[ANN][PIVX] - PRIVATE INSTANT VERIFIED TRANSACTION - PROOF OF STAKE - ZEROCOIN

[BitcoinFX]

I was following the upgrade guide and this file no longer exists on github.
Do I use something else now to upgrade?

Dnet devs. changed the download location from DarkNet-1.0.2.0-Linux64.zip  to  Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0.zip

Updated post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1262920.msg14220860#msg14220860

Linux / Cloud VPS - DNET command line upgrade guide from: v1.0.1.0 to: v1.0.2.0

Stop the Dnet daemon:

Code:

cd Darknet

Code:

cd src

Code:

./darknet-cli stop

Code:

cd

Remove the 'old' Dnet folder and daemon etc:

Code:

rm -rv Darknet

Download Dnet v1.0.2.0 :

EDIT (new download link):

Code:

wget https://github.com/Darknet-Crypto/Darknet/releases/download/v1.0.2.0/Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0.zip

Re-make the Dnet directory:

Code:

mkdir Darknet

Code:

cd Darknet

Code:

mkdir src

Code:

cd

Unzip the download :

EDIT:

Code:

unzip Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0.zip -d Darknet/src

Move the unzipped files to the 'default' directory :

Code:

mv Darknet/src/Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0/darknetd Darknet/src/

Code:

mv Darknet/src/Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0/darknet-cli Darknet/src/

Code:

mv Darknet/src/Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0/darknet-tx Darknet/src/

Tidy up:

Code:

rm -rv Darknet/src/Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0

Code:

rm -rv Darknet/src/__MACOSX

Code:

rm -R Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0.zip

Restart the Dnet daemon:

Code:

cd Darknet

Code:

cd src

Code:

./darknetd

Code:

./darknet-cli getinfo

Code:

./darknet-cli masternode start

Guide at: http://xeronet.c0m.li/dnet-crypto.php - to be updated.

EDIT: Go here: https://github.com/Darknet-Crypto/Darknet - If you prefer to build from source.

[1713912653]

1713912653

[1713912653]

1713912653

[1713912653]

1713912653

[jakiman]

I get a similar problem with 1.0.2.0 but not 1.0.1.0

When enabling from the controller with start-alias, everything looks fine, with a "result":"successful".

Checking the debug.log of the masternode I can see the correct "Got NEW Masternode entry -" line (identified by txid). Then with masternode list, I can see the correct line "ENABLED" (identified by txid).

But when I do masternode status, I get:

{
   "vin" : "CTxIn(COutPoint(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, 4294967295), coinbase )",
    "service" : "[::]:0",
    "status" : "Not capable masternode: Hot node, waiting for remote activation."
}

I think there is a problem with the new release.

I'm getting the exact same issue for last 3 MN that I created. (both 1.0.1.0 & 1.0.2.0)
I've never had this issue with other MN but only with the 3 MN I've set up today...

Edit: Got 1 of 3 using 1.0.2.0 to start locally. No idea why it worked now after failing last 10 goes. Now 2 to go!
Edit2: Now got all 3 started with 1.0.2.0. All I did was follow the guide by BitcoinFX to upgrade. Then started via "start-alias" from controller wallet.

[jakiman]

Dnet devs. changed the download location from DarkNet-1.0.2.0-Linux64.zip  to  Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0.zip

Updated post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1262920.msg14220860#msg14220860

<snip>

Thank you so much for this updated guide. Very much appreciated.

[BitcoinFX]

Dnet devs. changed the download location from DarkNet-1.0.2.0-Linux64.zip  to  Darknet-Qt-Linux-Wallet-v1.0.2.0.zip

Updated post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1262920.msg14220860#msg14220860

<snip>

Thank you so much for this updated guide. Very much appreciated.

No worries. Tested upgrading only from the previous guide, however the above should all be OK.

Cheers!

[BitcoinFX]

For those of us interested in achieving 'true' privacy and anonymity of transactions, from the client/user perspective, the choice of OS is vital.

Tails - https://tails.boum.org/ (The Amnesic Incognito Live System) - mentioned a few pages back, is an excellent choice for browsing the web and other tasks, although perhaps not as ideal for making crypto transactions, storing blockchains etc., (which is one reason it uses Electrum for Bitcoin).

Again, this is for client wallets i.e. not for Masternodes. So,

Whonix - is perhaps a way forward ...

Realizing that this solution requires at least 2 machines (or 2 Virtual Boxes!), being a "Gateway" and a "Workstation".

- https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Whonix - "...Unlike Tails, Whonix is not "amnesic"; both the Gateway and the Workstation retain their past state across reboots. Not being amnesic improves security on the Gateway, by allowing Tor's "entry guard" system to choose long-lived entry points for the Tor network, reducing adversaries' ability to trap users by running malicious relays."...

- https://www.whonix.org/

"Whonix is an operating system focused on anonymity, privacy and security. It's based on the Tor anonymity network, Debian GNU/Linux and security by isolation.

