Please Help Test Armory 0.91-beta!

[kendog77]

Has anyone here successfully run 0.90.99.4 on any OSX version?  I downloaded and ran it on 10.9, but that system also already has a build environment on it. 

It looks like the build has the QNetwork.so error on 10.9.2 and 10.9.1.  I have successfully run it on a 10.8 VM and 10.9 host.  But both have the build environments...

No, I haven't. I downloaded the Windows and OSX version of Armory 0.90.99.4.

The Windows version runs well, and the OSX version won't even open on version 10.9.2.

[aerobatic]

Has anyone here successfully run 0.90.99.4 on any OSX version?  I downloaded and ran it on 10.9, but that system also already has a build environment on it. 

It looks like the build has the QNetwork.so error on 10.9.2 and 10.9.1.  I have successfully run it on a 10.8 VM and 10.9 host.  But both have the build environments...

No, I haven't. I downloaded the Windows and OSX version of Armory 0.90.99.4.

The Windows version runs well, and the OSX version won't even open on version 10.9.2.

count me in as well, have got several mac osx computers, all running 10.9.2 (the current OS) and Armory does not start on any of them.

i have plenty of apps and none have problems on 10.9.2 except Armory

-- Jez

[doug_armory]

Has anyone here successfully run 0.90.99.4 on any OSX version?  I downloaded and ran it on 10.9, but that system also already has a build environment on it. 

It looks like the build has the QNetwork.so error on 10.9.2 and 10.9.1.  I have successfully run it on a 10.8 VM and 10.9 host.  But both have the build environments...

No, I haven't. I downloaded the Windows and OSX version of Armory 0.90.99.4.

The Windows version runs well, and the OSX version won't even open on version 10.9.2.

count me in as well, have got several mac osx computers, all running 10.9.2 (the current OS) and Armory does not start on any of them.

i have plenty of apps and none have problems on 10.9.2 except Armory

-- Jez

Hey everyone. Sorry about the build not running. To be honest, I was out of the country and unable to run some sanity checks against some changes that were made. I can't get the posted build to run as-is.

The good news is that the fix is dead simple. In a roundabout way, I've already tested it on the build that was posted. Works like a charm. I'm about to check in the fix. With any luck, the next build should be fine.

Thanks for your patience! I'm back now and will get everything ironed out ASAP.

[etotheipi]

Hey everyone. Sorry about the build not running. To be honest, I was out of the country and unable to run some sanity checks against some changes that were made. I can't get the posted build to run as-is.

The good news is that the fix is dead simple. In a roundabout way, I've already tested it on the build that was posted. Works like a charm. I'm about to check in the fix. With any luck, the next build should be fine.

Thanks for your patience! I'm back now and will get everything ironed out ASAP.

And follow-up good news:  I successfully built the OSX packages on 10.8.5 and it ran on my 10.9.2 system! 

The reason I messed it up the first time (0.90.99.4) was kind of funny: there was a hardcoded path in the build process, but both my testing machine and build machine had exactly the same username and build-environment paths, so the hardcoded path actually existed on my test machine!
This time I moved the paths around on the build machine, to make sure I couldn't make the same mistake.

Still cleaning up a few things with this build, but will have 0.90.99.5 soon.  Will also add a bug bounty to it!  Besides OSX, we've had pretty solid feedback about this version, so we're pretty excited that this might be the last testing version before release!

[qnxt]

I've been running 0.90.99.4 on OS X 10.9.2 since it was posted. (I installed the missing library from Homebrew and symlinked it to the appropriate hardcoded location.)

It's been MUCH more stable than the previous 0.90-beta version, which I ran for about two months. (The first wallet I ever used.) That version would often crash on me and force a full rescan. This version has been absolutely stable. I did notice that some of my comments disappeared, as someone else noted. (Only for certain types of transactions? I can check if you don't know what's causing this.)

Sending coins is still a little slow; Armory just sits there for a while before prompting for my wallet password. Is that just my computer being slow? I only have a few dozen addresses with a fairly small number of uncomplicated transactions.

Also, is it intentional that I can't set a 0.00001BTC transaction fee (with bitcoin-qt 0.90 and its new lower minimum), or am I doing something wrong?

[forever3x]

I have a big wallet with lots of addresses. I can't open it with 0.90.99.4. After rescanned, the GUI is frozen.

