Any news on Bitcoin v0.9 release?

[Envrin]

It's been a while, and can't see anything on the Bitcoin Foundation's blog about it.  Any idea when it's getting released?  And is it 100% confirmed we'll be able to store up to 80 bytes of data in a transaction?  That would be a god-send for us.

[rme]

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases/tag/v0.9.0rc1

[Shahrukh]

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin


it is version 0.9

[Carlton Banks]

Looks like headers-only block downloading has missed this release, as well as maaku's blockchain pruning (unless I'm reading the release notes wrong). Also missing the gmaxwell IP privacy change? And BIP32 HD wallets? Or this kilobyte rounding change to the tx fee logic?

Still a sterling feature/fix list, it would be interesting to see the beginnings of people using Payments Protocol (I'm guessing we can expect this first from Bitpay and Coinbase, but anything's possible). People have been crying out for CoinControl for so long, glad this is now part of the main (core?) client.

Re: Reject dust amounts during validation

This presumably makes dust inputs unpsendable (indeed, not recognised as part of the wallet balance). But they remain in the blockchain. so this is preventing their use until some future point when dust threshold is lowered? Is dust still considered <= 0.0000543 ?

[Peter Todd]

Looks like headers-only block downloading has missed this release, as well as maaku's blockchain pruning (unless I'm reading the release notes wrong). Also missing the gmaxwell IP privacy change? And BIP32 HD wallets? Or this kilobyte rounding change to the tx fee logic?

maaku isn't implementing pruning; he's implementing UTXO commitments, a very different technology that isn't directly related to pruning. (whether or not UTXO commitments are a good thing is debatable; my MMR TXO commitments are another option that many argue has better scalability)

I've actually been hired by Litecoin to get pruning implemented, among other things, but doing so is dependent on headers-only block downloading.
 

Re: Reject dust amounts during validation

This presumably makes dust inputs unpsendable (indeed, not recognised as part of the wallet balance). But they remain in the blockchain. so this is preventing their use until some future point when dust threshold is lowered? Is dust still considered <= 0.0000543 ?

Dust inputs are always spendable and are recognized as part of a wallet balance. What isn't allowed is creating new ones, although much of the mining hashing power hasn't decided to adopt that change and still allows the creation of dust.

[Carlton Banks]

Looks like headers-only block downloading has missed this release, as well as maaku's blockchain pruning (unless I'm reading the release notes wrong). Also missing the gmaxwell IP privacy change? And BIP32 HD wallets? Or this kilobyte rounding change to the tx fee logic?

maaku isn't implementing pruning; he's implementing UTXO commitments, a very different technology that isn't directly related to pruning. (whether or not UTXO commitments are a good thing is debatable; my MMR TXO commitments are another option that many argue has better scalability)

I've actually been hired by Litecoin to get pruning implemented, among other things, but doing so is dependent on headers-only block downloading.

Don't know where I got that idea then... could bitcoin benefit from your work on litecoin, once litecoin's benefited from (sipa's?) work on the headers-only/parallel block downloading?

[Peter Todd]

Don't know where I got that idea then... could bitcoin benefit from your work on litecoin, once litecoin's benefited from (sipa's?) work on the headers-only/parallel block downloading?

Absolutely; the litecoin and bitcoin code-bases are essentially identical.

[Carlton Banks]

Trying to build it, what's "protoc"? How do I satisfy the absence of it?

Edit: figured out the protoc part

./configure is happy apart from missing protoc, as well as a few "no" answers. It creates the makefile though. Not really sure what the issue(s) is/are. I have all the dependencies now, it's maybe just gcc configuration?

[maaku]

protoc is part of Google's protocol buffers. You need it for the payment protocol which is part of 0.9.

I've also been hired to do some work on pruning, but this is wholly dependent on sipa's headers-first branch getting finished & tested.

[Carlton Banks]

protoc is part of Google's protocol buffers. You need it for the payment protocol which is part of 0.9.

I've also been hired to do some work on pruning, but this is wholly dependent on sipa's headers-first branch getting finished & tested.

Yes, I managed to find that out (protoc is protocol buffers compiler). Still having build problems, I wrongly assumed ./configure doesn't produce a makefile if it's environment tests aren't satisfied.

Was kind of looking forward to testing out the headers-first production code in this release, but these big changes obviously shouldn't be rushed.

[Carlton Banks]

Anyone got any compilation advice? As I said, makefile is created by ./configure, all warnings eliminated. Various "no"s in the configure script output, but at least some of these sound like a good thing (I know I'm not wanting to cross-compile, and I know I'm not wanting to compile objective C).

Any help at all would be cool.

