[ANNOUNCE] Electrum - Lightweight Bitcoin Client

[gyverlb]

Still no android love: sl4a crashes when trying to run the install script.

[1714045868]

1714045868

[1714045868]

1714045868

[1714045868]

1714045868

[zebedee]

Looking at the wiki it has

  mktx [-s sourceaddr] [-c changeaddr] [-f fee] <address> <amount>

There is no documentation for what units "fee" and "amount" are in.  Are they in BTC or in Satoshis?

What happens:
- if a change address isn't specified?  Does the same as when in GUI mode, depending on wallet settings?
- if a fee isn't specified? Does it use the default fee, or no fee, or ...?
- if a source address isn't specified?  Does it use the freeze and priority settings of the wallet?

Can the docs be improved to specify these things?  It's far too scary to create a transaction without knowing the answers.

Particularly as there seems to be no way to dump a given transaction in a human readable form that shows inputs, outputs and fee. Hint. Hint.

[BkkCoins]

Looking at the wiki it has

  mktx [-s sourceaddr] [-c changeaddr] [-f fee] <address> <amount>

There is no documentation for what units "fee" and "amount" are in.  Are they in BTC or in Satoshis?

What happens:
- if a change address isn't specified?  Does the same as when in GUI mode, depending on wallet settings?
- if a fee isn't specified? Does it use the default fee, or no fee, or ...?
- if a source address isn't specified?  Does it use the freeze and priority settings of the wallet?

Can the docs be improved to specify these things?  It's far too scary to create a transaction without knowing the answers.

Particularly as there seems to be no way to dump a given transaction in a human readable form that shows inputs, outputs and fee. Hint. Hint.

I had a quick look at the code for you. Amount is definitely in BTC not satoshi. Other items appear to work the same as if you entered a send in the GUI because the values provided on the cmd line are passed to the same function as if from the GUI entry fields.

Ideally the docs would be better but it does take people effort to get that done and no one is getting paid for it.

I think it may be a good idea if perhaps adding a -v (verbose) flag would cause additional mktx info to be output. And in the case of pay_to cmd it could output details and prompt for final confirmation since it cannot be reversed. I could do that myself that if other devs nod agreement.

[zebedee]

Looking at the wiki it has

  mktx [-s sourceaddr] [-c changeaddr] [-f fee] <address> <amount>

There is no documentation for what units "fee" and "amount" are in.  Are they in BTC or in Satoshis?

What happens:
- if a change address isn't specified?  Does the same as when in GUI mode, depending on wallet settings?
- if a fee isn't specified? Does it use the default fee, or no fee, or ...?
- if a source address isn't specified?  Does it use the freeze and priority settings of the wallet?

Can the docs be improved to specify these things?  It's far too scary to create a transaction without knowing the answers.

Particularly as there seems to be no way to dump a given transaction in a human readable form that shows inputs, outputs and fee. Hint. Hint.

I had a quick look at the code for you. Amount is definitely in BTC not satoshi. Other items appear to work the same as if you entered a send in the GUI because the values provided on the cmd line are passed to the same function as if from the GUI entry fields.

Ideally the docs would be better but it does take people effort to get that done and no one is getting paid for it.

I think it may be a good idea if perhaps adding a -v (verbose) flag would cause additional mktx info to be output. And in the case of pay_to cmd it could output details and prompt for final confirmation since it cannot be reversed. I could do that myself that if other devs nod agreement.

Sounds good to me.  If you make the code to "dump details" self-contained, it could be used by mktx, the confirmation for pay_to, and a new dumptx command to show what's going on.  That would be v. cool.

[keewee]

You could try a build from git but if you are not familiar with terminals it might be a bit tricky. I can tell you that there is no reason a future version will suddenly work. It's not a problem with Electrum but the tools used to build a binary version from the Python source. Is there anybody else with the same problem on OS X?

