[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency

[fluffypony]

It happened here too, I dont remember the block, I had to download the blockchain from OP...

That certainly shouldn't be necessary and definitely shouldn't be required but I'm glad you found a work-around. We will investigate this.

If anyone else has the problem please let us know before trying the blockchain download since having your node stuck might help debug it. Everything worked fine on our test systems.

I also have a node that appears to have a similar problem (but stuck at an earlier block before the last checkpoint).  I haven't tried downloading the blockchain from the OP.  I built from a new git clone.

Can you increase your log with "set_log 2" so we can see why it's doing that? If you see messages like this you've pulled that reverted commit in -


2014-Sep-25 07:56:34.449024 [P2P5]coinbase transaction spend too much money (14.310913359331). Block reward is 14.307271922856(14.107271922856+0.200000000000)
2014-Sep-25 07:56:34.449060 [P2P5]Block with id: <24aa4a41e6d63dd34b1cb7a8b43f5b9315325d8ae60e7afd8d4b87374eea7ef2> has incorrect miner transaction
2014-Sep-25 07:56:34.485715 [P2P5][75.157.2.42:12237 INC]Block verification failed, dropping connection
2014-Sep-25 07:56:34.485763 [P2P5]Failed to invoke command 1002 return code -3
2014-Sep-25 07:56:34.485799 [P2P5][75.157.2.42:12237 INC]COMMAND_TIMED_SYNC invoke failed. (-3, LEVIN_ERROR_CONNECTION_DESTROYED)

[fluffypony]

If you're building from source, that bad commit got re-applied during a merge. I've reverted it again, please pull and rebuild.

[smfuser]

If you're building from source, that bad commit got re-applied during a merge. I've reverted it again, please pull and rebuild.

Pulled and rebuilt.  Block height now seems correct.

[superresistant]

Important update (source code only)

GCC 4.7.3 or later, CMake 2.8.6 or later, Unbound 1.4.16 or later, and Boost 1.53 or later (except 1.54, more details here).

Code:

cd build/release && cmake -D CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release ../..
-- The C compiler identification is GNU 4.9.0
-- The CXX compiler identification is GNU 4.9.0
-- Check for working C compiler: /usr/bin/cc
-- Check for working C compiler: /usr/bin/cc -- works
-- Detecting C compiler ABI info
-- Detecting C compiler ABI info - done
-- Check for working CXX compiler: /usr/bin/c++
-- Check for working CXX compiler: /usr/bin/c++ -- works
-- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info
-- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info - done
-- Could not find DEVELOPER_LOCAL_TOOLS in env
-- BOOST_IGNORE_SYSTEM_PATHS defaults to OFF
-- Looking for include file pthread.h
-- Looking for include file pthread.h - found
-- Looking for pthread_create
-- Looking for pthread_create - not found
-- Looking for pthread_create in pthreads
-- Looking for pthread_create in pthreads - not found
-- Looking for pthread_create in pthread
-- Looking for pthread_create in pthread - found
-- Found Threads: TRUE
Looking for libunbound
CMake Error at cmake/FindUnbound.cmake:52 (MESSAGE):
  Could not find unbound library
Call Stack (most recent call first):
  CMakeLists.txt:89 (find_package)


-- Configuring incomplete, errors occurred!
See also "/root/bitmonero/build/release/CMakeFiles/CMakeOutput.log".
See also "/root/bitmonero/build/release/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log".
make: *** [cmake-release] Error 1

What's missing please ?

[ArticMine]

...

What's missing please ?

libunbound

I ran into the same problem on Ubuntu 14.04 and solved it by installing libunbound

[smooth]

As such, dependencies have changed. For example Linux dependencies:

GCC 4.7.3 or later, CMake 2.8.6 or later, Unbound 1.4.16 or later, and Boost 1.53 or later (except 1.54, more details here).

[generalizethis]

What's the update on funding efforts? (This is for Devs and MEW). With the effort that was put in over the last few days and continues to be put forth, I think some people might want to give back  A thank you can only go so far.

[superresistant]

...
What's missing please ?

libunbound
I ran into the same problem on Ubuntu 14.04 and solved it by installing libunbound

As such, dependencies have changed. For example Linux dependencies:

GCC 4.7.3 or later, CMake 2.8.6 or later, Unbound 1.4.16 or later, and Boost 1.53 or later (except 1.54, more details here).

root@li559-147:~# sudo apt-get install unbound
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
unbound is already the newest version.

Version 1.4.22
Do I need to restart or something ?
EDIT: I did

Code:

sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
sudo apt-get upgrade

Still don't want to install.
EDIT2: I reinstalled unbound and even rebooted. Still not working.

EDIT3: SOLVED !!

