Electrum 4.7.0 released

[nc50lc]

-snip-
The xpubs displayed in listdescriptors command should work in Electrum.
What I forgot to mention is: he has to convert the xpub for other script types aside from p2pkh using the console.

But Bitcoin Core lists the extended private key descriptors from BIP44 to BIP86 formats. Electrum can only derive private keys from the root (m/0).

We're talking about creating "linked" watch-only wallets in Electrum.

As you can see in my previous reply and that quoted reply, it's about extended public key (xpub) which is already at the account_index when exported through listdescriptors.
Electrum can derive the next level (chain_index - internal/external chain) and their associated child public keys from it.
You can easily test this with Bitcoin Core and Electrum, Core doesn't need to be synced to do it.

Here's a sample descriptor:

Code:

"wpkh([17cedf16/84h/0h/0h]xpub6CjQxHxGsw2zJZMTZm1x4A5pmJeceQKhg3peuJoknaDnhTEpFNtthgpMQWkwxLJhdJgq6V4B2xyum9ew9qQ5XctUipSqTBDb2b9BzTrstNy/0/*)#ypr3t3cs"

The derivation path indicates that the extended public key is derived at 17cedf16(m)/84h/0h/0h and the receiving addresses are to be derived with .../0/addresses

BTW, I've explained how to import a non watch-only wallet from Bitcoin Core to Electrum a few years ago: /index.php?topic=5523526.msg64866403#msg64866403

[ABCbits]

You'll also need to configure and run Electrum server, since Electrum wallet/app actually connect to Electrum server. ElectrumX is probably most popular option, but personally i recommend Fulcrum due to higher performance[1]. There's an Electrum plugin that let you connect to Bitcoin Core directly[2], but it's been abandoned and probably won't work with newer version of Bitcoin Core/Electrum.

[1] https://www.sparrowwallet.com/docs/server-performance.html
[2] https://github.com/bwt-dev/bwt-electrum-plugin

I haven't used this plugin, but I have used the Electrum Personal Server and Electrs, it's a great plugin that deserves to be continued.

Both are valid alternative. But i don't like EPS when you need to load different Electrum wallet or create new Electrum wallet, since you'll need EPS to perform rescan.

Does the btw plugin still work on the latest version of Bitcoin Core and Electrum?

I don't know, since i never tested it with the latest version. But i don't expect it to work, since Bitcoin Core had some changes on RPC call and migrating legacy/BDB wallet to descriptor/SQLite wallet.

[LoyceV]

can i then use Electrum (which will be installed on a different computer) to connect to the Bitcoin core node and also link the existing wallets?

I'm going to ignore all the technical answers, and ask a counter question: why would you want that? It basically doubles the risk to have the same keys on more than one system/wallet. I use Bitcoin Core, Electrum and a few more wallets, but none of them hold the same keys.

[cygan]

can i then use Electrum (which will be installed on a different computer) to connect to the Bitcoin core node and also link the existing wallets?

I'm going to ignore all the technical answers, and ask a counter question: why would you want that? It basically doubles the risk to have the same keys on more than one system/wallet. I use Bitcoin Core, Electrum and a few more wallets, but none of them hold the same keys.

you are absolutely right here.
it would make more sense to simply create a new wallet and then generate one or more new Bitcoin addresses on Electrum. this would reduce the attack vector to a single wallet (Bitcoin Core)

[Chikito]

The Electrum 4.7.0 version didn't show my address when I imported its, I create it with the purpose of "watch only wallet."



I can import bulk addresses without a problem on the previous version.

Is it the bug?

This is the old version I always use :

[nc50lc]

Is it the bug?

Yes, a lot of users have used that "Send Bug Report" button so it got the attention of the devs immediately.
And it's already fixed in the master branch so you can expect it to get fixed in the next release version.

Here's the issue: github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues/10435

[Forsyth Jones]

We're talking about creating "linked" watch-only wallets in Electrum.

As you can see in my previous reply and that quoted reply, it's about extended public key (xpub) which is already at the account_index when exported through listdescriptors.
Electrum can derive the next level (chain_index - internal/external chain) and their associated child public keys from it.
You can easily test this with Bitcoin Core and Electrum, Core doesn't need to be synced to do it.
...
The derivation path indicates that the extended public key is derived at 17cedf16(m)/84h/0h/0h and the receiving addresses are to be derived with .../0/addresses

BTW, I've explained how to import a non watch-only wallet from Bitcoin Core to Electrum a few years ago: /index.php?topic=5523526.msg64866403#msg64866403

Oh I'see, I had read it but have forgotten, sorry.  
In fact, if we ar going to import the xpub from the Core descriptor to Electrum, we don't need any third-party tools like these scripts.

