Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 03:28:26 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 ... 830 »
  Print  
Author Topic: OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.9.2  (Read 4825626 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100



View Profile
September 23, 2011, 07:51:22 PM
 #1581

NEW VERSION: 2.0.4
Now available for Gentoo through Portage (or any other ebuild package manager):
Code:
layman -a bitcoin && emerge cgminer

Please test and report results! Smiley
Code:
emerge: there are no ebuilds to satisfy "dev-util/amd-adl-sdk"

I have dev-util/amd-app-sdk-bin though.
APP SDK isn't enough for the ADL features. You should be able to build with USE=-adl

1481340506
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481340506

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481340506
Reply with quote  #2

1481340506
Report to moderator
1481340506
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481340506

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481340506
Reply with quote  #2

1481340506
Report to moderator
1481340506
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481340506

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481340506
Reply with quote  #2

1481340506
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481340506
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481340506

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481340506
Reply with quote  #2

1481340506
Report to moderator
Ghostofkobra
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 167



View Profile
September 23, 2011, 08:09:11 PM
 #1582


The only thing 'merged mining' does is take hashes away from Bitcoin and give them to another chain (in this case namecoin) but pretend that it's good for bitcoin.
It isn't good for bitcoin.
It is good for namecoin and bad for bitcoin.
It's a scam because namecoin people won't admit the truth, and thus try to convince others by deception.

I'd wonder how people would react if SolidCoin 2.0 did merged mining ...

Anyway, AGAIN, cgminer cannot mine 2 chains at the same time.
So there is no point looking for other changes to suit you when it will never work in it's current incarnation anyway.

I look at it this way:
Would I want to lower cgminer's extremely high ability to avoid rejects and stales just so I can give away hashes to namecoin?
No, of course not.

Although i resisted posting this since this is not a merged mining thread here is my 2c.

- If merged mining works (as written in those threads) it doesnt take hashes away from bitcoin.
- It doesnt help nor hurt bitcoin
- It doesnt help nor hurt namecoin

Namecoin would be better off with just namecoin-ppl cpumining namecoins. You have to understand that a higher hashrate doesnt make namecoin better. Since the difficulty adapts itself. And namecoin is currently in a really bad situation since a lot of bitcoiner miners mined the living daylights out of their difficulty for a quick profit.

The ppl that can benefit from it and would want it are miners. They could potentially make more cash with it...

Some references:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=44546.0


Best
//Ghost of Kobra

Coin Reaper @ http://coinreaper.com - Your expressway to FREE Bitcoins!
Bunny Run @ http://bunnyrun.us and win every time. No Bets required
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 12:18:04 AM
 #1583

I look at it this way:
Would I want to lower cgminer's extremely high ability to avoid rejects and stales just so I can give away hashes to namecoin?
No, of course not.

Not sure why you are angry, but like bitcoins is not a scam merged mining is not a scam.  The work you do on mining is "a make work project" and very little to do with a particular block chain.   Yes, there is tx validation work being done but on any block chain the majority of the work you do is not relevant just the fact that you did it is.  This is an easy to understand version of how it works it's not exactly right but in a general sense it is.

I'm not going to get into an argument with you about fraud because there is none.  

Finally today at my pool you can mine namecoins and get paid bitcoins but when merged mining kicks in you will be mining both.  When it happens the market will decide if it's worth it.

Good luck

Davinci
Why do you ignore the most important part of my post:
Quote
The bitcoin+namecoin mining scam idea will not work with cgminer.
It cannot mine more than one chain at the same time.

Yes cgminer CANNOT mine 2 different chains at the same time.
It cannot. It cannot. Got that? It cannot.
If you wish to switch to a different chain, you have to exit cgminer and start it again on the different chain.

Also: lets say you mine 500Mh/s to Bitcoin
Please tell me how it is possible to add hashes to Namecoin, without reducing the hashs sent to Bitcoin?
i.e.
Quote
It's a scam because namecoin people won't admit the truth, and thus try to convince others by deception.

I will continue posting this because it is relevant to cgminer.
cgminer cannot mine 2 chains at the same time.
Until they get the hint that there is no point posting here about namecoin, take notice and stop doing it.

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
flower1024
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


luck is just a share away


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 12:23:47 AM
 #1584


Lets say you mine 500Mh/s to Bitcoin
Please tell me how it is possible to add hashes to Namecoin, without reducing the hashs send to Bitcoin?
i.e.


thats is what merged mining is. it does not split your hashrate. you'll mine with you total hashrate on both chains simultaneously.

what i dont understand: why is cgminer not able to do that? other miners are.

ok..pool need patched bitcoind (to put 33 bytes namecoin data in the coinbase without a block size change), a proxy and default namecoind... but your end should stay the same (except that you get the same btc value as now AND additional to that namecoins [at least after nmc-block 19200])

EDIT:
highlighted important part
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 12:33:01 AM
 #1585

OK I should have made it clearer - post a link to some proper explanation.
Don't post here about it (that's what I said at the end of my post)
Seriously, if I cannot find anyone who can actually answer the question I'll spend time tomorrow looking at the code myself.
This is as bad as the other coin threads - people posting beliefs, not facts.
This is not religion it's computer programming.

