[ANN] Litecoin - a lite version of Bitcoin. Launched!

[Furio]

LTC UP

Don't know what you mean, it's down 200% at least

[gambino]

Hi all
I'm one of the last optimists who trying to solo mine LTC, but with the last wallet update i'm not able to connect the miner to the wallet.
I'm using windows7 and KNC Titans (bfgminer 5.1.0). My conf file is fine.
Is there anything I can do to fix it except to make my own pool?

Thanks in advance

[hoie6060]

There was a soft fork yes, you can read the latest post from the devs on it. https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=26151.0

I'm not sure if we are talking about the same kind of fork. I'm talking about the two valid branches both running 0.10.2.2 code. Yesterday I had this reproduced with one machine at 0.10.2.2 Macintosh and the other 0.10.2.2 Windows. Today I added another copy on the Windows machine (running as another user). This way I have exactly the same code running on the exactly same hardware, the only difference are directories with the data and port numbers for the network traffic.

The fork starts after block 641334, the first different block is 641335.

Code:

C:\>litecoin-cli.exe -rpcport=19332 getblockhash 641334
745c3628a41b53b115add71ca304e0c3711447635a113a735b9d3c0357fb5ee9

C:\>litecoin-cli.exe -rpcport=1 getblockhash 641334
745c3628a41b53b115add71ca304e0c3711447635a113a735b9d3c0357fb5ee9

C:\>litecoin-cli.exe -rpcport=19332 getblockhash 641335
87dead3220e76a9b9a0422904bd17f3d3727236e4dbaf12d01f7ea186c7fd669

C:\>litecoin-cli.exe -rpcport=1 getblockhash 641335
2c90e25ac93447ab179f5dccd4ac776d79cb924048927bdfdad250eb012ad91a

Those aren't trivial short forks, they are several hundred blocks long

Code:

C:\>litecoin-cli.exe -rpcport=19332 getblockcount
641756

C:\>litecoin-cli.exe -rpcport=1 getblockcount
641435

although the comparison above isn't completely fair, because I was starting and stopping those tasks as well as opening and closing respective network ports in the firewall (external to Windows).

Can someone with an account at litecointalk.org repost this message there and ask for the comments from the developers?

My thinking is that if somebody managed to split the testnet that far there maybe a bug lurking in the code that could be used to split the mainnet.

Ahh ok thanks, I've passed the word on to the devs.

Any update about it?

I'm still worried how this kind of fork can exist.

[2112]

Ahh ok thanks, I've passed the word on to the devs.

So...

Any of "the devs" still alive?

The only non-dead public block explorer for Litecoin's testnet shows the last block as 641435 mined 5 days ago (although the page says "2 days ago").

I'm CPU-mining on that fork with optimum speed that wouldn't rise difficulty from the minimum, which according to my calculations is about 3500 hashes per seconds to stay at difficulty equal to the minimum of 1/4096. I'm currently up to 64196 as of this writing, but I don't see a way to verify that anyone was able to synchronize off of my machines. And they are for sure accessible from outside, both via IPv4 and IPv6. I did receive and mined some transactions earlier today, so some communication does exist, because I don't currently transact on my internal Litecoin testnet nodes, only CPU-mine.

The competing chain seems to be at block 644512 and is getting mined at difficulty 0.00312973
which is ~2.8 times higher than the minimum. While that would be still in the CPU-mining range, I have my test servers in storage and I'm not looking forward into deploying them.

This situation is indeed very worrying, because it clearly shows Litecoin Core client as faulty.

Quoting for future reference:

Any update about it?

I'm still worried how this kind of fork can exist.

Anyone here can post their current experience of synchronizing with the Litecoin's testnet? If possible do both resynchronizing the old install and a fresh resynchronization from scratch as another user on the same hardware and with same software.

[TheMage]

Issue resolved, will have more information tomorrow .

[crackfoo]

Heya,

Today we added Litecoin (LTC) as a payout option on our multipool, www.xpool.ca

We will also soon add so it can also be mined directly.

Cheers!

We now have the direct mining port opened up for exclusive Litecoin mining.

Variable DIFF:

stratum+tcp://mine.xpool.ca:2002 (diff 8 - 8192)

Fixed DIFF (Minimum = 512):

stratum+tcp://mine.xpool.ca:3002 (diff 512)

See here for config setup:

http://www.xpool.ca/configuration_guide

Cheers!

[TheMage]

Ahh ok thanks, I've passed the word on to the devs.

So...

Any of "the devs" still alive?

The only non-dead public block explorer for Litecoin's testnet shows the last block as 641435 mined 5 days ago (although the page says "2 days ago").