[Carlton Banks]

This is the complete configure script output:

Code:

checking build system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking host system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... gawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking whether to enable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles... yes
checking whether make supports nested variables... yes
checking for g++... g++
checking whether the C++ compiler works... yes
checking for C++ compiler default output file name... a.out
checking for suffix of executables... 
checking whether we are cross compiling... no
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... yes
checking whether g++ accepts -g... yes
checking for style of include used by make... GNU
checking dependency style of g++... gcc3
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed
checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
checking how to run the C preprocessor... gcc -E
checking how to run the C++ preprocessor... g++ -E
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether we are using the GNU Objective C compiler... no
checking whether gcc accepts -g... no
checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
checking for g++... g++
checking whether we are using the GNU Objective C++ compiler... no
checking whether g++ accepts -g... no
checking for a sed that does not truncate output... /bin/sed
checking for ar... /usr/bin/ar
checking for ranlib... /usr/bin/ranlib
checking for strip... /usr/bin/strip
checking for gcov... /usr/bin/gcov
checking for lcov... no
checking for java... /usr/bin/java
checking for genhtml... no
checking for git... /usr/bin/git
checking for ccache... no
checking for xgettext... /usr/bin/xgettext
checking for hexdump... /usr/bin/hexdump
checking for pkg-config... /usr/bin/pkg-config
checking pkg-config is at least version 0.9.0... yes
checking for grep that handles long lines and -e... /bin/grep
checking for egrep... /bin/grep -E
checking for ANSI C header files... yes
checking for sys/types.h... yes
checking for sys/stat.h... yes
checking for stdlib.h... yes
checking for string.h... yes
checking for memory.h... yes
checking for strings.h... yes
checking for inttypes.h... yes
checking for stdint.h... yes
checking for unistd.h... yes
checking whether byte ordering is bigendian... no
checking if compiler needs -Werror to reject unknown flags... no
checking for the pthreads library -lpthreads... no
checking whether pthreads work without any flags... no
checking whether pthreads work with -Kthread... no
checking whether pthreads work with -kthread... no
checking for the pthreads library -llthread... no
checking whether pthreads work with -pthread... yes
checking for joinable pthread attribute... PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE
checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... no
checking for PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT... yes
checking for special C compiler options needed for large files... no
checking for _FILE_OFFSET_BITS value needed for large files... no
checking whether the linker accepts -Wl,--large-address-aware... no
checking whether C++ compiler accepts -Wstack-protector... yes
checking whether C++ compiler accepts -fstack-protector-all... yes
checking whether C++ compiler accepts -fPIE... yes
checking whether C++ preprocessor accepts -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2... yes
checking whether C++ preprocessor accepts -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE... yes
checking whether the linker accepts -Wl,--dynamicbase... no
checking whether the linker accepts -Wl,--nxcompat... no
checking whether the linker accepts -Wl,-z,relro... yes
checking whether the linker accepts -Wl,-z,now... yes
checking whether the linker accepts -pie... yes
checking stdio.h usability... yes
checking stdio.h presence... yes
checking for stdio.h... yes
checking for stdlib.h... (cached) yes
checking for unistd.h... (cached) yes
checking for strings.h... (cached) yes
checking for sys/types.h... (cached) yes
checking for sys/stat.h... (cached) yes
checking for MSG_NOSIGNAL... yes
checking for Berkeley DB C++ headers... default
checking for main in -ldb_cxx-4.8... yes
checking miniupnpc/miniwget.h usability... yes
checking miniupnpc/miniwget.h presence... yes
checking for miniupnpc/miniwget.h... yes
checking for main in -lminiupnpc... yes
checking miniupnpc/miniupnpc.h usability... yes
checking miniupnpc/miniupnpc.h presence... yes
checking for miniupnpc/miniupnpc.h... yes
checking for main in -lminiupnpc... (cached) yes
checking miniupnpc/upnpcommands.h usability... yes
checking miniupnpc/upnpcommands.h presence... yes
checking for miniupnpc/upnpcommands.h... yes
checking for main in -lminiupnpc... (cached) yes
checking miniupnpc/upnperrors.h usability... yes
checking miniupnpc/upnperrors.h presence... yes
checking for miniupnpc/upnperrors.h... yes
checking for main in -lminiupnpc... (cached) yes
checking for boostlib >= 1.20.0... yes
checking whether the Boost::System library is available... yes
checking for exit in -lboost_system... yes
checking whether the Boost::Filesystem library is available... yes
checking for exit in -lboost_filesystem... yes
checking whether the Boost::Program_Options library is available... yes
checking for exit in -lboost_program_options-mt... yes
checking whether the Boost::Thread library is available... yes
checking for exit in -lboost_thread... yes
checking whether the Boost::Chrono library is available... yes
checking for exit in -lboost_chrono-mt... yes
checking whether the Boost::Unit_Test_Framework library is available... yes
checking for dynamic linked boost test... yes
checking for SSL... yes
checking for CRYPTO... yes
checking for PROTOBUF... yes
checking for QR... yes
checking for protoc... /usr/bin/protoc
checking whether to build bitcoind... yes
checking whether to build bitcoin-cli... yes
checking for QT... yes
checking for QT_TEST... yes
checking for QT_DBUS... yes
checking for moc-qt4... /usr/bin/moc-qt4
checking for uic-qt4... /usr/bin/uic-qt4
checking for rcc-qt4... no
checking for rcc4... no
checking for rcc... /usr/bin/rcc
checking for lrelease-qt4... /usr/bin/lrelease-qt4
checking for lupdate-qt4... /usr/bin/lupdate-qt4
checking whether to build Bitcoin Core GUI... yes (Qt4)
checking for operating system IPv6 support... yes
checking if ccache should be used... no
checking if wallet should be enabled... yes
checking whether to build with support for IPv6... yes
checking whether to build with support for UPnP... yes
checking whether to build with UPnP enabled by default... yes
checking whether to build GUI with support for D-Bus... yes
checking whether to build GUI with support for QR codes... yes
checking whether to build test_bitcoin-qt... yes
checking whether to build test_bitcoin... yes
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating Makefile
config.status: creating src/Makefile
config.status: creating src/test/Makefile
config.status: creating src/qt/Makefile
config.status: creating src/qt/test/Makefile
config.status: creating share/setup.nsi
config.status: creating share/qt/Info.plist
config.status: creating qa/pull-tester/run-bitcoind-for-test.sh
config.status: creating qa/pull-tester/build-tests.sh
config.status: creating src/bitcoin-config.h
config.status: src/bitcoin-config.h is unchanged
config.status: executing depfiles commands