In my explanation, I focused more on xpriv descriptors.

BTW, I've explained how to import a non watch-only wallet from Bitcoin Core to Electrum a few years ago: /index.php?topic=5523526.msg64866403#msg64866403

Indeed an excellent tutorial.

Is it the bug?

Yes, a lot of users have used that "Send Bug Report" button so it got the attention of the devs immediately.
And it's already fixed in the master branch so you can expect it to get fixed in the next release version.

Here's the issue: github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues/10435

What a weird bug, I haven't updated to v4.7.0 yet, I'm basically using Electrum to test something, I mostly use the import option.

That button is a lifesaver (although I've never used it, but it's great to know).

[Chikito]

I mostly use the import option.

I almost did it. In this case, because I just want to create a "watch only wallet,", and I am pasting the address in the beginning create wallet.

And, I tried another option, but got the same problem when using the import wallet option on the 4.7.0 version.

[Chikito]

I have another problem on 4.7.0, I got an error when import wallet from another device. I am accustomed to importing, and never store on PC.



Besides that, when I have a wallet file older than 4.7.0, for example wallet file from 4.5.8, I also get an error: my file cannot be used in this version.

[nc50lc]

I got an error when import wallet from another device. I am accustomed to importing, and never store on PC.

Since it's from another device,
I'm quite sure that it's just a permission error and the only thing related to the version is how it handles the error.
Other versions will result with a similar error but presented differently.

I've reproduced it by removing the necessary permissions on the wallet file, then tried to load it:


But to be 100% sure, try to generate a log when loading the affected wallet file.
Load a working wallet file, then you can enable it in: "Tools->Preferences->Misc->Write logs to file", restart Electrum and load the said wallet file.
Then check "/electrum/logs" folder.

[Sauaba]

Today I opened a new wallet after several years, but now I see "onchain" and "lightning"
What's the difference and which I should select?

[Forsyth Jones]

Today I opened a new wallet after several years, but now I see "onchain" and "lightning"
What's the difference and which I should select?

Onchain (Blockchain) = means using layer1 of the Bitcoin network, which is how most transactions are made, i.e, transferring coins from one Bitcoin address to another through the Blockchain.

Lightning (Lightning Network) = Bitcoin's second-layer network for faster, instant and almost free transactions, also known as the Lightning Network. I've never used it on Electrum (except on the testnet), so I'm not the best person to give you more details. If you're unsure, research it further, make DYOR.

Perhaps it would be interesting for you to create a new topic addressing this question to get more targeted and focused answers on this subject.

[nc50lc]

Today I opened a new wallet after several years, but now I see "onchain" and "lightning"

You're talking about the "Receive" tab, correct?
Since there's nowhere else those two will appear on a newly created wallet.

Anyways;
That "Lightning" will only work if you have a lightning channel and Electrum will even tell you that if you happen to click the button.
Read this thread to get the general idea about Electrum's lightning network feature: /index.php?topic=5259973.0

And that "Onchain" is the usual request that you're familiar with, you'll be presented with one of your unused address or URI (if desc and amount aren't blank) with that.

[Chikito]

I got an error when import wallet from another device. I am accustomed to importing, and never store on PC.

Since it's from another device,
I'm quite sure that it's just a permission error and the only thing related to the version is how it handles the error.
Other versions will result with a similar error but presented differently.

I've reproduced it by removing the necessary permissions on the wallet file, then tried to load it:


But to be 100% sure, try to generate a log when loading the affected wallet file.
Load a working wallet file, then you can enable it in: "Tools->Preferences->Misc->Write logs to file", restart Electrum and load the said wallet file.
Then check "/electrum/logs" folder.

Yes, after I checked and tried another USB disk, it worked. Seems like the problem is from my SD card side. My problem has solved after I copy paste wallet file to PC (temporary).

but why when we create from old wallet (4.5.8 ), we can't import a wallet file to new version (4.7.0)  ?

Today I opened a new wallet after several years, but now I see "onchain" and "lightning"
What's the difference and which I should select?

What old version did you use?,
Electrum will select default on-chain when you opena  new wallet.

[nc50lc]

I'm quite sure that it's just a permission error and the only thing related to the version is how it handles the error.
Other versions will result with a similar error but presented differently.

Yes, after I checked and tried another USB disk, it worked. Seems like the problem is from my SD card side. My problem has solved after I copy paste wallet file to PC (temporary).

but why when we create from old wallet (4.5.8 ), we can't import a wallet file to new version (4.7.0)  ?