Prerequisites

Code:

# apt-get install \
make \
gcc \
libssl-dev \
libevent-dev \
libexpat1-dev

Compile

Code:

# cd /usr/src
# wget http://www.unbound.net/downloads/unbound-1.4.22.tar.gz 
# tar xvfz unbound-1.4.22.tar.gz
# cd unbound-1.4.22
# ./configure \
--prefix=/usr \
--sysconfdir=/etc \
--localstatedir=/var \
--with-conf-file=/var/unbound/unbound.conf \
--with-ssl \
--with-libevent
# make && make install

[smooth]

...
What's missing please ?

libunbound
I ran into the same problem on Ubuntu 14.04 and solved it by installing libunbound

As such, dependencies have changed. For example Linux dependencies:

GCC 4.7.3 or later, CMake 2.8.6 or later, Unbound 1.4.16 or later, and Boost 1.53 or later (except 1.54, more details here).

root@li559-147:~# sudo apt-get install unbound
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
unbound is already the newest version.

How to check the version of unbound ?
If it's outdated, how to manually install an updated version ?

Found it : Version 1.4.22

Do I need to restart or something ?

Restart your computer? No.

[varun555]

...
we consider the threat credible and are acting accordingly.
...
Our recommendation for exchange is to remain frozen for external transactions.
...

phantom attack: success

Weird, I would have picked some other words to indicate success.
Such as:
"We will be distributing updated checkpoint files that will continue to protect the blockchain without the need for a full update of the daemon."

This has been done exactly never before on other coins.
It shows the innovation on demand this team can produce, with rapid on-point responsiveness to a real-time threat with no warning, whether it be real or not.

They could be writing anything, anywhere, and yet have chosen to work on this project.
I am humbled by their generosity to advancing the state of the art as we know it in this arena.

Thank you gentlemen, thank you kindly, you are a credit to your profession.

A BIG +

[Hotmetal]

Compile

Code:

# cd /usr/src
# wget http://www.unbound.net/downloads/unbound-1.4.22.tar.gz 
# tar xvfz unbound-1.4.22.tar.gz
# cd unbound-1.4.22
# ./configure \
--prefix=/usr \
--sysconfdir=/etc \
--localstatedir=/var \
--with-conf-file=/var/unbound/unbound.conf \
--with-ssl \
--with-libevent
# make && make install

Compiling from source is not needed. apt-get install libunbound-dev

[rpietila]

What's the update on funding efforts? (This is for Devs and MEW). With the effort that was put in over the last few days and continues to be put forth, I think some people might want to give back  A thank you can only go so far.

The devs (core team) and MEW are different entities. The funding requirements mainly arise from the work that is coordinated by the devs. The monthly burn rate for developing Monero by the 7 core team members and several specialists, is significant. So far there has not been an efficient mechanism for recouping the costs already paid by the devs, and supplying the ongoing efforts. Our developers are so great that it is not fitting for them to go around begging for donations, they have rather concentrated on their excellent work and paid the outside help from their own pocket.

A great reason for MEW to even exist is that it can support the development. 50% of MEW membership fees are directed to the developers from the onset. So joining MEW automatically aids the development. More than 2000 XMR are thus received, from the founding members alone.

MEW has a voting system where the community can vote on matters related to Monero. Some members have brought it to me (as Operational Executive, it is my job to arrange the voting if 10% of the votepower so requires) to exhort the devs that Monero software should be developed to include some or all of these:
- a one-time bonus block that gives coins to the development (similar to premine that the other coins have, but "post-mine" and smaller in percentage);
- Permanent diversion of some % of the block rewards to the development;
- Slowing of emission curve, whose side effect would be that coins mined prior to the change would be considered a sort of fast mine. At this point it might be able to rally the owners of the privileged coins to donate large chuncks to the developers, since their remaining coins may likely gain in value.

It must be further underlined that:
a) the core team cannot stop the MEW members from taking whatever to be voted upon, so merely the fact that something is being discussed and/or voted in MEW, does not mean that the core team is at all behind it, and may be against it, or not even considered it.
b) if such proposal to do something with the software passes, the MEW's authority to enforce it stops there. The developers may do whatever with their coin. Since some of the core team members are also in MEW, their voting may indicate whether the resolution is likely to be implemented in the core team.

The purpose of MEW is to be a legitimate and functional way to find out what the coin owners think how things should be developed. The owners of the coin are an important peer group to the developers, eg. for a reason that the aggregate demand for ownership determines the market cap (price of the coin).

In any way you can donate to the developers directly to the donation address. Also hopefully even today, the MEW (in the mouth of David Latapie, the Members Executive) will announce that the membership is opened for everybody starting at 10 XMR entry fee.