I just tried 1.6.1 with the same result so decided to try some things in the command line. Ran it with -v and got:
localhost:MacOS s$ ./Electrum -v
path /Users/s/.electrum/electrum.dat
Install zbar package to enable QR scans
Illegal instruction: 4

So then I renamed the electrum.dat file and tried to recover my old wallet and got:
localhost:MacOS s$ ./Electrum -v
path /Users/s/.electrum/electrum.dat
Install zbar package to enable QR scans
Using random server...
electrum.no-ip.org:50001:t
electrum.bitcoin.cz:50001:t
missing tx []
Illegal instruction: 4

Finally I deleted the electrum.dat file and this time created a new wallet and it seems to fail in a similar manner except this time 5 new addresses were generated before the crash. Is there anything here that might lead to a solution? Is there anything else I can try?

[BkkCoins]

You could try a build from git but if you are not familiar with terminals it might be a bit tricky. I can tell you that there is no reason a future version will suddenly work. It's not a problem with Electrum but the tools used to build a binary version from the Python source. Is there anybody else with the same problem on OS X?

I just tried 1.6.1 with the same result so decided to try some things in the command line. Ran it with -v and got:
localhost:MacOS s$ ./Electrum -v
path /Users/s/.electrum/electrum.dat
Install zbar package to enable QR scans
Illegal instruction: 4

So then I renamed the electrum.dat file and tried to recover my old wallet and got:
localhost:MacOS s$ ./Electrum -v
path /Users/s/.electrum/electrum.dat
Install zbar package to enable QR scans
Using random server...
electrum.no-ip.org:50001:t
electrum.bitcoin.cz:50001:t
missing tx []
Illegal instruction: 4

Finally I deleted the electrum.dat file and this time created a new wallet and it seems to fail in a similar manner except this time 5 new addresses were generated before the crash. Is there anything here that might lead to a solution? Is there anything else I can try?

I know nothing about OSX but a quick google turned up this:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10177038/illegal-instruction-4-shows-up-in-os-x-lion
I don't know if this is known already but I wanted to make sure it's been looked at.

[DPony13]

I can't seem to open Electrum

Won't startup.
I need a fix? thanks

[ThomasV]

Please note that I have removed links to third party binaries from the website.
I did this for security reasons, because I believe third-party binaries are the #1 threat for Electrum users.

If you need windows binaries, I invite you use the "official" Electrum builds, which are linked on the website.
These builds are provided by slush (Marek Palatinus), and they are completely open source.
We are also trying to make these builds 'deterministic', so that they will be verifiable by everybody.

[hazek]

That's a bit of a slap in flatfly's face, wouldn't you say? I hope you talked to him before you did that..

[HostFat]

Are you going to support commands on "official" Windows Electrum builds?

[Tachikoma]

You could try a build from git but if you are not familiar with terminals it might be a bit tricky. I can tell you that there is no reason a future version will suddenly work. It's not a problem with Electrum but the tools used to build a binary version from the Python source. Is there anybody else with the same problem on OS X?

I just tried 1.6.1 with the same result so decided to try some things in the command line. Ran it with -v and got:
localhost:MacOS s$ ./Electrum -v
path /Users/s/.electrum/electrum.dat
Install zbar package to enable QR scans
Illegal instruction: 4

So then I renamed the electrum.dat file and tried to recover my old wallet and got:
localhost:MacOS s$ ./Electrum -v
path /Users/s/.electrum/electrum.dat
Install zbar package to enable QR scans
Using random server...
electrum.no-ip.org:50001:t
electrum.bitcoin.cz:50001:t
missing tx []
Illegal instruction: 4

Finally I deleted the electrum.dat file and this time created a new wallet and it seems to fail in a similar manner except this time 5 new addresses were generated before the crash. Is there anything here that might lead to a solution? Is there anything else I can try?

I wonder if this is perhaps QT related. Can you try to start ./Electrum -g text and see if that does start?

Edit: For those on 10.8 and up, this applies to Electrum as well. I only noticed this now because I already switched this as soon as I got my laptop and then forgot about it. I will see where I can add this to the site.

[MadSweeney]

Electrum 1.6.1 is released. see http://electrum.org/download.html

Thanks to the devs for the fixes. My bash script for making off-line transactions is working again. When electrum reached a certain previous version, 'electrum -w wallet mktx... > tx' stopped redirecting its output to a file if executed within my bash script.

I should have reported that earlier, but I hope it stays fixed in future updates. Sent a donation.

