Will Armory 0.93.3 still work after Segwit?

[afunkyobject]

I've been working on getting upgraded to 0.96.1, just waiting for it to complete its initialization.  I couldn't get the latest "testing-3" version to launch even after upgrading gcc to 5.4).  It's been "Scanning Tx Hashes" for a few days on a fast 4GHz machine, one core has been pegged @ 100%, with light/moderate HD access, seeing occasional new .ldb files in "chainstate" directory but, besides that, I have no idea if it is actually making progress or stuck in a loop.

Please forgive me this dumb question -- on the off chance I'm still on 0.93.3 on Aug 1st, Segwit is a soft-fork, which means backward compatibility, right?  Will my legacy 0.93.3 installation (on another machine w/ Bitcoin 0.13.2) still be able to communicate with the Bitcoin network as usual after Segwit activates?

Thanks.

[achow101]

Armory 0.93.3 won't work with Bitcoin Core 0.13.1+ after segwit activates. However if you use an older version, the older versions of Armory should work fine after segwit. You just won't be able to use any of the functionality provided by segwit.

[goatpig]

I've been working on getting upgraded to 0.96.1, just waiting for it to complete its initialization.  I couldn't get the latest "testing-3" version to launch even after upgrading gcc to 5.4).  It's been "Scanning Tx Hashes" for a few days on a fast 4GHz machine, one core has been pegged @ 100%, with light/moderate HD access, seeing occasional new .ldb files in "chainstate" directory but, besides that, I have no idea if it is actually making progress or stuck in a loop.

0.93.3 can't work on a SW chain, neither 0.94. If you are having issues bootstrapping the DB, post your log files for troubleshooting. Use pastebin.

[goatpig]

I see you are 14.04, therefor you would have to build the current testing branch to get the relevant fix (you can't use the testing builds on this OS).

If you don't want to deal with that, this what I'd suggest:

1) Delete the content of your databases folder (/home/cmm/.armory/databases)

2) Make sure your node is turned off for the duration of this process

3) From the terminal run: ArmoryDB

4) Once it's up, from another terminal, run: armory

Let it do its thing, report here afterwards. If the process is successful, you can start your node again run Armory the regular way. If it fails, post your logs again.

[goatpig]

...
2) Make sure your node is turned off for the duration of this process
...
4) Once it's up, from another terminal, run: armory

You did not respect either of these instructions. Do not PM me, use this thread.

[afunkyobject]

Hi goatpig,

It wasn't an issue of not respecting them, simply of not fully understanding them.

After another go at it, it worked.  Almost..  Can you help me understand why many of my Labels are missing?  These are stored in the .wallet file is that right?  I've even had this issue also when moving from one Armory 0.93.3 to another 0.93.3.

Only one of my the wallets has an extra copy named with "_encrypt", even though I have more than one wallet encrypted, and so why would it keep around the same named wallet WITHOUT the "_encrypt" suffix?

Thanks for any clarifications or tips on this for this transition.

PS -- I PM'd you only for sending you the log file links, to minimize the exposure of my personal information like wallet id's and names, computer hardware, OS, etc.  I'm sure you can respect that.

[goatpig]

After another go at it, it worked.  Almost..  Can you help me understand why many of my Labels are missing?  These are stored in the .wallet file is that right?  I've even had this issue also when moving from one Armory 0.93.3 to another 0.93.3.

You mean they missing in the main tx ledger? That's a known issue, fixed in the testing builds.

Only one of my the wallets has an extra copy named with "_encrypt", even though I have more than one wallet encrypted, and so why would it keep around the same named wallet WITHOUT the "_encrypt" suffix?

Armory will never delete redundant wallet files, even though it won't load them. Some times ago you performed some operations on your wallets resulted in creating an encrypted copy, and this is what you are seeing now.

PS -- I PM'd you only for sending you the log file links, to minimize the exposure of my personal information like wallet id's and names, computer hardware, OS, etc.  I'm sure you can respect that.

Then post here and PM me just the logs. I need to see the convo and my previous replies to remember the context. It's painfully hard to make sense of what's going on if you break the thread into pieces. Consider that I can end up juggling as many as a dozen cases simultaneously.