I'm CPU-mining on that fork with optimum speed that wouldn't rise difficulty from the minimum, which according to my calculations is about 3500 hashes per seconds to stay at difficulty equal to the minimum of 1/4096. I'm currently up to 64196 as of this writing, but I don't see a way to verify that anyone was able to synchronize off of my machines. And they are for sure accessible from outside, both via IPv4 and IPv6. I did receive and mined some transactions earlier today, so some communication does exist, because I don't currently transact on my internal Litecoin testnet nodes, only CPU-mine.

The competing chain seems to be at block 644512 and is getting mined at difficulty 0.00312973
which is ~2.8 times higher than the minimum. While that would be still in the CPU-mining range, I have my test servers in storage and I'm not looking forward into deploying them.

This situation is indeed very worrying, because it clearly shows Litecoin Core client as faulty.

Quoting for future reference:

Any update about it?

I'm still worried how this kind of fork can exist.

Anyone here can post their current experience of synchronizing with the Litecoin's testnet? If possible do both resynchronizing the old install and a fresh resynchronization from scratch as another user on the same hardware and with same software.

Ok all done now

https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=26793.msg278378#msg278378

[2112]

Ok all done now

https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=26793.msg278378#msg278378

It turns as I was expecting, in other words the problem is back after less than a week:

1) the 0.10.2.2 chain got stuck at block 645801 (which was approximately 14 hours ago) and all further mined blocks don't propagate anymore

2) meanwhile the old chain running 0.8.7.5 an earlier is now at around 645939 and slowly getting further ahead.

3) which confirms my suspicion that there were no real developers looking at the problem and that probably Litecoin developers don't understand the new code their imported from Bitcoin.

[Altynbekova]

This coin revived

[Wekkel]

So this means that LTC has forked? Sure is not reflected in its price though.

[thrasher]

Ok all done now

https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=26793.msg278378#msg278378

It turns as I was expecting, in other words the problem is back after less than a week:

1) the 0.10.2.2 chain got stuck at block 645801 (which was approximately 14 hours ago) and all further mined blocks don't propagate anymore

2) meanwhile the old chain running 0.8.7.5 an earlier is now at around 645939 and slowly getting further ahead.

3) which confirms my suspicion that there were no real developers looking at the problem and that probably Litecoin developers don't understand the new code their imported from Bitcoin.

I work on Litecoin Core and know about this testnet issue, I was the one who also made a post advising users to stop mining on 0.8.7.x and upgrade to 0.10.2.2 whilst also setting up a private pool to orphan the version 2 chain. After our notification and to encourage others to begin mining, I lowered my testnet pools mining intensity. In doing so, version 2 blocks got the lead again which lasted in a small fork. If you actually looked at testnet recently, you would see that this issue has now been corrected and my pool settings will permanently stay like this until I see no more 0.8.x miners (subject to availability obviously). The block height is currently at 646208 in which I'm currently connected to over 25 nodes (similar to the dedicated testnet node we have setup), all reflecting this. This can also be verified by a block explorer site like http://blockchains.io/ltct/blocks/

Also, please don't make ridiculous claims that we don't know what we are doing, we know very well what is in Litecoin Core, including the causation of this and we know how to resolve issues like this (as shown above) and is why we contacted all pools to make sure that mainnet encounters a smooth transition for BIP66 activation (which has had 0 problems). Your concern stating that 'if somebody managed to split the testnet that far there maybe a bug lurking in the code that could be used to split the mainnet' is clearly unfounded and shows inadequate knowledge of how this issue occurs. If people could do it on mainnet, they would. BTW, this issue also occurred on Bitcoin's testnet https://blog.blocktrail.com/2015/06/bitcoin-testnet-is-forking-19-blocks-deep-and-counting/, admittedly it isn't a good thing to have happen on testnet, but both Bitcoin and Litecoin devs were extremely focused on mainnet BIP66 activation, as testnet is low priority which can always be reset accordingly if things go haywire (which has been done in the past).

[TheMage]

Thanks Thrasher

[Altynbekova]

159 k to 167 I got a good profit

[windjc]

So I have Yosemite Operating System on a Mac.

I cannot find the Litecoin wallet.dat file.

There is no Litecoin folder under the Applications Support folder under the home library.

There is no "Library" folder under the Admin user and thus no Applications Support folder.

The Applications Support folder under Guest user is empty.

I have gone through all the other system folders and found nothing.

When I "show package contents of Litecoin-LQ" I see Litecoin folders/docs but not the wallet.dat file.

I am trying to restore an older wallet.dat file from a external hard drive but cannot find the one that exists somewhere on my computer that I will need to replace.