In armorylog.txt there're repeating error logs:

Code:

2014-03-30 16:51 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:2518 - Syncing wallet: ********
2014-03-30 16:51 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1383 - Error processing BDM input
2014-03-30 16:51 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1385 - Received inputTuple: Passthrough [15, 96499437, True, 'scanRegisteredTxForWallet', <CppBlockUtils.BtcWallet; proxy of <Swig Object of type 'std::vector< BtcWallet * >::value_type' at 0x030BC758> >, None]
2014-03-30 16:51 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1386 - Error processing ID (96499437)
2014-03-30 16:51 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1387 - ERROR:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "armoryengine\BDM.pyc", line 1343, in run
  File "CppBlockUtils.pyc", line 1877, in scanRegisteredTxForWallet
NotImplementedError: Wrong number or type of arguments for overloaded function 'BlockDataManager_LevelDB_scanRegisteredTxForWallet'.
  Possible C/C++ prototypes are:
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::scanRegisteredTxForWallet(BtcWallet &,uint32_t,uint32_t)
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::scanRegisteredTxForWallet(BtcWallet &,uint32_t)
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::scanRegisteredTxForWallet(BtcWallet &)

2014-03-30 16:51 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:2528 - Current block number: 293201
2014-03-30 16:51 (ERROR) -- ArmoryQt.py:5906 - Error in heartbeat function
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "ArmoryQt.py", line 5809, in Heartbeat
  File "armoryengine\Timer.pyc", line 99, in inner
  File "ArmoryQt.py", line 2533, in finishLoadBlockchain
AttributeError: 'int' object has no attribute 'getTimestamp'
2014-03-30 16:51 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:5564 - Dashboard switched to fully-online mode
2014-03-30 16:51 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:4878 - Switching Armory state text to Mgmt:User, State:OnlineFull1
2014-03-30 16:51 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:4820 - Switching Armory functional mode to "Online"
2014-03-30 16:51 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:4878 - Switching Armory state text to Mgmt:User, State:OnlineFull2
2014-03-30 16:51 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:2518 - Syncing wallet: ********
2014-03-30 16:51 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1383 - Error processing BDM input
2014-03-30 16:51 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1385 - Received inputTuple: Passthrough [15, 10574415, True, 'scanRegisteredTxForWallet', <CppBlockUtils.BtcWallet; proxy of <Swig Object of type 'std::vector< BtcWallet * >::value_type' at 0x0322F818> >, None]
2014-03-30 16:51 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1386 - Error processing ID (10574415)
2014-03-30 16:51 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1387 - ERROR:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "armoryengine\BDM.pyc", line 1343, in run
  File "CppBlockUtils.pyc", line 1877, in scanRegisteredTxForWallet
NotImplementedError: Wrong number or type of arguments for overloaded function 'BlockDataManager_LevelDB_scanRegisteredTxForWallet'.
  Possible C/C++ prototypes are:
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::scanRegisteredTxForWallet(BtcWallet &,uint32_t,uint32_t)
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::scanRegisteredTxForWallet(BtcWallet &,uint32_t)
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::scanRegisteredTxForWallet(BtcWallet &)

Can you help? Thanks.

[Brangdon]

Still cleaning up a few things with this build, but will have 0.90.99.5 soon.  Will also add a bug bounty to it!  Besides OSX, we've had pretty solid feedback about this version, so we're pretty excited that this might be the last testing version before release!

Besides OSX and WinXP.

Sorry to go on about it, and I may be the only tester planning to use XP, but the original post listed WinXP support as one of the bolded new features. I hope someone checks that 0.90.99.5 at least runs up on it. Running a cold storage wallet on a cheap, low-end notebook is a valuable feature for Armory, and XP is often the only version of Windows those machines can handle.

[etotheipi]

Just updated the downloads and announcements, with 0.90.99.5-testing!  Also posted a bounty thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=550804.0

Please post there any bugs if you want to claim a bounty for your bug reports.

I really think this one will work with 10.9.1 and 10.9.2!

[Subo1977]

In the Armory-Log  there are many such Outputs:

Code:

2014-03-31 09:32:21 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:21 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:22 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:22 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:23 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:23 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:24 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:24 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:25 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:25 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:26 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:26 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:27 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:27 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:28 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:28 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:29 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:29 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:30 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:30 keypool return 2
2014-03-31 09:32:31 keypool reserve 2
2014-03-31 09:32:31 keypool return 2

i think a API request to Bitcoin core ervery second is to much !?
why no i.e. ever 2 or five second's?