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
DavinciJ15
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 750


Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.


View Profile WWW
September 24, 2011, 12:45:35 AM
 #1586

what i dont understand: why is cgminer not able to do that? other miners are.

This is a mistake, it's not CGMINER it MY POOL's fault with all the rejects, NOT CGMINER!

With that said.  I was looking for an easy way out where thus I was requesting the developer changed cgminer to stick to one IP address until there was a problem and requested a new one from the DNS just like poclbm does.
flower1024
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


luck is just a share away


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 12:48:21 AM
 #1587

what i dont understand: why is cgminer not able to do that? other miners are.

This is a mistake it's not CGMINER it MY POOL's fault NOT CGMINER!


yes i know... i just wanted the "1997 linux user" to explain why he thinks it couldn't work.

sorry
DavinciJ15
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 750


Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.


View Profile WWW
September 24, 2011, 12:52:55 AM
 #1588

what i dont understand: why is cgminer not able to do that? other miners are.

This is a mistake it's not CGMINER it MY POOL's fault NOT CGMINER!


yes i know... i just wanted the "1997 linux user" to explain why he thinks it couldn't work.

sorry


Oh ok I have no idea why he thinks it will not work I have tested it on test net, no problems not sure I understand what he is talking about.
The00Dustin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 806


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 01:05:40 AM
 #1589

yes i know... i just wanted the "1997 linux user" to explain why he thinks it couldn't work.

sorry
If you try to mine a BTC chain and an NMC chain at two different pools at the same time, it won't work, you will (in my experience) only get BTC blocks unless the BTC pool goes down.  I believe that is what he is saying, but I am not sure it has anything to do with merged mining.  That said, there are plenty of merged mining threads, thisi s a cgminer thread.
miscreanity
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 01:17:23 AM
 #1590

Your pool is namecoin.
There is no point posting in this thread.
The bitcoin+namecoin mining scam idea will not work with cgminer.
It cannot mine more than one chain at the same time.

... post a link to some proper explanation.
... people posting beliefs, not facts.

Hey pot, the kettle says hi.

There's a simple solution regarding cgminer: run a fully separate instance for each blockchain.

From my understanding about the idea itself (I could be wrong):

Code:
if block valid in BTC
 return blockBTC
else if block valid in NMC
 return blockNMC
else
 return blockNone
mmortal03
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1395


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 01:26:48 AM
 #1591

This is a cosmetic issue, but if you are running cgminer with load balancing, shouldn't the priority of each pool be listed as identical (or just not display at all)?
DavinciJ15
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 750


Bitcoin - helping to end bankster enslavement.


View Profile WWW
September 24, 2011, 01:52:01 AM
 #1592


good one but lets end this line of conversation.

http://dot-bit.org/Merged_Mining

Both bitcoind and namcoind have been modified and with a proxy app you can mine both try it out by enabling test net it works end of story.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 02:01:03 AM
 #1593

Also: lets say you mine 500Mh/s to Bitcoin
Please tell me how it is possible to add hashes to Namecoin, without reducing the hashs sent to Bitcoin?

THAT IS WHAT MERGED MINING DOES.

Look I am no fan of merged mining but you ranting on about things you don't understand is equally stupid.

The longest part (i.e. 99+) of mining is creating the hash from the nonce.

This is how bitcoin mining works.
Take nonce and create hash.
Check if Hash matches BITCOIN Target.
Repeat.

This is how namecoin mining works.
Take nonce and create hash
Check if Hash matches NAMECOIN Target.
Repeat.

See anything similar?  See any way you could do both at the same time?

This is how bitcoin mining works.
Take nonce and create hash.
Check if Hash matches BITCOIN Target.
Check if Hash matches NAMECOIN Target.
Repeat.

One hash two target checks.  While cgminer doesn't support it today it would take a small code change for it to support namecoin. If it doesn't honestly I don't really care I just find it annoying when people rant on and on about something they are clueless about.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 02:31:55 AM
 #1594

Yes my first post was a guess about how Namecoin works.

After reading up around here: what I said is wrong (yeah highlighted that myself Smiley
(well most likely wrong since I still haven't read the code and no one seems to know how it really does work)

However, as stated before (correctly) cgminer cannot mine 2 chains at the same time.

That is not what it would appear namecoin is doing.

The description above by DeathAndTaxes is completely clueless (you missed completely what "create hash" is)

This is of course a guess - but it would appear that namecoin is putting extra information in the coinbase - i.e. increasing the bitcoin block size.
(I'm guessing this due to a discussion with luke-jr)

As I already said, I'll be reading the code to determine how it works if no one can actually describe it.
It would appear that is my only option coz on one reading here does know how it works and thus is able to describe it properly.

Edit: Well I guess I now have the link to get the official code at least ... from DavinciJ15 : http://dot-bit.org/Merged_Mining
(can't remember where I got it last time I compiled and ran it)

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 03:03:24 AM
 #1595


The description above by DeathAndTaxes is completely clueless (you missed completely what "create hash" is)

Funny you say then then link to a document which says the same thing.