using Mint/Ubuntu 13.04 equivalent

[seanwilliam1988]

I haven’t heard anything about this at Bitcoin Daily. But I think the v0.9 would be a good thing for all bitcoin users.

[Envrin]

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

it is version 0.9

https://bitcoin.org/en/download

Maybe they forgot to update the site, but looks like 0.8.6 is still the officially released version.  Instead of playing around with a beta version, I think I'll just hang tight, and wait for the core devel team to approve 0.9.0 for public release.

[Shahrukh]

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

it is version 0.9

https://bitcoin.org/en/download

Maybe they forgot to update the site, but looks like 0.8.6 is still the officially released version.  Instead of playing around with a beta version, I think I'll just hang tight, and wait for the core devel team to approve 0.9.0 for public release.

I am using 0.9.0 on my Ubuntu PC no issues so far

[rme]

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

it is version 0.9

https://bitcoin.org/en/download

Maybe they forgot to update the site, but looks like 0.8.6 is still the officially released version.  Instead of playing around with a beta version, I think I'll just hang tight, and wait for the core devel team to approve 0.9.0 for public release.

I am using 0.9.0 on my Ubuntu PC no issues so far

There are compiled binaries?

[Carlton Banks]

I am using 0.9.0 on my Ubuntu PC no issues so far

Can I ask you to look at my issue compiling the 0.9 source? The makefile is generated, so it can't be missing library dependencies. I'm thinking maybe disk permissions or compiler config, but not certain. Makefile output in this thread, a few posts up

[cr1776]

I am using 0.9.0 on my Ubuntu PC no issues so far

Can I ask you to look at my issue compiling the 0.9 source? The makefile is generated, so it can't be missing library dependencies. I'm thinking maybe disk permissions or compiler config, but not certain. Makefile output in this thread, a few posts up

I've been running it on Ubuntu too - 13.10  though vs 13.04 - without a problem (since last weekend-ish, forget exactly when I updated it).

I didn't see anything obvious from what you posted that would cause an issue.

[Carlton Banks]

I am using 0.9.0 on my Ubuntu PC no issues so far

Can I ask you to look at my issue compiling the 0.9 source? The makefile is generated, so it can't be missing library dependencies. I'm thinking maybe disk permissions or compiler config, but not certain. Makefile output in this thread, a few posts up

I've been running it on Ubuntu too - 13.10  though vs 13.04 - without a problem (since last weekend-ish, forget exactly when I updated it).

I didn't see anything obvious from what you posted that would cause an issue.

Strange, that's my interpretation, although I'm not a programmer, I just know how to research and read instructions!

Just tried chmod 777 -R <source code directory>

Didn't work either. Tried 'sudo make' out of desperation, wasn't expecting it to work anyway (although I've long since realised that trying something illogical doesn't mean that it wasn't the problem all along )

Compiler options for gcc or g++ is the only other thing left over, if that's not it I cannot imagine the problem. I've not had any problems on this environment before, but that was completely different (python building Armory)

[cr1776]

Perhaps I missed it, but are there any messages showing up indicating an error when you go to make it?