That's a separate issue? I though it's an additional description of the permission issue.

There doesn't seem to be any incompatibility with v4.5.8 and the latest version's wallet file, I've tested this multiple times.

If vice-versa (wallet from 4.7.0 to Electrum 4.5.8), it'll cause an issue since the wallet will be upgraded after it's loaded to v4.7.0 so the older version wont be able to load it.
But there shouldn't be an issue with a wallet file from 4.5.8 to Electrum 4.7.0.
If your instance did, check the errors and/or log.

[LoyceV]

You're talking about the "Receive" tab, correct?

Am I the only one who never uses this tab? I would hide it from View if it allowed me to.
All I do is go to the Addresses tab, edit a Label (and still out of habit sometimes double click to edit, even though that feature hasn't worked for a very long time), and copy the address. I find this more straight forward than the "Receive" tab.
Note that I don't use LN in Electrum.

[pooya87]

You're talking about the "Receive" tab, correct?

Am I the only one who never uses this tab? I would hide it from View if it allowed me to.
All I do is go to the Addresses tab, edit a Label (and still out of habit sometimes double click to edit, even though that feature hasn't worked for a very long time), and copy the address. I find this more straight forward than the "Receive" tab.
Note that I don't use LN in Electrum.

I don't think that many people use it and maybe even fewer people understand its purpose.

Receive tab is only useful to create a payment link that you want to give other people who want to send you money, while also having your wallet keep an eye out for the payment by having that little reminder in your receive tab's listbox at the bottom.

It is taking advantage of BIP-21 to create that link or QR code you want to give other people; and it has cool features. For example when you click a BIP-21 link, it will open your Electrum (or other wallets that you have installed and is set to detect bitcoin: uri), fill in the boxes with the address, the amount to pay, a message that would be added to your wallet and finally an expiration date which would make sense if you click on the second link:
first link (not expired) and second link (already expired)
When clicking on an expired request, your wallet shows you a warning that says "expired" and disables the send buttons to prevent you from sending money out to an expired request. (if you are clicking the first link a week from when I'm posting this, it will have also expired).

The link looks like this by the way:

Code:

bitcoin:bc1q2qpa507lkd48alxlxl93anmw794se2236rwvgd?amount=1.23456786&message=gimme%20my%20money%21&time=1771434772&exp=604800

[LoyceV]

while also having your wallet keep an eye out for the payment by having that little reminder in your receive tab's listbox at the bottom.

Now that you mention it: I don't like how payments pop up there after I send them, and usually delete them manually. But it makes sense to be a feature, it's just not for me.

[Forsyth Jones]

while also having your wallet keep an eye out for the payment by having that little reminder in your receive tab's listbox at the bottom.

Now that you mention it: I don't like how payments pop up there after I send them, and usually delete them manually. But it makes sense to be a feature, it's just not for me.

I personally find this "invoice duration" feature completely unnecessary and, based on what I see, it only confuses newcomers, as they think Bitcoin addresses expire and lose their validity, not to mention I've to keep clearing them (invoices) all the time. I don't remember any other wallet with this "invoice duration" feature, because Bitcoin addresses don't expire. After invoices expire, even without receiving anything, Electrum uses the same addresses again (as long as it doesn't receive funds, it doesn't change).

Before, the "receive" tab worked perfectly, you had an address that only changed if you actually received funds in it. You entered an amount or description, and the QR code was dynamically updated. If their intention was to "improve" it for commercial use, they made the "receive" tab worse, in other words, they did it poorly made way.

I completely dispense the "receive" tab. When I use Electrum, I do the same: go to the "addresses" tab and copy the address from there.

[nc50lc]

You're talking about the "Receive" tab, correct?

Am I the only one who never uses this tab? I would hide it from View if it allowed me to.

I use it on Testnet3/4 Electrum with 1day expiry,
But not on mainnet where it's critical whether to reissue an expired invoice's address that I've already given to others or not.

I personally find this "invoice duration" feature completely unnecessary and, based on what I see, it only confuses newcomers, as they think Bitcoin addresses expire and lose their validity, not to mention I've to keep clearing them (invoices) all the time.

That's useful in case you don't want to manage your addresses since it's an indicator that an address isn't used yet.
Once expiration time has passed, Electrum will issue the address associated with that invoice to another invoice again if it's not yet used.

IMO, it's more preferrable for newbies to use that tab so that they may be able to unintentionally prevent address-reuse.
The same reason why 'Addresses' tab is hidden by default, so only the advanced users can utilize it.