[forever3x]

On 0.90.99.5 mac version I still can't open my wallet. Keep getting the following error messages:

Code:

014-03-31 21:00 (ERROR) -- ArmoryQt.py:5942 - Error in heartbeat function
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/ArmoryQt.py", line 5845, in Heartbeat
    self.finishLoadBlockchain()
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/armoryengine/Timer.py", line 99, in inner
    ret = func(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/ArmoryQt.py", line 2552, in finishLoadBlockchain
    self.createCombinedLedger()
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/armoryengine/Timer.py", line 99, in inner
    ret = func(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/ArmoryQt.py", line 2714, in createCombinedLedger
    spendFunds += wlt.getBalance('Spendable')
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/armoryengine/PyBtcWallet.py", line 399, in getBalance
    return self.cppWallet.getSpendableBalance(currBlk, IGNOREZC)
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/CppBlockUtils.py", line 1712, in getSpendableBalance
    def getSpendableBalance(self, currBlk=0, ignoreAllZeroConf=False): return _CppBlockUtils.BtcWallet_getSpendableBalance(self, currBlk, ignoreAllZeroConf)
NotImplementedError: Wrong number or type of arguments for overloaded function 'BtcWallet_getSpendableBalance'.
  Possible C/C++ prototypes are:
    BtcWallet::getSpendableBalance(uint32_t,bool)
    BtcWallet::getSpendableBalance(uint32_t)
    BtcWallet::getSpendableBalance()

2014-03-31 21:00 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:252 - BDM was not ready for your request!  Waited 20 sec.
2014-03-31 21:00 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:253 -   getattr   name: hasTxWithHash
2014-03-31 21:00 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:254 - BDM currently doing: Passthrough (18626052)
2014-03-31 21:00 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:255 - Waiting for completion: ID= 20580841
2014-03-31 21:00 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:256 - Direct traceback
2014-03-31 21:00 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:259 - Traceback:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/armoryengine/BDM.py", line 249, in passthruFunc
    out = self.outputQueue.get(True, self.mtWaitSec)
  File "/Users/joeschmoe/buildenv/BitcoinArmory/osxbuild/workspace/Armory.app/Contents/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/Queue.py", line 176, in get
Empty
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:252 - BDM was not ready for your request!  Waited 20 sec.
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:253 -   getattr   name: hasTxWithHash
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:254 - BDM currently doing: Passthrough (18626052)
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:255 - Waiting for completion: ID= 28303169
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:256 - Direct traceback
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:259 - Traceback:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/armoryengine/BDM.py", line 249, in passthruFunc
    out = self.outputQueue.get(True, self.mtWaitSec)
  File "/Users/joeschmoe/buildenv/BitcoinArmory/osxbuild/workspace/Armory.app/Contents/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/Queue.py", line 176, in get
Empty
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:252 - BDM was not ready for your request!  Waited 20 sec.
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:253 -   getattr   name: hasTxWithHash
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:254 - BDM currently doing: Passthrough (18626052)
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:255 - Waiting for completion: ID= 14166385
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:256 - Direct traceback
2014-03-31 21:01 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:259 - Traceback:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/Applications/Armory.app/Contents/MacOS/py/usr/lib/armory/armoryengine/BDM.py", line 249, in passthruFunc
    out = self.outputQueue.get(True, self.mtWaitSec)
  File "/Users/joeschmoe/buildenv/BitcoinArmory/osxbuild/workspace/Armory.app/Contents/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/Queue.py", line 176, in get
Empty
 

[goatpig]

Is your wallet gigantic? Or are you poiting at huge transactions? Do you have a Linux or Windows machine to try this wallet on? Would you be willing to send us a watching only copy of your wallet otherwise?