Any HELP would be much appreciated!

Thanks in advance.

[CryptoCanary]

So I have Yosemite Operating System on a Mac.

I cannot find the Litecoin wallet.dat file.

There is no Litecoin folder under the Applications Support folder under the home library.

There is no "Library" folder under the Admin user and thus no Applications Support folder.

The Applications Support folder under Guest user is empty.

I have gone through all the other system folders and found nothing.

When I "show package contents of Litecoin-LQ" I see Litecoin folders/docs but not the wallet.dat file.

I am trying to restore an older wallet.dat file from a external hard drive but cannot find the one that exists somewhere on my computer that I will need to replace.

Any HELP would be much appreciated!

Thanks in advance.

Have you launched the new wallet? What I mean is, there will not be a wallet.dat file until the program is executed the first time. Just an idea.

[chinapeople]

Always the best for me. Or its the one that comes up next.

[2112]

I work on Litecoin Core and know about this testnet issue, I was the one who also made a post advising users to stop mining on 0.8.7.x and upgrade to 0.10.2.2 whilst also setting up a private pool to orphan the version 2 chain. After our notification and to encourage others to begin mining, I lowered my testnet pools mining intensity. In doing so, version 2 blocks got the lead again which lasted in a small fork. If you actually looked at testnet recently, you would see that this issue has now been corrected and my pool settings will permanently stay like this until I see no more 0.8.x miners (subject to availability obviously). The block height is currently at 646208 in which I'm currently connected to over 25 nodes (similar to the dedicated testnet node we have setup), all reflecting this. This can also be verified by a block explorer site like http://blockchains.io/ltct/blocks/

Also, please don't make ridiculous claims that we don't know what we are doing, we know very well what is in Litecoin Core, including the causation of this and we know how to resolve issues like this (as shown above) and is why we contacted all pools to make sure that mainnet encounters a smooth transition for BIP66 activation (which has had 0 problems). Your concern stating that 'if somebody managed to split the testnet that far there maybe a bug lurking in the code that could be used to split the mainnet' is clearly unfounded and shows inadequate knowledge of how this issue occurs. If people could do it on mainnet, they would. BTW, this issue also occurred on Bitcoin's testnet https://blog.blocktrail.com/2015/06/bitcoin-testnet-is-forking-19-blocks-deep-and-counting/, admittedly it isn't a good thing to have happen on testnet, but both Bitcoin and Litecoin devs were extremely focused on mainnet BIP66 activation, as testnet is low priority which can always be reset accordingly if things go haywire (which has been done in the past).

I'm sorry thrasher, but I still think that you seem to be missing the root cause of the problem exhibited on the Litecoin testnet. I'll write it in single sentence in a separate paragraph to avoid it getting lost in a wall of text.

The problem with the new 0.10.* nodes seem to be that they maintain the mutual connections but under certain circumstances cease to listen or distribute the newly mined blocks.

Running a single pool that overwhelms the combined competition from all the old 0.8.* nodes is a neat workaround and a temporary safety measure. But they still have the advantage that they correctly pass the mined blocks amongs themselves and properly cumulate the hashing power of the individual nodes into their (sub-)net-wide hashing power.

This cumulation ceased occurring on the 0.10.* sub-net, so the net-wide hashing power is no longer the sum of the individual hashing powers of the nodes that were actively mining. Before you started or restarted your pool I was CPU-mining on my several test nodes and I nearly immediately noticed the stalls after upgrading from 0.8.* to 0.10.*.

I'm currently in the process of moving, so I'm back to running a single node and thus I cannot easily reproduce this problem or search the logs of orphaned transactions.

But I believe the bug is still there and as soon as you stop your pool it will reoccur.

The remaining questions are:

1) is this bug new to Litecoin codebase or was imported from the Bitcoin codebase,

2) is this bug exploitable on the mainnet or is particular to the testnet behavior where it temporarily switches to minimum difficulty under certain conditions.

[tigerwood0432]

Litecoin is up again. I think the roof is not reached yet! 

Waiting for $21

waiting for LTC to 50 $

[Monopoly]

Litecoin is up again. I think the roof is not reached yet!  

Waiting for $21

waiting for LTC to 50 $

If it's true so we are waiting for BtC to $30K

[rudolfaxl]

Litecoin lead the way...and litecoin is the winner 

LITECOIN.ID | http://www.litecoin.id
[Litecoin dot Id]
Domain name Litecoin for Sale
[Identity] Id for Litecoin
contact us : sandputra@gmail.com
Twitter : http://www.twitter.com/litecoindotid