat file, it's just that Bitcoin Core would ignore it. So if the wallet is disabled in pruning mode, what purpose if any is pruning good for? Seeing you cant send /receive btc running it that way? Icon |
|
|
|
|
dserrano5
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1029
|
|
July 17, 2015, 10:27:45 PM |
|
So if the wallet is disabled in pruning mode, what purpose if any is pruning good for? Seeing you cant send /receive btc running it that way?
If you're currently running a full node: none. If not, you already have some other wallet, so this doesn't affect you. Pruning allows you to set up a node without the need to dedicate 50 Gb of storage to it. |
|
|
|
|
Mikestang
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 20, 2015, 06:36:56 PM |
|
I get way, way more random crashes/errors in v0.11.0 than I ever did with 0.10.2. Some times the programs shuts down with no error or notice, thankfully bitnodes emails me when the node goes down so I can restart it, but it sure is frustrating having the thing crash for no apparent reason.
|
|
|
|
|
daniel.nimtsch
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
|
|
July 22, 2015, 11:41:15 AM |
|
Thank you very much for the "block file pruning" mode! The barrier to run a full node for the support of the Bitcoin network now should be much lower.
|
|
|
|
|
Hyena
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2114
Merit: 1011
|
|
July 26, 2015, 01:03:33 PM |
|
The v0.11.0 bitcoin-qt binary for 64bit Linux is 30.2 MB.
Bitcoin Core version v0.10.2 (64-bit) bitcoin-qt binary for Linux is only 13.3 MB.
Why is there such a huge file size difference?
|
|
|
|
Slark
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1862
Merit: 1004
|
|
July 26, 2015, 01:52:05 PM |
|
New version of bitcoin-qt looks odd - small fonts, ugly icons. Is this something with new version of QT used?
I agree, the new look is horribly ugly, it's all black and white the the icons for incoming/outgoing tx are terrible. Give me back my colorized lock, connectivity monitor, and check mark! Thanks for the heads up. I recently upgraded my Bitcoin Core from version 0.9.x to 0.10.2 (mainly due to recent small blockchain split) and I thought that new version look less intuitive than old. And now I see that developer continue to bring changes which will make Bitcoin core the ugliest bitcoin wallet on Earth. I will rather wait for version 0.12.0 and then update my client. |
|
|
|
|
Hyena
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2114
Merit: 1011
|
|
July 26, 2015, 02:31:29 PM |
|
The v0.11.0 bitcoin-qt binary for 64bit Linux is 30.2 MB.
Bitcoin Core version v0.10.2 (64-bit) bitcoin-qt binary for Linux is only 13.3 MB.
Why is there such a huge file size difference?
I will not upgrade until someone explains the file size difference. Did the developer leave debug symbols in or what? This is just fishy. |
|
|
|
superpanos2
Member
Offline
Activity: 88
Merit: 10
|
|
July 26, 2015, 08:11:14 PM |
|
Does prunning only help with hard disk space usage?
Are there any more benefits?
|
|
|
|
|
Lauda
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
|
|
July 26, 2015, 08:26:54 PM |
|
Does prunning only help with hard disk space usage?
Are there any more benefits?
That's the only real benefit. It was introduced mainly because people started complaining that the blockchain is becoming too big. However, it currently has some limitations so you should read the changelog before deciding. |
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks" 😼 Bitcoin Core ( onion) |
|
|
|
MarketNeutral
|
|
July 27, 2015, 02:03:40 AM |
|
The v0.11.0 bitcoin-qt binary for 64bit Linux is 30.2 MB.
Bitcoin Core version v0.10.2 (64-bit) bitcoin-qt binary for Linux is only 13.3 MB.
Why is there such a huge file size difference?
I will not upgrade until someone explains the file size difference. Did the developer leave debug symbols in or what? This is just fishy. I second this. |
|
|
|
|
Newar
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1000
https://gliph.me/hUF
|
|
July 28, 2015, 08:52:54 AM |
|
The v0.11.0 bitcoin-qt binary for 64bit Linux is 30.2 MB.
Bitcoin Core version v0.10.2 (64-bit) bitcoin-qt binary for Linux is only 13.3 MB.
Why is there such a huge file size difference?
I will not upgrade until someone explains the file size difference. Did the developer leave debug symbols in or what? This is just fishy. I second this. Probably better off asking on github or the Development section on here. |
|
|
|
|
BTCBinary
|
|
July 29, 2015, 01:51:02 PM |
|
will this fix the spammy transactions we've been having in the network?
|
|
|
|
|
|
