[ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX]

[watcoin]

As the ASIC Borg takes over scrypt it is nice to see software like ccminer making NVIDIA the supreme being of X11 hashing!

Full of win!

[1714693935]

1714693935

[grendel25]

Is there any way to set failovers for CCminer? I've asked this a few times, but never seen an answer.

Also @bigjme

I assume the 26/05/2014 CCminer V1.02 on your website is the version that has been available on the Github master for over a week?

S_tring: no, at this time and AFAIK... there is not a failover feature in ccminer.  I want it too.  Maybe the dev(s) well answer our prayers :-)

[gpuminer]

I am thinking maybe to release killer groestl windows binary only and later if found a way to do a full release.

He cannot do a binary only without violating the GPL (or whatever licence is uses) of the open source requirement. That is the issue as I understand it.

I am certainly not bugging him about it, but just trying to help others understand the problem.

He would have to re-write all the code he included from others in order to take it 'closed source', and that would be a whole lot of work to write and debug it all correctly.

Right now he gets to enjoy the fruits of his labor on his own, and that is fine.

Can't he do a close source release (windows binary) temporarily on other website a close source version and later release a full version when he found a way ? In that way it didn't violate the GPL since its not the official version ?

[ManiacMiner]

Anyone tryed mining with new GeForce 337.88 driver released today? Performance better or no?

[nomad1109]

Can't he do a close source release (windows binary) temporarily on other website a close source version and later release a full version when he found a way ? In that way it didn't violate the GPL since its not the official version ?

I am no coding guru, but my understanding is that ANY code that is a derivative work of the code that is already open sourced cannot be released without also making that new version of the code open sourced as well.

I don't read the ATI boards, but apparently the guy who released a new version over there but didn't release the code is getting threatened with a lawsuit.

I don't think you can release 'just a little bit' and have it be any less in violation.

In order to release anything that is a sub-work with your own improvements you would have to make the entire work your own.... and then have that stand up when they tear your exe apart to make sure you didn't just copy the original.

[Tyr808]

I am thinking maybe to release killer groestl windows binary only and later if found a way to do a full release.

He cannot do a binary only without violating the GPL (or whatever licence is uses) of the open source requirement. That is the issue as I understand it.

I am certainly not bugging him about it, but just trying to help others understand the problem.

He would have to re-write all the code he included from others in order to take it 'closed source', and that would be a whole lot of work to write and debug it all correctly.

Right now he gets to enjoy the fruits of his labor on his own, and that is fine.

Can't he do a close source release (windows binary) temporarily on other website a close source version and later release a full version when he found a way ? In that way it didn't violate the GPL since its not the official version ?

He could do it and not claim it's his, and have our posted on some anon account, but it's still violating the license, he'd simply be getting away with it.  As far as my understanding of open source goes under the GPL, you simply must ALWAYS have source available for changes you release. I don't know what type I'd action is taken against someone that breaks the license, but I'd imagine it would be some expensive civil suit if it got enough attention.

I'll totally respect whatever decision he makes, as will we all I assume, but assuming he wants to do this with integrity intact, I'm perfectly fine with him enjoying the fruits of his labors and finding at least a proper loophole if not a fully proper way to release it.

That being said, I do hope we haven't hit a snag here. It'll be nice to keep nvidia healthily in the lead with AMD recently getting their own hash boost.

[bigjme]

ive made a quick edit to the header of cudamining.cc, do we prefer that or the older one?

[Bombadil]

Anyone tryed mining with new GeForce 337.88 driver released today? Performance better or no?

I've seen no difference so far

[jk_14]

Is there any way to set failovers for CCminer? I've asked this a few times, but never seen an answer.

Also @bigjme

I assume the 26/05/2014 CCminer V1.02 on your website is the version that has been available on the Github master for over a week?

At least in some Linux there is:

"- longer failover time = 5 min"
https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=16800.0

[djm34]

I am thinking maybe to release killer groestl windows binary only and later if found a way to do a full release.

He cannot do a binary only without violating the GPL (or whatever licence is uses) of the open source requirement. That is the issue as I understand it.

I am certainly not bugging him about it, but just trying to help others understand the problem.

He would have to re-write all the code he included from others in order to take it 'closed source', and that would be a whole lot of work to write and debug it all correctly.

Right now he gets to enjoy the fruits of his labor on his own, and that is fine.

Can't he do a close source release (windows binary) temporarily on other website a close source version and later release a full version when he found a way ? In that way it didn't violate the GPL since its not the official version ?

I think that at some point it is just a question of honesty, Claymore is using a modified version of jhprimeminer which is open source and nobody even tried to tell him what he's been doing is wrong...

Now if we search for a loophole, there is no point in a "leaked" private version out of nowhere (which is kind of funny since it is discussed on an open place like this forum). I think a dynamic library ( and corresponding header) for this cuda kernel would be enough to comply with the GPL licence agreement ( I think ?).
The part which is open source would still be open source and fully compilable while the kernel would be linked at execution time like any other dynamic libraries

Would that be a good thing ? I am rather perplexed as we might see then a lot more of these hybrid stuff from far less trustworthy people with all the problem this could generate (viruses, keylogger, botnet   etc...).

[DemosMirak]

ive made a quick edit to the header of cudamining.cc, do we prefer that or the older one?

I am indifferent about it, I like them both.

[djm34]

ive made a quick edit to the header of cudamining.cc, do we prefer that or the older one?

The new one with green background looks nice. I prefer this one.

[jack80]

Anyone tryed mining with new GeForce 337.88 driver released today? Performance better or no?

Overclock gpu stuck at +135 mhz ? .

[bigjme]

The new one with green background looks nice. I prefer this one.

thanks, if anyone thats good at drawing anything wants to design one feel free

[liomojo1]

ive made a quick edit to the header of cudamining.cc, do we prefer that or the older one?

The new one with green background looks nice. I prefer this one.

You did a great job!!! Wonderfull site!!!

[bigjme]

facelift #2
http://cudamining.cc/url/home

[antonio8]

facelift #2
http://cudamining.cc/url/home

Looks good

[zelante]

Anyone tryed mining with new GeForce 337.88 driver released today? Performance better or no?

Overclock gpu stuck at +135 mhz ? .

+1000 mhz 

[nomad1109]

facelift #2
http://cudamining.cc/url/home

If you need anything made in particular graphics wise just let me know... happy to contribute where I can with my skills.

Graphics are what I do.

[DemosMirak]

facelift #2
http://cudamining.cc/url/home

That looks good. Perhaps a little more green (because this is CUDA) in the overall theme of the site, by which I mean the parts other than the header.