Justin00
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice
|
 |
April 10, 2012, 12:02:58 PM |
|
hmm i have been using version 6.0 in win32, have a few addresses setup and what not. I wanted to try your version of 5.3 but it ses my wallet is not compatible. Not sure of the best approach to get it working. I imagine I can setup addresses in 5.3 and then use 6.0 to send the coins across and start using 5.3?? dunno if there is a better approach ? thanks  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you see garbage posts (off-topic, trolling, spam, no point, etc.), use the "report to moderator" links. All reports are investigated, though you will rarely be contacted about your reports.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Luke-Jr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
|
|
April 10, 2012, 01:03:03 PM |
|
next-test should be compatible with 0.6.0, and has Coin Control
|
|
|
|
|
Serenata
|
|
April 11, 2012, 10:06:54 AM |
|
It should be mentioned elsewhere but what about an "Open Wallet..." function, for us keeping many different wallets?
|
|
|
|
Justin00
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 910
Merit: 1000
★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice
|
|
April 14, 2012, 07:36:11 AM |
|
Thanks I will test her out. next-test should be compatible with 0.6.0, and has Coin Control |
|
|
|
check_status
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
Web Dev, Db Admin, Computer Technician
|
|
May 10, 2012, 05:44:56 PM |
|
Is this still being developed?
|
For Bitcoin to be a true global currency the value of BTC needs always to rise. If BTC became the global currency & money supply = 100 Trillion then ⊅1.00 BTC = $4,761,904.76. P2Pool Server List | How To's and Guides Mega List | 1 EndfedSryGUZK9sPrdvxHntYzv2EBexGA |
|
|
|
|
|
Hawkix
|
|
May 15, 2012, 06:07:47 AM |
|
Please, could we get 0.6.2 with this "Coin control" merged in?
|
|
|
|
CIYAM
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1075
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
|
|
May 15, 2012, 06:15:30 AM
Last edit: May 15, 2012, 06:37:09 AM by CIYAM Pty. Ltd. |
|
If the ability to specify a "change address" was also added to/included with coin control for release in the next version (i.e. 0.7.0) then I will gladly pay a bounty of 20 BTC to the author of the patch that is merged in (feel free to quote this for reference). Cheers, Ian. |
|
|
|
Luke-Jr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
|
|
May 15, 2012, 06:42:09 AM |
|
Please, could we get 0.6.2 with this "Coin control" merged in?
The latest next-test is secure. |
|
|
|
Ente
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2126
Merit: 1001
|
|
June 19, 2012, 09:43:48 AM |
|
Please, could we get 0.6.2 with this "Coin control" merged in?
The latest next-test is secure. Can't wait for it to be merged in the mainline client! Ente |
|
|
|
|
phelix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1019
|
|
June 19, 2012, 10:34:22 AM |
|
Please, could we get 0.6.2 with this "Coin control" merged in?
The latest next-test is secure. Can't wait for it to be merged in the mainline client! Ente +1 |
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1800
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
June 19, 2012, 10:55:42 AM |
|
... and fixed so you can specify transactions, not just addresses.
|
|
|
|
Luke-Jr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
|
|
June 19, 2012, 03:21:41 PM |
|
Can't wait for it to be merged in the mainline client! As of right now, that probably won't be happening. There's a lot of cleanup needed before it can be merged, and both coderrr and dooglus who were maintaining it seem to have lost interest. I've been rebasing it for next-test, and Diapolo is trying to clean up the GUI code, but it still needs someone to clean up the internals. |
|
|
|
phelix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1019
|
|
June 24, 2012, 02:04:33 PM |
|
... and fixed so you can specify transactions, not just addresses.
As has been mentioned before and I mentioned in here recently (but got ignored), just going to address level is insufficient. Selecting the source for a txn should be to transaction level. is it not possible to achieve the same with coin control and a separate address for every transaction? ? |
|
|
|
|
phelix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1019
|
|
June 24, 2012, 02:06:43 PM |
|
a feature that sets the transfer amount to all coins in the selected address minus fee would be nice. currently it's a pita to empty an address.
|
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1800
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
June 24, 2012, 11:52:27 PM |
|
a feature that sets the transfer amount to all coins in the selected address minus fee would be nice. currently it's a pita to empty an address.
It seems that knowing the fee in advance is beyond bitcoin. This an issue that has been ignored or argued not possible for a VERY long time, every time it comes up, since there are some variables in the calculation that change over time I imagine is the excuse. ... what's that old timers term ... 2 phase commit ... not used much these days ... |
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4466
Merit: 1800
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
June 24, 2012, 11:59:11 PM |
|
... and fixed so you can specify transactions, not just addresses.
As has been mentioned before and I mentioned in here recently (but got ignored), just going to address level is insufficient. Selecting the source for a txn should be to transaction level. is it not possible to achieve the same with coin control and a separate address for every transaction? ? So for the average joe's wallet that might want to use this to choose transactions or addresses, it's no good since you have to have done this from the start and always remember to do it that way? My point being that your saying that this is only of use to people who have anonymity issues, rather than also for those who wish to have control over certain transactions i.e. going one more level is as far as is possible with selecting sources for a transaction - and why not allow that? Why stop early? |
|
|
|
Gavin Andresen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1652
Merit: 2216
Chief Scientist
|
|
June 25, 2012, 12:45:17 AM |
|
As has been mentioned before and I mentioned in here recently (but got ignored), just going to address level is insufficient.
Selecting the source for a txn should be to transaction level.
See the raw transaction API I've been working on, and please help try to break it-- it needs more testing. The main motivation is to move forward with multisignature transactions, but it also lets you have complete control over the source(s) for a transaction. |
How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
|
|
|
CIYAM
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1075
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
|
|
June 25, 2012, 06:53:02 AM |
|
See the raw transaction API I've been working on, and please help try to break it-- it needs more testing. The main motivation is to move forward with multisignature transactions, but it also lets you have complete control over the source(s) for a transaction. This looks interesting - just one question after reading this document (as the word "change" does not appear in it at all) - will it be also possible to specify the *change* address with such "raw transactions" (in perhaps the sendrawtx command itself)? |
|
|
|
phelix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1019
|
|
June 25, 2012, 09:40:59 AM |
|
a feature that sets the transfer amount to all coins in the selected address minus fee would be nice. currently it's a pita to empty an address.
It seems that knowing the fee in advance is beyond bitcoin. This an issue that has been ignored or argued not possible for a VERY long time, every time it comes up, since there are some variables in the calculation that change over time I imagine is the excuse. ... what's that old timers term ... 2 phase commit ... not used much these days ... I never understood why the fee calculation has to bee so complicated... age of coins - wtf why? |
|
|
|
|
|