Whonix consists of two parts: One solely runs Tor and acts as a gateway, which we call Whonix-Gateway. The other, which we call Whonix-Workstation, is on a completely isolated network. Only connections through Tor are possible. With Whonix, you can use applications and run servers anonymously over the internet. DNS leaks are impossible, and not even malware with root privileges can find out the user's real IP."

or

Qubes OS - https://www.qubes-os.org/ - https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Qubes_OS

..."With Whonix integrated into Qubes, you can easily route network traffic through the Tor anonymity network."...

[jk9694]

For those of us interested in achieving 'true' privacy and anonymity of transactions, from the client/user perspective, the choice of OS is vital.

Tails - https://tails.boum.org/ (The Amnesic Incognito Live System) - mentioned a few pages back, is an excellent choice for browsing the web and other tasks, although perhaps not as ideal for making crypto transactions, storing blockchains etc., (which is one reason it uses Electrum for Bitcoin).

Again, this is for client wallets i.e. not for Masternodes. So,

Whonix - is perhaps a way forward ...

Realizing that this solution requires at least 2 machines (or 2 Virtual Boxes!), being a "Gateway" and a "Workstation".

- https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Whonix - "...Unlike Tails, Whonix is not "amnesic"; both the Gateway and the Workstation retain their past state across reboots. Not being amnesic improves security on the Gateway, by allowing Tor's "entry guard" system to choose long-lived entry points for the Tor network, reducing adversaries' ability to trap users by running malicious relays."...

- https://www.whonix.org/

"Whonix is an operating system focused on anonymity, privacy and security. It's based on the Tor anonymity network, Debian GNU/Linux and security by isolation.

Whonix consists of two parts: One solely runs Tor and acts as a gateway, which we call Whonix-Gateway. The other, which we call Whonix-Workstation, is on a completely isolated network. Only connections through Tor are possible. With Whonix, you can use applications and run servers anonymously over the internet. DNS leaks are impossible, and not even malware with root privileges can find out the user's real IP."

or

Qubes OS - https://www.qubes-os.org/ - https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Qubes_OS

..."With Whonix integrated into Qubes, you can easily route network traffic through the Tor anonymity network."...

Good stuff,

If anyone is interested, I will gladly add TOR masternodes to my hosting service.  And, as soon as I2P is available I will add that as well.

Coin-Server

[cryptohunter]

whats the rpcport for solo mining?

also why wont it allow

rpcallowip=*

any wild cards at all?

Do you have to enter all rigs manual ip?

[q327K091]

status: going by the velocity of the collections by Master Nodes, I will be able to spin off 14th unit in approx 3 days

I see we have gained 20K overnight , good

[Grandpa Jones]

I get a similar problem with 1.0.2.0 but not 1.0.1.0

When enabling from the controller with start-alias, everything looks fine, with a "result":"successful".

Checking the debug.log of the masternode I can see the correct "Got NEW Masternode entry -" line (identified by txid). Then with masternode list, I can see the correct line "ENABLED" (identified by txid).

But when I do masternode status, I get:

{
   "vin" : "CTxIn(COutPoint(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, 4294967295), coinbase )",
    "service" : "[::]:0",
    "status" : "Not capable masternode: Hot node, waiting for remote activation."
}

I think there is a problem with the new release.

I'm getting the exact same issue for last 3 MN that I created. (both 1.0.1.0 & 1.0.2.0)
I've never had this issue with other MN but only with the 3 MN I've set up today...

Edit: Got 1 of 3 using 1.0.2.0 to start locally. No idea why it worked now after failing last 10 goes. Now 2 to go!
Edit2: Now got all 3 started with 1.0.2.0. All I did was follow the guide by BitcoinFX to upgrade. Then started via "start-alias" from controller wallet.

What do you mean by "start locally"?

I have tried many many many times and it can never start with 1.0.2.0 but starts with no issue for 1.0.1.0, using the same protocol to sync a chain and bring up the node.

[jk9694]

I get a similar problem with 1.0.2.0 but not 1.0.1.0

When enabling from the controller with start-alias, everything looks fine, with a "result":"successful".

Checking the debug.log of the masternode I can see the correct "Got NEW Masternode entry -" line (identified by txid). Then with masternode list, I can see the correct line "ENABLED" (identified by txid).

But when I do masternode status, I get:

{
   "vin" : "CTxIn(COutPoint(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, 4294967295), coinbase )",
    "service" : "[::]:0",
    "status" : "Not capable masternode: Hot node, waiting for remote activation."
}

I think there is a problem with the new release.

I'm getting the exact same issue for last 3 MN that I created. (both 1.0.1.0 & 1.0.2.0)
I've never had this issue with other MN but only with the 3 MN I've set up today...

Edit: Got 1 of 3 using 1.0.2.0 to start locally. No idea why it worked now after failing last 10 goes. Now 2 to go!
Edit2: Now got all 3 started with 1.0.2.0. All I did was follow the guide by BitcoinFX to upgrade. Then started via "start-alias" from controller wallet.

What do you mean by "start locally"?