[dc81]

Downloaded 0.90.99.5 for windows and still getting this error:

Code:

2014-03-31 10:29 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1387 - ERROR:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "armoryengine\BDM.pyc", line 1343, in run
  File "CppBlockUtils.pyc", line 1884, in enableZeroConf
NotImplementedError: Wrong number or type of arguments for overloaded function 'BlockDataManager_LevelDB_enableZeroConf'.
  Possible C/C++ prototypes are:
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::enableZeroConf(string,bool)
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::enableZeroConf(string)

[etotheipi]

Downloaded 0.90.99.5 for windows and still getting this error:

Code:

2014-03-31 10:29 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1387 - ERROR:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "armoryengine\BDM.pyc", line 1343, in run
  File "CppBlockUtils.pyc", line 1884, in enableZeroConf
NotImplementedError: Wrong number or type of arguments for overloaded function 'BlockDataManager_LevelDB_enableZeroConf'.
  Possible C/C++ prototypes are:
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::enableZeroConf(string,bool)
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::enableZeroConf(string)

This really looks like a bundled version of Armory with the newest python code, but outdated C++ engine.  I'm not sure how that would happen...

What version of Windows are you using?  Anyone here tried XP yet? (the previous build was supposed to have all the XP code, but we botched it... it should be right this time).

[dc81]

Downloaded 0.90.99.5 for windows and still getting this error:

Code:

2014-03-31 10:29 (ERROR) -- BDM.pyc:1387 - ERROR:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "armoryengine\BDM.pyc", line 1343, in run
  File "CppBlockUtils.pyc", line 1884, in enableZeroConf
NotImplementedError: Wrong number or type of arguments for overloaded function 'BlockDataManager_LevelDB_enableZeroConf'.
  Possible C/C++ prototypes are:
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::enableZeroConf(string,bool)
    BlockDataManager_LevelDB::enableZeroConf(string)

This really looks like a bundled version of Armory with the newest python code, but outdated C++ engine.  I'm not sure how that would happen...

What version of Windows are you using?  Anyone here tried XP yet? (the previous build was supposed to have all the XP code, but we botched it... it should be right this time).

win 7

[analytics]

Has anyone verified this is really the right person.  There are no links from their website to this version.

[etotheipi]

Has anyone verified this is really the right person.  There are no links from their website to this version.

The hashes of these installers/binaries are signed by my email GPG key (not as strong as the offline GPG key, but still good).  Also, if you are still using 0.90 you can find our hardcoded offline Bitcoin address which will match the hashes found on the download links announcement.  You should be able to us Tools->Message Signing & Verification and copy the contents of that file in as a signed message block, and verify the address show there.

Once you have upgraded to one of the new testing versions, and any future version, the "Secure Downloader" does exactly that:  it downloads that announcement file, verifies the signatures, and then downloads the new version and verifies the hashes match.

I will continue to use my offline GPG key for signing new releases as well, but it will only be necessary the first time you download any new Armory version.  After that, you can use the secure downloader to download verified installers (or manually verify them as described above).  Also, if you do manual verification, the new  version of Armory will recognize the public key and tell you "Signed by Armory Technologies Inc" instead of "Signed by 1NWvhByxfTXPYNT4zMBmEY3VL8QJQtQoei"

[chrisrico]

0.90.99.5 secure downloader works perfectly.

What's the install process for the Raspberry Pi tar? Extract to /?

Right now I'm running 0.86 or so offline, is there even any benefit to upgrading?

When funds are transferred from a cold storage wallet to an online wallet, do you no longer show two separate transactions (one outgoing from cold storage, one incoming to online)?

[etotheipi]

0.90.99.5 secure downloader works perfectly.

What's the install process for the Raspberry Pi tar? Extract to /?

Right now I'm running 0.86 or so offline, is there even any benefit to upgrading?

When funds are transferred from a cold storage wallet to an online wallet, do you no longer show two separate transactions (one outgoing from cold storage, one incoming to online)?

Not totally sure about the RPi thing yet.  I mean, yes, it should be extracted to /, but you will need some other dependencies, which I haven't fully assembled yet.  I don't have an RPi setup that I can use for testing atm, so I'm relying on someone else to help me figure out what's missing.  Perfecting the RPi offline bundle might have to wait until after the conference, as we have some other priorities.  But building for RPi was apparently much more challenging than just getting the dependencies, so hopefully this is one big piece of that puzzle solved for the RPi users.

If both wallets are loaded on the online computer, you should see two transactions.  As you said, it is two distinct events, one for each wallet, so it should show up (@goatpig:  didn't you say something about duplicate ledger entries?  did you misread this as a bug and "fix" it?)

[goatpig]

Testing this now.

There was a convoluted ledger entry misrepresentation that I caught fixing the send to many issue. This is all post .5, sadly.

[Kluge]

Clean install, win7, used website to download instead of secure downloader.