[XPM] [ANN] Primecoin Release - First Scientific Computing Cryptocurrency

[AgentME]

How can we mine this cpu or gpu? is there a windows-qt? link?

Everything you asked is in the first post of the thread.

[1714807788]

1714807788

[1714807788]

1714807788

[1714807788]

1714807788

[1714807788]

1714807788

[1714807788]

1714807788

[oroqen]

Price is jumping, I think this coin could be interesting.

Personaly, I think it's undervalued. only time will tell

[Lauda]

Price is jumping, I think this coin could be interesting.

Personaly, I think it's undervalued. only time will tell

It sure is.

[paulthetafy]

Price is jumping, I think this coin could be interesting.

Personaly, I think it's undervalued. only time will tell

It sure is.

Regretting selling my first 200 coins now!  This really is going to be a good coin and worth a good deal more than its current price.  I might even buy mine back

[teknohog]

1 block now less than 17 XPM. I miss the days when it was over 20 <sigh>

Ah, yes - the good old days when men were men and wrote their own Primecoin clients in binary on punch cards. Kids these days with their newfangled compilers and all... pfft. Now get off my lawn!

[SpaceCadet]

1 block now less than 17 XPM. I miss the days when it was over 20 <sigh>

Ah, yes - the good old days when men were men and wrote their own Primecoin clients in binary on punch cards. Kids these days with their newfangled compilers and all... pfft. Now get off my lawn!

Those were the days! I kept my wallet on paper tape and used my trusty KSR-33 for updating it...

[oroqen]

Was tired of trying to add immature blocks up so heres some dirty bash too get it done, I'm sure someone has a much better solution.

Code:

echo `./primecoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A1 category | grep -A1 'immature\|generate' | grep amount | awk -F" " '{print $3}' | awk -F, '{printf "%s +",$1}'` 0 | bc

Edit: this doesn't account for sent.

[mhps]

After importing the privatekeys, I see the blocks still show in the original wallet. I guess both wallets think they own the blocks. So.. if I spend some of the coins in the block involved, do both wallets register the transaction?

If I find this confusing, how do I make the original wallet to forget the moved block (but not all the blocks) ? I looked it up but didn't find answer. Thanks.

If you spend some of the coins in the block, the other wallet might see the tx on the blockchain, it might not. If you try to spend from both wallets, one tx will make it into a block, the other won't. You can't delete private keys from a wallet, so you can't make it forget the block you moved.

Oh well. Guess I will have to delete the old wallet and make a new wallet after moving away all the blocks from the old one.

[xyzzy099]

Was tired of trying to add immature blocks up so heres some dirty bash too get it done, I'm sure someone has a much better solution.

Code:

echo `./primecoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A1 category | grep -A1 'immature\|generate' | grep amount | awk -F" " '{print $3}' | awk -F, '{printf "%s +",$1}'` 0 | bc

Edit: this doesn't account for sent.

If I'm not mistaken, the balance command alone (i.e. './primecoind balance') will give you the total of only mature blocks, but if you include the account parameter (i.e. './primecoind balance ""'), it will give you the total of all blocks, both mature and immature.  All you have to do is subtract to see the immature balance alone, if I understand correctly what you are trying to do.

[oroqen]

Was tired of trying to add immature blocks up so heres some dirty bash too get it done, I'm sure someone has a much better solution.

Code:

echo `./primecoind listtransactions "" 1000 | grep -A1 category | grep -A1 'immature\|generate' | grep amount | awk -F" " '{print $3}' | awk -F, '{printf "%s +",$1}'` 0 | bc

Edit: this doesn't account for sent.

If I'm not mistaken, the balance command alone (i.e. './primecoind balance') will give you the total of only mature blocks, but if you include the account parameter (i.e. './primecoind balance ""'), it will give you the total of all blocks, both mature and immature.  All you have to do is subtract to see the immature balance alone, if I understand correctly what you are trying to do.

lol I did say some would have a better solution, never accured to me too use "" in getbalance, touche.

[tadakaluri]

Any one got Blocks by using Release5 ?

[refer_2_me]

Any one got Blocks by using Release5 ?

I have gotten a block on release 3, I haven't tried 5 yet. I will when I get home tonight. (or a more recent version, if available)

[Zalfrin]

Any one got Blocks by using Release5 ?

I just got one with release5, and there are a few posts in the other thread from other people who have had success with it. I've heard release3 is finding blocks as well. I haven't heard about the rest, but they all use the same codebase so theoretically if it doesn't crash immediately on your computer, you should be good.

Sounds like my releases may only work on quad-core processors.

[Zalfrin]

Any one got Blocks by using Release5 ?

I just got one with release5, and there are a few posts in the other thread from other people who have had success with it. I've heard release3 is finding blocks as well. I haven't heard about the rest, but they all use the same codebase so theoretically if it doesn't crash immediately on your computer, you should be good.

Sounds like my releases may only work on quad-core processors.

It only works on those with the instruction set extensions that an i5 has.

Makes perfect sense, thought there was at least one guy with the same i5-2500k processor I use that couldn't run my build. Software is strange sometimes.

I understand why using -march makes it processor architecture specific. Shouldn't my last release with -mtune=i686 have been more widely usable? That should still work on other families, just optimized for i686 instructions (I thought).

[mustyoshi]

I haven't gotten any blocks in a couple of days.

[Zalfrin]

Any one got Blocks by using Release5 ?

I just got one with release5, and there are a few posts in the other thread from other people who have had success with it. I've heard release3 is finding blocks as well. I haven't heard about the rest, but they all use the same codebase so theoretically if it doesn't crash immediately on your computer, you should be good.

Sounds like my releases may only work on quad-core processors.

It only works on those with the instruction set extensions that an i5 has.

Makes perfect sense, thought there was at least one guy with the same i5-2500k processor I use that couldn't run my build. Software is strange sometimes.

I understand why using -march makes it processor architecture specific. Shouldn't my last release with -mtune=i686 have been more widely usable? That should still work on other families, just optimized for i686 instructions (I thought).

It should have, although it would be slower. Possibly even slower than if you had used "-march=x86_64".

EDIT: -march implies -mtune. Don't use -mtune.

Yes, march implies mtune, but not vice-versa.

I will give -march=x86_64 a try, thanks for the suggestion.

[Arcas]

Found 3 more blocks with my i7 last night. 8 Total in the last 72 hours with the first released client.

[Vorksholk]

Just a reminder, DigitalOcean 16-core instances get around 2500-2600 primes per sec, and cost $0.72 per hour.

[Zalfrin]

It should have, although it would be slower. Possibly even slower than if you had used "-march=x86_64".

EDIT: -march implies -mtune. Don't use -mtune.

Yes, march implies mtune, but not vice-versa.

I will give -march=x86_64 a try, thanks for the suggestion.

no bueno on x86_64, possibly my version of gcc is too old, not sure.

error: bad value (x86_64) for -march= switch

EDIT: NVM, should be x86-64.

[mustyoshi]

Just a reminder, DigitalOcean 16-core instances get around 2500-2600 primes per sec, and cost $0.72 per hour.

So that's why I'm no longer getting any blocks :s