Looking for Armory 0.91-beta

[cybrbeast]

My cold storage laptop is still running that and I want to do an offline transaction, but can't do that with the newer version installed on my online PC. A friend installed my offline Ubuntu laptop, I'm not familiar with Ubuntu and don't want to troubleshoot through the upgrade procedure right now.

It's the Windows7 64 bit version I'm looking for, for my online PC.

[1714791453]

1714791453

[1714791453]

1714791453

[1714791453]

1714791453

[1714791453]

1714791453

[1714791453]

1714791453

[unamis76]

It's on the old GitHub, somewhere on the releases page.

[goatpig]

It's on the old GitHub, somewhere on the releases page.

Alan never released binaries on github. The only thing you will get there is the snapshot of the source for that particular tag.

My cold storage laptop is still running that and I want to do an offline transaction, but can't do that with the newer version installed on my online PC. A friend installed my offline Ubuntu laptop, I'm not familiar with Ubuntu and don't want to troubleshoot through the upgrade procedure right now.

It's the Windows7 64 bit version I'm looking for, for my online PC.

You are seriously better off updating the offline signer than trying to get 0.91 online. That will be painful, trust me. I'm not it will even manage to at this point. If you insist on running 0.91, you will most likely have to build it from source, in which case you are better off doing this on some Debian/Ubuntu distro as it is fairly easy to build on those.

[unamis76]

It's on the old GitHub, somewhere on the releases page.

Alan never released binaries on github. The only thing you will get there is the snapshot of the source for that particular tag.

Better than downloading from an unknown source...

[goatpig]

Better than downloading from an unknown source...

I'm surprised no one got burned like this yet. It goes a long way showing how good willed this community is. But it's still goddamn suicide. I may just build those and publish them on my release page to put an end to the hemorrhage.

[unamis76]

Better than downloading from an unknown source...

I'm surprised no one got burned like this yet. It goes a long way showing how good willed this community is. But it's still goddamn suicide. I may just build those and publish them on my release page to put an end to the hemorrhage.

Nobody got burned probably because Armory's userbase is smaller? And maybe more knowledgeable, or at least more curious. Anyways, I agree, I think there are still many good willed people around here, we haven't really seen any "stolen coins" issue due to bad binaries like the ones that happen on the Electrum sub-forum, as an example.

Building several versions and putting them up to download is a bit like a "double sided knife", you're avoiding possible damages by downloading binaries from untrusted sources, without verifying its authenticity, but you're also making people delay temporarily (or possibly permanently) updating to current, up to date versions with bug fixes, new functionality and stability improvements.

[goatpig]

Building several versions and putting them up to download is a bit like a "double sided knife", you're avoiding possible damages by downloading binaries from untrusted sources, without verifying its authenticity, but you're also making people delay temporarily (or possibly permanently) updating to current, up to date versions with bug fixes, new functionality and stability improvements.

I was only considering doing some 0.92 builds for offline signing. It's the last version with x86 support and can sign for 0.93-4-5.

0.91 is a goner, there is just no way someone could get that online on consumer hardware. It was already locking up for most users around block #240k.

As for updating, people will have to if they want to use the segwit and BIP32 wallets (when that comes =P)

[ArmoryFanxx]

Building several versions and putting them up to download is a bit like a "double sided knife", you're avoiding possible damages by downloading binaries from untrusted sources, without verifying its authenticity, but you're also making people delay temporarily (or possibly permanently) updating to current, up to date versions with bug fixes, new functionality and stability improvements.

I was only considering doing some 0.92 builds for offline signing. It's the last version with x86 support and can sign for 0.93-4-5.

0.91 is a goner, there is just no way someone could get that online on consumer hardware. It was already locking up for most users around block #240k.

As for updating, people will have to if they want to use the segwit and BIP32 wallets (when that comes =P)

Hi goatpig,

Is there any foreseeable reason 0.93.3 will ever stop being able to receive transfers or sign transactions due to a Bitcoin Core version update, or for some other reason? If this version will eventually become obsolete to the point of being unusable, would that be months or years from now?

Will all future versions of Armory allow for exporting key lists so that private keys can always be kept safe in case of hard drive/wallet backup failure?

Thanks for your time.

[achow101]

Hi goatpig,

Is there any foreseeable reason 0.93.3 will ever stop being able to receive transfers or sign transactions due to a Bitcoin Core version update, or for some other reason? If this version will eventually become obsolete to the point of being unusable, would that be months or years from now?

When Segregated Witness is deployed and Armory implements it, then 0.93.3 will not be able to sign SegWit transactions. This is expected to happen within a few months.

Will all future versions of Armory allow for exporting key lists so that private keys can always be kept safe in case of hard drive/wallet backup failure?

You can already do this. Just create a backup of your wallet and there is an option to export Key Lists. You can also view the key information of each address by double clicking on it and choosing "View Address Keys"

[goatpig]

Is there any foreseeable reason 0.93.3 will ever stop being able to receive transfers or sign transactions due to a Bitcoin Core version update, or for some other reason? If this version will eventually become obsolete to the point of being unusable, would that be months or years from now?

Once the new wallets are out, the current versions of Armory won't be able to sign for them.

You will still be able to create old format wallets, or convert those to the new format, with the ability to output old format unsigned transactions for older versions to sign. You won't get the benefits of BIP32/44 nor segwit if you do that however.

[ArmoryFanxx]

Is there any foreseeable reason 0.93.3 will ever stop being able to receive transfers or sign transactions due to a Bitcoin Core version update, or for some other reason? If this version will eventually become obsolete to the point of being unusable, would that be months or years from now?

Once the new wallets are out, the current versions of Armory won't be able to sign for them.

You will still be able to create old format wallets, or convert those to the new format, with the ability to output old format unsigned transactions for older versions to sign. You won't get the benefits of BIP32/44 nor segwit if you do that however.

I appreciate the response. I suppose my novice fear is if there will ever come a time when an unencrypted Base58 private key cannot be manually imported or swept into a different wallet after sitting in cold storage for years.