[keewee]

You could try a build from git but if you are not familiar with terminals it might be a bit tricky. I can tell you that there is no reason a future version will suddenly work. It's not a problem with Electrum but the tools used to build a binary version from the Python source. Is there anybody else with the same problem on OS X?

I just tried 1.6.1 with the same result so decided to try some things in the command line. Ran it with -v and got:
localhost:MacOS s$ ./Electrum -v
path /Users/s/.electrum/electrum.dat
Install zbar package to enable QR scans
Illegal instruction: 4

So then I renamed the electrum.dat file and tried to recover my old wallet and got:
localhost:MacOS s$ ./Electrum -v
path /Users/s/.electrum/electrum.dat
Install zbar package to enable QR scans
Using random server...
electrum.no-ip.org:50001:t
electrum.bitcoin.cz:50001:t
missing tx []
Illegal instruction: 4

Finally I deleted the electrum.dat file and this time created a new wallet and it seems to fail in a similar manner except this time 5 new addresses were generated before the crash. Is there anything here that might lead to a solution? Is there anything else I can try?

I wonder if this is perhaps QT related. Can you try to start ./Electrum -g text and see if that does start?

Edit: For those on 10.8 and up, this applies to Electrum as well. I only noticed this now because I already switched this as soon as I got my laptop and then forgot about it. I will see where I can add this to the site.

No joy, same error message. I see "Synchronising..." at the bottom left then it crashes with the illegal instruction 4 again

[ThomasV]

source packages and binaries for Windows are now provided with gpg signatures.
Windows binaries are built and signed by slush.

To verify the signature of a package, you must first import the public key of the person who signed it.
For  example, this is how you import my gpg key:

Code:

curl "http://pool.sks-keyservers.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x2BD5824B7F9470E6" | gpg --import

Then you do this to verify a file:

Code:

gpg --verify Electrum-1.6.1.tar.gz.asc Electrum-1.6.1.tar.gz

[ThomasV]

That's a bit of a slap in flatfly's face, wouldn't you say? I hope you talked to him before you did that..

It seems that flatfly has been kicked out. Thats deplorable!
I like his work.

We (slush and I) are working to make the build process transparent and open, in the best interest of users.
Flatfly's builds are not open source (violation of GPL, despite my repeated demands) and it is impossible for other developers to verify what he puts in them.

I am sure flatfly is a honest person. However, that is a personal opinion, not a certainty.
I cannot run the risk of exposing hundreds of users to a massive scam, just because I failed to have the right opinion on someone.

[HostFat]

Again, are commands available on the windows build?

[ThomasV]

Again, are commands available on the windows build?

I don't think they are.
if we do not manage to get this working soon, we will release a command-line only build.

[hazek]

That's a bit of a slap in flatfly's face, wouldn't you say? I hope you talked to him before you did that..

It seems that flatfly has been kicked out. Thats deplorable!
I like his work.

We (slush and I) are working to make the build process transparent and open, in the best interest of users.
Flatfly's builds are not open source (violation of GPL, despite my repeated demands) and it is impossible for other developers to verify what he puts in them.

I am sure flatfly is a honest person. However, that is a personal opinion, not a certainty.
I cannot run the risk of exposing hundreds of users to a massive scam, just because I failed to have the right opinion on someone.

A reasonable stance. Thanks for the clarification.

[flatfly]

Just posting a quick reply, as I'm at work...

I have no problem with this decision, as discussed with Thomas already. I haven't fully documented my build process yet, mainly due to lack of time.

PS: Just to confirm, there's never been a bit of malware in my builds. It's always been against my values. (Also confirmed by my VirusTotal reports) 

[ThomasV]

PS: Just to confirm, there's never been a bit of malware in my builds. It's always been against my values. (Also confirmed by my VirusTotal reports) 

Sorry, but this kind of statement is completely misleading. An antivirus report will only detect viruses.
It will not detect whether you deliberately introduced a line that sends user's money to an address controlled by you. This is what I mean by malware.

What I'm writing here might be obvious to 99% of readers.
However, I believe it is necessary to say it, because you seem to imply that a virus scanner report makes your builds trustable.