Personally I believe excess funding leads to problems with prioritization, thus the "lean and hungry" approach will lead to better results. Concerning Monero, however, the funding situation has been ridiculous for too long already, and if the MEW is allowed to help, the problem will be put to rest even this year.

[sparky999]

I think your entering very dangerous territory by suggesting changes to core features of the coin. MEW will have significant power over the DEV team since holders can effectively collude to blackmail DEV's into following their suggestions since other wise they can dump coins and slash market prices.

MEW's role should be in helping the economy grow and business' develop not in suggesting changes to the core fundamentals of the coin. For better or worse the emission curve and block rewards are what they are and that is how they should remain.

[nakaone]

- a one-time bonus block that gives coins to the development (similar to premine that the other coins have, but "post-mine" and smaller in percentage);
- Permanent diversion of some % of the block rewards to the development;
- Slowing of emission curve, whose side effect would be that coins mined prior to the change would be considered a sort of fast mine. At this point it might be able to rally the owners of the privileged coins to donate large chuncks to the developers, since their remaining coins may likely gain in value.

can we get a serious discussion on the way to finance the development? Do we need a new thread for that?

I think the last point is the not practical/ ethical. The other two suggestions are interesting, both having it pros and cons.

[Nekomata]

XMR is the future.

[fluffypony]

I think your entering very dangerous territory by suggesting changes to core features of the coin. MEW will have significant power over the DEV team since holders can effectively collude to blackmail DEV's into following their suggestions since other wise they can dump coins and slash market prices.

MEW's role should be in helping the economy grow and business' develop not in suggesting changes to the core fundamentals of the coin. For better or worse the emission curve and block rewards are what they are and that is how they should remain.

We (as in the core team) have indicated before that we don't do things based on the market value. Even if the value plummets overnight we will continue working. So that sort of strong-arming won't work, we'll just ignore it.

With regards to your last statement, we generally tend to agree. Every time this has come up and been bounced around as an idea we've come to the conclusion that changing the emission curve is probably a bad idea. We're stuck with it, so now we have to make it work.

[oda.krell]

We (as in the core team) have indicated before that we don't do things based on the market value. Even if the value plummets overnight we will continue working. So that sort of strong-arming won't work, we'll just ignore it.

With regards to your last statement, we generally tend to agree. Every time this has come up and been bounced around as an idea we've come to the conclusion that changing the emission curve is probably a bad idea. We're stuck with it, so now we have to make it work.

I don't entirely agree. There is no need to rush this topic, and I'm pretty sure that right now is not the time to seriously look into it, but in principle, I'd welcome if the 'emission' discussion is re-opened at a point in the not-too-distant future.

I summarized my view on the matter about a week ago in a discussion in the speculation thread as:

[snip]

there are now two open questions:

- do we want a change in emission? (if so, what are the pros/cons?)

- can we afford a change in emssion? (as in: will the negative reactions be prohibitively expensive).

[varun555]

There have been several instances of people suggesting a bounty for an open source optimized AMD miner with the mining fees going to the devs.
This can provide  a long term development fund without the devs to be seen a begging. Kindly consider this option too. This seems to have much less cons than pros.

[smooth]

- a one-time bonus block that gives coins to the development (similar to premine that the other coins have, but "post-mine" and smaller in percentage);
- Permanent diversion of some % of the block rewards to the development;
- Slowing of emission curve, whose side effect would be that coins mined prior to the change would be considered a sort of fast mine. At this point it might be able to rally the owners of the privileged coins to donate large chuncks to the developers, since their remaining coins may likely gain in value.

can we get a serious discussion on the way to finance the development? Do we need a new thread for that?

I think the last point is the not practical/ ethical. The other two suggestions are interesting, both having it pros and cons.

I'm curious why you think #1 and #3 (or #2 for that matter) are ethically different.

I view #1 and #3 as part of a package that moves part of the emission curve forward (by paying out coins ahead of schedule) and part of it backward (by slowing down the rest). The effects somewhat balance out.

Practical is another matter. I guess that depends a lot on what the various stakeholders support.

[Febo]

I think your entering very dangerous territory by suggesting changes to core features of the coin. MEW will have significant power over the DEV team since holders can effectively collude to blackmail DEV's into following their suggestions since other wise they can dump coins and slash market prices.

MEW's role should be in helping the economy grow and business' develop not in suggesting changes to the core fundamentals of the coin. For better or worse the emission curve and block rewards are what they are and that is how they should remain.

I think price is in favour of holders so MEV, not developers.
Only reason why higher price would be good fro developers is, that there is more hashpower.
I doubt any not technically expert from MEW will try to make changes in the technically expect of coin. Since if goes wrong price would fall and their reason why are here would go down.
But. There is always but. IF this fake shilers and trolls and FUDers from this forum join MEW, then all this can happen.