Quote
This is of course a guess - but it would appear that namecoin is putting extra information in the coinbase - i.e. increasing the bitcoin block size.
(I'm guessing this due to a discussion with luke-jr)

No need to guess.  That isn't how it works at all. Funny you "know" what I said was wrong yet you haven't even figured out how it works (still making wrong guesses).

Quote
Edit: Well I guess I now have the link to get the official code at least ... from DavinciJ15 : http://dot-bit.org/Merged_Mining
(can't remember where I got it last time I compiled and ran it)

Lets take a look at that.

Quote
"Merged mining works like this, you have two totally separate block chains, they are not related in any way nor does either contain any data from the other. When you mine you generate hashes that may be the solution to the current block, this is very very improbable per hash, its like a lottery where everyone generates tickets until someone finds the winning one. Normally you make tickets and check them against the Bitcoin block chain to see if they are the solution. With merged mining you create a ticket and check it against both the Bitcoin block chain and the Namecoin block chain, Bitcoin and Namecoin know nothing about each other, they are two totally different lotteries with different winning numbers, you just sent a copy of your ticket to both. Since you are sending the same ticket to two lotteries you increase your chances of winning one or the other. No Bitcoin data goes into Namecoin no Namecoin data into Bitcoin they remain totally separate, you simply run both the Namecoin and Bitcoin clients on the same machine and submit hashes to both networks, if your hash is the solution to the Namecoin block you get Namecoins if you hash is the solution to the Bitcoin block you get Bitcoins, its exactly like if you where mining on just one network, except you submit the same work twice."

Single hash checked against both bitcoin and namecoin targets.  Hmm sounds exactly like my "wrong" answer above.
mmortal03
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1395


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 03:13:55 AM
 #1596


Look I am no fan of merged mining but...

I'm curious to know why you aren't a fan of it? Is there a separate thread about this that people can take a look at that debates the pros and cons?

Edit: Nevermind: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=44546.0
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 07:51:06 AM
 #1597

My reply to DeathAndTaxes ... and where any more off topic discussion should be.
... as I said in my post quite a while ago ... it's shouldn't be here.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=44546.msg542595#msg542595

Pool: https://kano.is BTC: 1KanoiBupPiZfkwqB7rfLXAzPnoTshAVmb
CKPool and CGMiner developer, IRC FreeNode #ckpool and #cgminer kanoi
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with Stratum, the best protocol to mine Bitcoins with ASIC hardware
gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
September 24, 2011, 09:13:17 AM
 #1598


Code:
emerge: there are no ebuilds to satisfy "dev-util/amd-adl-sdk"

I have dev-util/amd-app-sdk-bin though.
APP SDK isn't enough for the ADL features. You should be able to build with USE=-adl
Maybe it's not enough, I don't know : this was the only available ebuild with a name remotely similar to the one your ebuild requests.

More information :
Cgminers binaries compiled for Ubuntu 64 bit with adl work (temp/fan/freq monitoring/setting works). Your ebuild depends on another that isn't provided in the bitcoin overlay nor the Portage tree.

P2pool tuning guide
Trade BTC for €/$ at bitcoin.de (referral), it's cheaper and faster (acts as escrow and lets the buyers do bank transfers).
Tip: 17bdPfKXXvr7zETKRkPG14dEjfgBt5k2dd
iopq
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644


View Profile
September 24, 2011, 10:57:44 AM
 #1599

I know about PID controllers, I just think it's just far too complicated to bother trying to implement, as I said in git issues. Most people find the simple approach works fine. I'd happily take well done patches implementing it though. I will damp is slightly next release.

OK, thanks. I still didn't taste this new version; I guess your damp is a kind of differential control. Anyway, what I have in mind is something like this.

Fi: actual fan value
Ti: actual temp.
Tc: target temp

Pi = Ti - Tc
Di = Ti - T(i-1)
F(i+1) =  Fi + aPi + bDi

where a,b are constants that should be elected after some tryings.  See, that integral control is implicit in the dependence of old value.

the problem with the current algorithm even as it is now is that it updates too quickly before the changes have a chance to take place
so say it decreased by 1% until 34% fan, as the temp kept rising
at 34% it reaches 75C
then it reaches 78C and suddenly the fan goes to 39%, but the temp doesn't drop the next second, so the fan will increase to 44% and then to 49%

so you have two problems:
the fans keep dropping past the correct point because the temperature is a lagging indicator, the change in temperature is the current indicator of cooling (dT)
the fans go up to higher really quick because we slowed the fan down too much and won't come down for a while because we only lower by one degree

so any solution for the correct value to be reached quickly must involve a dT term, not just T

Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100



View Profile
September 24, 2011, 12:38:24 PM
 #1600

Cgminers binaries compiled for Ubuntu 64 bit with adl work (temp/fan/freq monitoring/setting works). Your ebuild depends on another that isn't provided in the bitcoin overlay nor the Portage tree.
That's an effect of using a from-source distro: you need build dependencies.

Pages: « 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 ... 830 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!