I have tried many many many times and it can never start with 1.0.2.0 but starts with no issue for 1.0.1.0, using the same protocol to sync a chain and bring up the node.

Are you trying to run 3 nodes locally?  Do they all have public facing IP addresses that are distinct?

[Grandpa Jones]

Are you trying to run 3 nodes locally?  Do they all have public facing IP addresses that are distinct?

I'm just upgrading. If I upgrade to 1.0.2.0 the masternode reports it is not capable. If I revert to 1.0.1.0, it works. I'm gong to paste the problem again. I think there is an issue with this release.

I get a similar problem with 1.0.2.0 but not 1.0.1.0

When enabling from the controller with start-alias, everything looks fine, with a "result":"successful".

Checking the debug.log of the masternode I can see the correct "Got NEW Masternode entry -" line (identified by txid). Then with masternode list, I can see the correct line "ENABLED" (identified by txid).

But when I do masternode status, I get:

{
   "vin" : "CTxIn(COutPoint(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, 4294967295), coinbase )",
    "service" : "[::]:0",
    "status" : "Not capable masternode: Hot node, waiting for remote activation."
}

I think there is a problem with the new release.

[OKorator]

Got mine up and running, brought in 80 dnet

[avitas]

Got mine upgraded too. first mn payment took about 30 hours or so?
Looks like we're up to 500+ masternodes now.  nice.

[bathrobehero]

Can I disable Obfuscating in the conf file? It keeps turning back on messing with my nodes.

[Grandpa Jones]

I get a similar problem with 1.0.2.0 but not 1.0.1.0

When enabling from the controller with start-alias, everything looks fine, with a "result":"successful".

Checking the debug.log of the masternode I can see the correct "Got NEW Masternode entry -" line (identified by txid). Then with masternode list, I can see the correct line "ENABLED" (identified by txid).

But when I do masternode status, I get:

{
   "vin" : "CTxIn(COutPoint(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, 4294967295), coinbase )",
    "service" : "[::]:0",
    "status" : "Not capable masternode: Hot node, waiting for remote activation."
}

I think there is a problem with the new release.

Okay, I figured this out. The fix is simple.

Make sure you masternode start-alias from the 2.0.2.0 controller before you start the 2.0.2.0 masternode.

[jk9694]

I get a similar problem with 1.0.2.0 but not 1.0.1.0

When enabling from the controller with start-alias, everything looks fine, with a "result":"successful".

Checking the debug.log of the masternode I can see the correct "Got NEW Masternode entry -" line (identified by txid). Then with masternode list, I can see the correct line "ENABLED" (identified by txid).

But when I do masternode status, I get:

{
   "vin" : "CTxIn(COutPoint(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, 4294967295), coinbase )",
    "service" : "[::]:0",
    "status" : "Not capable masternode: Hot node, waiting for remote activation."
}

I think there is a problem with the new release.

Okay, I figured this out. The fix is simple.

Make sure you masternode start-alias from the 2.0.2.0 controller before you start the 2.0.2.0 masternode.

Another thing that you can do which works really well for me is to run your wallet locally as a controller and not a masternode.  Then all of your remote nodes can be started with no issues.  This is how i recommend people who use the coin-server.com hosting service for master nodes.  Running in this manner tends to keep things problem free.

[BitcoinFX]

Dnet listing has been activated at cryptocoin.cc - - http://cryptocoin.cc/table.php?cryptocoin=darknet   
 

[jakiman]

Edit: Got 1 of 3 using 1.0.2.0 to start locally. No idea why it worked now after failing last 10 goes. Now 2 to go!
Edit2: Now got all 3 started with 1.0.2.0. All I did was follow the guide by BitcoinFX to upgrade. Then started via "start-alias" from controller wallet.

What do you mean by "start locally"?

I have tried many many many times and it can never start with 1.0.2.0 but starts with no issue for 1.0.1.0, using the same protocol to sync a chain and bring up the node.

I meant by running "masternode start" on each of the VPS.
But I did run "masternode start-alias <alias>" from my controller wallet before hand. Need to do this first AFAIK.
(I did both multiple times and kept getting the hot node error before. But trying again later on, it worked. Weird.)

[BitcoinFX]

Reporting a potential 'conflict of obfuscation' / Masternode activation issue when users set-up a new Masternode on a 0 balance wallet address, in regards to the v1.0.2.0 release setting: "Enabled Obfuscation by default, the new default is to keep 1000 DNET mixed with 8 rounds."

- If the user is intending to set-up 'One single Local Masternode', receiving the 10,000 Dnet set-up (requirement) from say purchasing coins via an exchange, then the incoming transaction is likely to be met with an Obfuscation transaction fee payment from the balance (before the Masternode is enabled), thus leaving say a 9999.99981844 Dnet balance remaining and causing the user to receive the following unexpected message; "Not capable masternode: Could not find suitable coins!"

Which can ofc be easily resolved by sending just 1 more Dnet to the same address and then making a new transaction of 10,000 Dnet to the same (your own) wallet address to allow for successful Masternode activation.
  

[caramelisedbanknote]

is this worth mining still?